Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It seems the police are examining inconsistencies in the wife's story now. Apparently the only thing she said in the 911 call that was true was that George was there.

She may find herself in a bit more hot water over this.

Again.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the news report I saw last night said that Zimmerman was filmed 'breaking' the iPad on the house's security camera.

Presumably he would not have consented to being recorded committing a crime, so the security camera will be due a year in prison.

Wasn't she conviscted of perjury regarding how much income the family had?

I wonder how much her conviction and the $$$ from being 2nd Amendment celebrities comes into the picture here?

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Presumably he would not have consented to being recorded committing a crime, so the security camera will be due a year in prison.

I'm not sure of anyone consenting to seeing their ugly mug(s) on a security camera while they commit a crime, but if that were the case, then if you rob a liquor store and the security camera gets you on film the person you robbed would go to prison for a year since you never consented to that either.

I believe such things only require 1 party know they're on tape/being recorded.

 Alfndrate wrote:
I'm not sure of anyone consenting to seeing their ugly mug(s) on a security camera while they commit a crime, but if that were the case, then if you rob a liquor store and the security camera gets you on film the person you robbed would go to prison for a year since you never consented to that either.

I believe such things only require 1 party know they're on tape/being recorded.

You get to the right conclusion, but you're commingling 2 different elements of the same law. You are correct that some states are one party notification laws: for example Iowa being one, I am free to record any call I like since one party (me) knows they are being recorded.

However, the above example of the liquor store robbery, the same law covering wiretaps go into an enormous amount of exceptions to the above, the one being salient here that you're free to openly record in a public place where there is no expectation of privacy.

Unfortunately it varies from state to state, which has led to an incredibly unfortunate event where the police have arrested bystanders for filming them in public under the principle that they had audio recording as well, and the state statute lacks the second element above. Outrageous, but true.

 Ouze wrote:

 Alfndrate wrote:
I'm not sure of anyone consenting to seeing their ugly mug(s) on a security camera while they commit a crime, but if that were the case, then if you rob a liquor store and the security camera gets you on film the person you robbed would go to prison for a year since you never consented to that either.

I believe such things only require 1 party know they're on tape/being recorded.

You are commingling 2 different elements of the same law.

I'm okay being wrong, this is why I'm not a lawyer. If I was a lawyer, I would most likely be this lawyer:

Plus if you lose the case, the pizza is free - that adds up.

I don't see Zimmerman getting into much trouble over this baring some dazzling revelation. If everyone involved in martial strife went to prison for being angry, aggressive, lying to police about particulars, there'd be even less room in the US penal system than there already is.

This is only notable because it involves Zimmerman. It's probably happening somewhere right now at this very moment etc etc to someone else.

I wonder if the police are ignoring any more important cases to work on this one.

 xole wrote:
I wonder if the police are ignoring any more important cases to work on this one.

Because when they ignore cases without investigating and someone dies people claim the police aren't doing they're job.