So i had my truck searched on friday

You are correct in that, state laws do differ in this matter...

However, your incorrect that consent IS needed to be video taped or audio recorded. (ie Say an officer stops a suspect... would the officer have to immediately stop video/recording if the suspect declined their consent of the video/recording... after the suspect was told they were, in fact, being video/recorded...of course?...[required by some states...more later]) the answer is NO!

Fortunately, the law works both ways! The officer would ONLY need be informed that he/she was being video/recorded. The officer also has no right to tamper or destroy the recording device or media(personal property). The officer does have the right to immediately leave the area, or call a superior if the officer doesn't feel comfortable being video/recorded... a right a suspect usually doesn't have...

In some states, the officer doesn't NEED to be informed that they are being video/recorded...or consequently inform a suspect.... This IS what differs from state to state.

Peace

 

cop has no expectation of privacy from you;
-In a recent unpublished opinion, United States vs. Sherman, 990 F. 2d 1265 (9th Cir. 1993), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that individuals videotaped in public view have no reasonable expectations of privacy

-cop doesnt have to tell you he's recording you (in public, of course)....he's not intercepting anything private of yours (ie-phone conversations);
The U.S. Senate report on the Act noted that:

If law enforcement officials were to install their own cameras and create their own CCTV picture of a meeting, the capturing of the video image would not be an interception under the statute because there would be no interception of the contents of an electronic communication."

ie; they aren't violating your privacy by monitoring your information, they are monitoring their own....such as a squad car camera.


-The U.S. Supreme Court in Katz vs. United States 389 U.S. 347 (1967), defined modern "search and seizure" law under the Fourth Amendment.11 The Court declared that "What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection, but what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected. Generally, a person walking along a public sidewalk or standing in a public park cannot reasonably expect that his activity will be immune from the public eye or from observation by the police.12 As recognized by the Supreme Court in United States vs. Knotts 368 U.S. 276, 281-82 (1983)

The only expectation of privacy in public are in actions you "seek to preserve as private"
-I highly doubt that your interaction as a LEO is something you seek to preserve as private, in lite of the fact that your entire job/interaction is to build evidence for exposure to a public court.


Of course I've been wrong before....could be wrong here.
Where do you work at? I need a job.
​

 

Yes, you are very correct at the Federal level... but there are also state laws at a state level that cover the video/recording questions also... deemed legal in some states... Heck, at a Federal Level the 'Patriot Act' lets the Gov't do almost everything but take your first born...
(but that's another topic)

Example: S. Dakota requires(or at least they used to require) that you be legally informed that your being video/recorded... even in public...(ie those little signs stating, "Smile, your on camera" are/were required by law). There are even signs in S. Dak. at ATM's telling you your being recorded.

Other States... require no such signs in public. (some states only require it mentioned on a traffic citation...whereas, an officer need not verbally inform you that your being video/recorded).

However, a citizen also has the 'right' to do the same (ie video/record an officer). Of course, the citizen MUST know the state laws and inform the officer if need be... check the state law in question. As you pointed out, this is also true Federally. Great Job!

dieselbear, should take heed to all of this info.....

Interesting topic!

 

When I was a fed I audio taped all conversations & wrote many civil penalties because of the conversation(s). The other party would complain when they received the notice of penalty that a tape couldn't be used in court of law & I simply told them that I wasn't a court of law.

Some of these penalties went through the court system on appeal & without question these civil penalties ended up being paid.

 

It may have been something in the way feds are allowed to do things.

However, as I posted before, taping is one way to get in trouble for the average person.

 

so everyone that wants to video tape a cop just put up a sign telling them to smile they are on camera.
It does not have to be on you side window it can be on the vent window if you have one.

 

Dieselbear is quite correct, while everyone has the right to install cameras for whatever reason they choose, recording audio without the knowledge of the people being recorded is against the law. This is why you find cameras is stores, but they donot, cannot, record audio legally. If a police officer is recording audio by wearing a wireless mic, he tells you you're being recorded.

 

Again, this varies by state... but all you NEED to do is inform a police officer that you are indeed audio and/or video recording(if so required by the state, some states you don't have to even inform them your recording). However, a wireless mic is more complex and problematic, legally that is... the mic needs to transmit a signal, which can/could be intercepted. this alone may violate 570-A:2.

The ONLY way you get into trouble recording something(even police without a wire tap warrant) is if they/you record or electronically intercept(ie cell phone) anything that could be deemed private, like a private phone conversation. Getting pulled over by LEO's or a DMV inspection is NOT deemed private. Or if the person being recorded is not informed.

Example: In a public forum, like a City Counsel meeting. Any average Joe can walk in there and state they are audio recording and have every right to do so... In fact, it's done all the time... Getting pulled over by a LEO or DMV IS a public forum.

 

If you did this without informing the other party of the audio recording...

You sir, would have committed a Class B Felony under TITLE LVIII
Section 570-A:2

Good thing you didn't pull that with me! (Assuming you didn't inform the other party) My lawyers name is Sue... and she is good.

 

I'd bet a steak dinner at Outback Steak House that every telephone at all the terminals for your company are recorded and you don't know it.......at least with the carriers of 50 or more drivers........check it out with your company!