who told Montgomery County police that it was legal for them to mount cameras in their police cars and record video and audio of traffic stops. Curran wrote that such recordings "could hardly be characterized as private conversations."
"Any driver pulled over by a uniformed officer in a traffic stop is acutely aware that his or her statements are being made to a police officer and, indeed, that they may be repeated as evidence in a courtroom," Curran wrote.
That's nice. Now let's see the Maryland LE authorities stop acting like they're sacred and cannot be recorded by citizens.
1 comment:
The officers' "reasonable expectation of privacy" is a colossal non-starter of an argument, as that expectation has not protected the recordation of conversations where the person who would ordinarily have the expectation of privacy knows he is speaking to someone who is acting as the agent of another and will pass whatever is said along to the third party. As Curran said, anything you say to a cop can be used against you in a court of law, so there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. In addition, you expect that everything you say will get transcribed into a police report, which is only a semi-public document.
The only place police can get a "reasonable expectation of privacy" for what they do in the performance of their sworn duties is from wherever the Stasi and NKVD do, and that has no place in a free society.
They have to make sure their hair is combed, they're in the public view, either in person or on camera
Post a Comment