Comments on: MD could charge filmmaker who made ACORN video?

By: Maryland May Prosecute ACORN Sting Video Makers | Covert Surveillance News

Maryland May Prosecute ACORN Sting Video Makers | Covert Surveillance News — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 23:51:46 +0000

[...] description of her sexual encounter with President Bill Clinton. And, as the Baltimore blog Inside Charm City noted, this particular ACORN office has previously been in hot water for apparent illegal [...]

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 22:43:47 +0000

#15 robert is absolutely correct. The state of Maryland doesn’t have a case. They are just posturing. This all comes down to the left wing politicians that represent Maryland trying to protect their corrupt interests in ACORN.

By: umami

umami — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 03:30:09 +0000

A woman in Florida was charged with the same charge, 3 felonies, facing 15 years, for taking a video of her ex-boyfriend, a criminal judge, while he was on a public beach talking about women’s breasts and posting it on YouTube. She was denied bond, spent 83 days in jail before pleading to a misdemeanor just to get out of jail. Her public defender neglected to tell her the whole time she was the judge’s once divorce attorney.  http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/local_news/epaper/2008/10/15/a8b_wennetsuit_1016.html?cxntlid=inform_sr

By: robert

robert — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 23:07:20 +0000

O’keefe will not be prosecuted…if he is, he will not be convicted…and here is why…First of all, Linda Tripp was not convicted for these reasons stated in this comment…Maryland is run by democrats and the prosecuter in this case is a democrat, so she might be dumb enough to prosecute because of her liberal biased motives, but it will be malicious prosecution on her part and she might be disbarred if she does (i.e. duke lacrosse d.a.). Also it will be very expensive for them to prosectute it and in the end they will lose. This is the IMPORTANT part… the Maryland law/statute does not prohibit/outlaw taperecording…the Md. Law/statute does not even mention tape recording as something that is prohibited…if anything it allows it when it says “[oral communication] authorized by this chapter SHALL, if possible, be RECORDED ON TAPE” (emphasis added) (read it yourself)…the statute states the it is illegal to “intercept” a communication, it is not illegal to “taperecord” a communication. Because the ACORN employees “knew” they were talking to O’keefe and Giles, they implicitly consented to that communication (as several court cases will support). It is a fact that both the Maryland law and federal law make a distinction between “taperecording” and the “intercepting” of “communications” [refer to 18 U.S.C. & 2518(8)(a)]. Bottom line: the very liberal pro-Obama prosecutor might decide to prosecute O’keefe and Giles, but they will definitely lose and it will cost the prosecution a lot of money…plus, Okeefe/Giles can sue Maryland for malicious prosecution.

By: Jasperbob

Jasperbob — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:45:50 +0000

Remembering the movie “Chinatown” let’s just say “It’s Baltimore Jake, it’s Baltimore.”

By: proudhon

proudhon — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 05:24:20 +0000

“This man has just unearthed a crime ring”

are you kidding, chaz? whatever this may be (me: i happen to believe it’s four lousy people talking to each other), you are wildly overstating the case if you think this video exposed a “crime ring.”

By: VeganConservative

VeganConservative — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 21:27:14 +0000

Obama will represent ACORN again.

By: Maryland May Prosecute ACORN Sting Video Makers « Prayer, News & Action

Maryland May Prosecute ACORN Sting Video Makers « Prayer, News & Action — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 19:49:38 +0000

By: Charlie

Charlie — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:07:05 +0000

She’s more likely to prosecute because these people were doing her job, and apparently much better than she is capable of doing it. And then there’s the whole “in the tank for Obama” thing, since he is soo intimately connected to ACORN.

By: Adam

Adam — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 15:45:54 +0000

Most likely, ACORN would not be the one who brings charges. However, I disagree with the claim that their building is our building. If this were done in the common areas of an office building, where there is surveillance and often notices posted, I could see that point.

As for raiding offices, if this tape is the sole reason why it is done, ACORN would likely successfully get all of the evidence quashed, as this is likely not admissible as probable cause in Maryland.

NOTE: I am not a lawyer. Nor does this condone ACORN’s actions.