Recent felony conviction

Man, you said it...

Interestingly in another post... Mr. Retired "Federal" DOT official admitted to recording conversations with drivers and using them(the recordings) to write citations.

In doing so under 'Federal' Law... Mr. Retired 'Federal' DOT official committed a Class B 'Felony' under TITLE LVIII Section 570-A:2 under current 'WIRETAPPING AND EAVESDROPPING' laws. Each time he did this.... go figure, huh? (assuming he didn't inform the driver he was recording)

I don't think this guy has ANY justification to be pompus or self-righteous about ANY persons conviction... Mr. Retired 'Federal' DOT official just never got caught.



Back to the topic... kirk, just keep your chin, up be honest about it, and somebody will give you a chance.... Learn from it, and move on

 

These posts are getting close to the inflammatory point. Attack the post not the member!

 

Sorry about that, I may have gotten a little too passionate about it.

Live the dream!

 

If he worked in a single party state, that was fine. You can't record third party conversations you're not part of for that law. In other states both parties have to be aware. In many states only one person need know. This is different because he was part of the conversation.

 

I feel we as a society need to stop pointing fingers and realize we all make stupid bad mistakes and decisions in our life time...Me included.....I try to practice that alot..even though i still catch myself pointing the finger.

We are all ''sinners'' no matter what badge we wear..No one is perfect in this world.Well ''aftershock'' is an exception to the rule'' lmfao....he is from that other world cali....lmfao..

Lets try to play nice (including me) and attack the post...

And yes i have seen so much corruption in my life from the ''so-called" LAW....CORRECT....I will say this::: how do you think drugs and prostitution get in the'' WALLS''????HHMMMMMMMM

My own opinion.There is more corruption with ''law'' members then us little people trying to survive.

 

That is assuming that he is/was writing citations under 'State' jurisdiction. The key word here being 'Federal'. I suspect the citations written could only be contested in 'Federal' court. Thus, he has to play by a different set of rules than a 'State' officer/official.

So, in this case, he couldn't use a particular 'state' law to trump 'federal' law when using recorded audio to aid in writing 'federal' citations. It just doesn't work that way.

 

The U.S. has a very robust "criminal industry".













Law enforcement of every flavour, lawyers, judges, prisons, etc.

 

YOU GOTTA TELL US WHO if these threads are to help others!

Local or OTR?

Oh yeah, CONGRATS!