As we predicted first, state may prosecute filmmaker who made ACORN video
I was the first blogger to mention this as a possibility yesterday.
STATEMENT OF STATE’S ATTORNEYS OFFICE FOR BALTIMORE CITY RELATIVE TO THE ALLEGED BALTIMORE ACORN INCIDENT
Baltimore, MD – September 11, 2009 – We have received inquiries from citizens and the media asking whether the Baltimore City State’s Attorneys Office would initiate a criminal investigation for acts allegedly committed at ACORN offices located in Baltimore. The only information received in reference to this alleged criminal behavior was a YouTube video. Upon review by this office, the video appears to be incomplete. In addition, the audio portion could possibly have been obtained in violation of Maryland Law, Annotated Code of Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article §10-402, which requires two party consent.
If it is determined that the audio portion now being heard on YouTube was illegally obtained, it is also illegal under Maryland Law to willfully use or willfully disclose the content of said audio. The penalty for the unlawful interception, disclosure or use of it is a felony punishable up to 5 years.
The above statement was also run by WBAL in their news story on the item.
From that story:
The Baltimore city state’s attorney is considering prosecuting those responsible for taping the ACORN employees on charges that they violated Maryland’s wiretap laws.
[...]
The Maryland state prosecutor’s office went after Linda Tripp in the 1990s on two wiretap charges. Tripp was accused of illegally taping a phone conversation with Monica Lewinski [sic] about her relationship with then-President Bill Clinton and disclosing the conversation to Newsweek. Prosecutors decided to drop the case when Lewinski’s [sic] testimony was suppressed.
You should let Baltimore City State’s Attorney Patricia Jessamy politely know your opinion on this issue. You can send her an email to mail@stattorney.org or call her office at (410) 396-4001.
Related:
Hot Air
Ace of Spades HQ
14 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
1
[...] Yes, really. [...]
Pingback by Michelle Malkin » ACORN Watch: The Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office warped priorities — September 11, 2009 @ 11:10 pm
2
While the wiretap law should have merit with regard to private citizens, it should not apply to investigations of government entities or entities heavily supported by (especially illegal, as in this case) government funding.
If the government can legally investigate private citizens in this fashion, then there should be no problem with private citizens investigating the government in this fashion.
This isn’t any different from the Rodney King case, from a wiretapping standpoint.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
Comment by RightWingRocker — September 12, 2009 @ 12:00 am
3
[...] Davis is speaking at MICA from 5 to 7 p.m. later today. The ACLU of Maryland, which should be lecturing city prosecutors on free speech, is co-sponsoring the [...]
Pingback by Communist Angela Davis speaking Saturday night at Constitution Day event on Baltimore campus | Inside Charm City: Baltimore, Maryland blog — September 12, 2009 @ 2:39 am
4
So, according to this law, if I were a tourist, and I recorded a city street in downtown Baltimore with people walking around, and their voices can be heard on my camcorder, I could face up to 5 years in jail? Or is only when corruption is exposed they invoke this law?
Comment by AmazedAtWhatISee — September 12, 2009 @ 2:41 am
5
There’s no phone call. There’s no wire. Nothing was tapped. What’s the deal?
Comment by slider — September 12, 2009 @ 10:49 am
6
Responding to Comment 4:
So, according to this law, if I were a tourist, and I recorded a city street in downtown Baltimore with people walking around, and their voices can be heard on my camcorder, I could face up to 5 years in jail? Or is only when corruption is exposed they invoke this law?
====
Major difference: Those areas are common areas. An office or an apartment building where sounds made would not leave the building is not.
=
Comment 5:
There’s no phone call. There’s no wire. Nothing was tapped. What’s the deal?
—–
My understanding is that videotaping is also covered under the law.
Comment by Adam — September 12, 2009 @ 11:48 am
7
Adam, the statute makes no reference to videotaping. That’s why the State’s Attorney statement refers to the “audio portion” of the recording.
Comment by Jeff Quinton — September 12, 2009 @ 11:51 am
8
[...] concerning this matter One more thing. The people who took the video might be prosecuted….. As we predicted first, state may prosecute filmmaker who made ACORN video | Inside Charm City: Balti… [...]
Pingback by ACORN atempts to help set up a whore house - Page 2 - Grasscity.com Forums — September 12, 2009 @ 2:50 pm
9
[...] Acorn doing illegal activity! Michelle Malkin is all over this, and we suggest you take a look and also here. Talk about the gang that can’t shoot straight! These folks don’t even know the meaning [...]
Pingback by The race for the bottom? : Off-the-cliff.com — September 12, 2009 @ 7:33 pm
10
Typical Statists! One wonders if they have a leg to stand on if the video was uploaded outside of the state?
Comment by swathdiver — September 13, 2009 @ 3:40 am
11
[...] a prostitute how to hide underage El Salvadorean girls and what happens? The State of Maryland may prosecute the FILMMAKERS who exposed ACORN as the Corrupt Organization they really are. An you wonder why more than 1 [...]
Pingback by ACORN is a Criminal Enterprise « Konfusing Kancer — September 14, 2009 @ 12:40 pm
12
responding to comment 6
Actually the statute says “Willfully intercept, endeavor to intercept, or procure any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication”. Now call me crazy, but nothing in that video shows them “intercepting” any communications. They were recording, albeit surreptiously, a conversation between themselves and the ACORN workers in an open office/conference room were other people were coming and going(common area maybe?). In addition you can easily hear other voices/babies crying from the other room through the open door, so any reasonable expection of privacy argument should not apply. Just goes to show that even though there are much more pressing matters to deal with in Baltimore, like say murders and other violent crimes, it seems State’s Attorney Jessamy lets her partisanship show.
Comment by David — September 16, 2009 @ 10:06 pm
13
RightWingRocker, your conflation of ACORN with “the government” is false on its face. Try again.
AmazedAtWhatISee, if you are a tourist and you video a street scene of people walking around, you would not be liable under Maryland law, because you did not deliberately and without consent record a conversation which was carried out under a reasonable presumption of privacy. Try again.
slider: It is illegal in Maryland, as explained in the original post, to make an audio recording of a conversation which is reasonably expected to be private, without the consent of all parties involved. Unless you mute your camcorder’s microphone, you make an audio recording at the same time as you make a video recording; this situation does indeed, then, come under Maryland wiretap law.
swathdiver, if O’Keefe committed a crime under Maryland law, he did so while in Maryland. Therefore, yes, we do have a leg to stand on. Try again.
David — Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. Sec. 10-401, point 3: “Intercept” means the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device. You’re not crazy; you’re a deliberate liar, and not a very good one. Try again.
Comment by Aaron — September 18, 2009 @ 1:23 pm
14
[...] investigate ACORN, saying any potential evidence in the video may have been illegal obtained, and threatened to prosecute the makers of the [...]
Pingback by O’Malley says MD Attorney General to investigate ACORN | Inside Charm City: Baltimore, Maryland blog — September 21, 2009 @ 5:36 pm