It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by PsykoOps
Actually it's not the cops who determine that. It's the court and since we have pretty clear evidence that there was no interference this charge will either be dropped by cops or by the DA. Or feel free to show me a court case where speaking to a cop was considered interference. Fyi, you can even flip them off and that's not illegal. We've seen 'interference' charges thrown at people alot. Especially those who film/photo them. That never sticks. Protip: just because a cop says you're commiting a crime that doesn't make it so.
If you're thinking about recording police or other law authorities working in Illinois, you better think twice. It could cost you 15 years in prison.
Take the case of Sekiera Fitzpatrick. She was taken into custody for hiding a fugitive in her Danville home when she found out the hard way that taking a video or making a sound recording of an on-duty law enforcement official without permission is illegal.
...
Illinois’ penalty for knowingly recording audio of anyone without their consent is Class 4 felony. It is punishable by up to three years in prison. When someone like Fitzpatrick decides to record law enforcement performing their job, the charge gets ratchet up to a Class 1 felony and carries with it a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison. A Class 1 felony is the same class as someone who is charged with for having more than 11 pounds of marijuana.
Originally posted by PsykoOps
They say that but the wiretapping charge wont stick. Noone has expectation of privacy in public.
reason.com...
Last week, an Illinois judge rejected Chicago artist Christopher Drew's motion to dismiss the Class I felony charge against him. Drew is charged with violating the state's eavesdropping statute when he recorded his encounter with a police officer last December on the streets of Chicago. A Class I felony in Illinois is punishable by 4 to 15 years in prison. It's in the same class of crimes as sexual assault. Drew will be back in court in June to request a jury trial.
I'm currently working on a feature for Reason about man in a more rural part of the state charged with six violations of the same statute, all of them for making audio recordings of on-duty public officials. For several of the counts in that case, the police were actually on the man's property. He started recording his conversations with police because he felt he was being unjustly harassed for violating a town ordinance he thought was unconstitutional.
www.illinoisfelony.com...
Man is found guilty of Class 4 felony eavesdropping. Lewis Gainor gets conviction reversed and case dismissed. Download the court records
Lake County felony attorney Lewis Gainor recently defended a man who had been found guilty of a felony. The man was found guilty of the Class 3 felony of eavesdropping for illegally recording the police. He was found guilty before Lewis Gainor took over the case, and was facing sentencing of 2 to 5 years in the Illinois Department of Corrections (state prison).
The man was arrested on November 19, 2006 by officers from the Lake Zurich Police Department for illegal use of a sound recording device used to eavesdrop on the police. The officers handcuffed him and took him to jail. While waiting in his jail cell, the man was charged with a Class 3 felony for the incident.
www.findgreatlawyers.com...
To legally record conversations, Illinois law requires that all parties consent to the recording. This applies even to conversations that are not private. Illinois law does not require that one or more parties reasonably expect the conversation to be private, thus If a conversation is recorded without the consent of one of the participating parties, that party's right to privacy may have been violated and they may be able to sue, both criminally for eavesdropping, and civilly for invasion of privacy.
Under Illinois law, eavesdropping is defined as the use of "an eavesdropping device to hear or record all or any part of any conversation" without obtaining the consent of all parties to the conversation.
Originally posted by TheKnave
People are failing to realize that unless a crime is committed you cannot be arrested, end of story. It doesn't matter how stupid, rude or belligerent you are.
Originally posted by ararisq
Originally posted by TheKnave
People are failing to realize that unless a crime is committed you cannot be arrested, end of story. It doesn't matter how stupid, rude or belligerent you are.
It is a crime to be rude to a law enforcement officer. Don't believe me? Go try it.
Originally posted by ararisq
It is a crime to be rude to a law enforcement officer. Don't believe me? Go try it.
Originally posted by PsykoOps
Originally posted by ararisq
It is a crime to be rude to a law enforcement officer. Don't believe me? Go try it.
Show me even one conviction of 'being rude'. Protip: Just cause they arrest you doesn't mean you have done anything criminal.
reply to post by areyouserious2010
Yeah anyone can ask anyones ID. I can ask your ID for the hell of it. That has just as much authority than any law enforcement person asking.
Originally posted by mossme89
Anybody else find it sad that while the police are harassing this guy, you have a high & drunk jaywalker and they're paying no attention to him?