telephone recording laws in the US

by dungbeetle 9 Replies latest jw friends

  • dungbeetle
    dungbeetle

    It would appear from some of the comments of our dear pro-Watchtower friends here on this board, that they are not the least bit concerned that

    Watchtower has been ORDERING their adherents to break Federal and State laws regarding reporting of child abuse;

    Watchtower has been punishing their adherents for obeying state and Federallaw regarding reporting of child abuse

    Watchtower likly is guilty of CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY with regard to the protecting and harboring of child molesters within their organization, as evidenced by their magazines and their letters to their appointed representatives the 'elders'.

    No, they are concerned with two things:

    1)That Erica wore a cross on the Dateline show. Well, let me tell you, the cross is no less a pagan symbol than wedding rings.

    2)That the telephone call Bill made to Dateline was recorded with only one-party consent.

    Well let me set those little worried minds at ease:

    http://www.pimall.com/nais/n.recordlaw.html

    There are twelve states that require all party consent. They are:

    California
    Connecticut
    Delaware
    Florida
    Illinois
    Maryland
    Massachusetts
    Michigan
    Montana
    New Hampshire
    Pennsylvania
    Washington

    There are 38 states that permit one party consent. They are:

    Alaska
    Arkansas
    Colorado
    District of Columbia
    Georgia
    Hawaii
    Idaho
    Indiana
    Iowa
    Kansas
    Kentucky
    Louisiana
    Maine
    Minnesota
    Mississippi
    Missouri
    Nebraska
    Nevada
    New Jersey
    New Mexico
    New York
    North Carolina
    North Dakota
    Ohio
    Oklahoma
    Oregon
    Rhode Island
    South Carolina
    South Dakota
    Tennessee
    Texas
    Utah
    Vermont
    Virginia
    West Virginia
    Wisconsin
    Wyoming

    In all 50 states and through federal law, it's considered illegal to record telephone conversations outside of one party consent. There are a couple of exceptions. In the state of California, one party consent can be applied only under circumstances in which one party is involved in criminal activity which would include extortion or blackmail. In the state of Arizona, the subscriber to a telephone service can record telephone conversations with no party consent when criminal activity is involved. Other than those two known exceptions, all other recordings outside of those states that permit one party consent are a violation of state and federal law.

    BEFORE YOU TRY AND REMOVE THE STICK FROM MY ARSE, REMOVE THE TELEPHONE POLE FROM YOUR OWN ARSE.

  • Yerusalyim
    Yerusalyim

    DUNG

    EXCELLENT! Thanks!


    YERUSALYIM
    "Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
    [Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"]

  • Dutchie
    Dutchie

    Hi Dungbeetle:

    New York Law:

    N.Y. Penal Law § 250.00, 250.05 (Consol. 1999): It is a crime to overhear or record a telephonic or telegraphic communication if one is not the sender or receiver, or does not have the consent of either the sender or receiver. It also is a crime for someone not present to overhear or record any conversation or discussion without the consent of at least one party to that conversation. Any illegal overhearing or recording is punishable as a felony.

    Kentucky Law:

    Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 526.010 (1998): It is a felony to overhear or record, through use of an electronic or mechanical device, a wire or oral communication without the consent of at least one party to that communication. Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 526.020 (1998).

    The same one party provision law is applicable in both New York State and Kentucky. As long as one person consents to the taping of a telephone call, it is legal.

    Therefore, the recorded call that Bill made to Bethel was perfectly legal.


  • dungbeetle
    dungbeetle

    Don't you just love the CLEAN Christian congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses? No idolatry or paganism HEEERE...<gag> <choke>

    http://www.birthdayexpress.com/bexpress/planning/WeddingTraditions.asp

    The wedding ring is the most ancient of all marriage traditions. Nearly every civilization since the Egyptians has used the wedding ring as a symbol of the marriage agreement. In Egyptian hieroglyphics, the circle represents eternity, and the earliest rings were made of braided grass, hay, leather, bone and ivory. When metals were eventually discovered, the first metal rings were lumpy and awkward. Today, wedding rings can be anything from an inexpensive, plain band to an intricate setting studded with gems.

    No matter where a person chooses to wear their wedding ring, the marriage bond is complete once vows are recited. The most common placement for wearing a wedding ring is on the fourth finger of the left hand. This custom began with the Egyptians, who believed that a vein on the left hand was directly connected to the heart. Today, a more practical explanation is that the left hand gets less use - and will be less likely to get damaged - since most people are right-handed.

    Despite longstanding traditions, however, wedding rings are not always worn on the left hand. For a time, wealthy Elizabethans wore huge, elaborate wedding rings on their thumbs. In the eighteenth century, Roman Catholics wore them on the right hand. Even today, many European women still follow this tradition.

    There are also many superstitions about wedding rings. For example, it is unlucky for the bride-to-be to go shopping for a ring on a Friday due to the bad luck associated with that day. It is equally important that neither the future bride nor groom wear their rings before the wedding ceremony since that would be presumptuous.

    Wedding cakes have been a part of marriage ceremonies since medieval times. In Rome, the first wedding cakes were actually loaves of wheat bread. During the ceremony, the bread was broken over the bride?s head as a blessing for long life and many children. Guests often ate the crumbs as a sign of good luck.

    Over time, a variant of this custom evolved into the forerunner of the contemporary tiered cake that is widely used today. In medieval England, wedding guests brought small cakes to the ceremony as a gift for the newlyweds. The cakes were stacked in a pile, as high as possible, to make it difficult for the newlyweds to kiss one another over the top. If the bride and groom were able to kiss over the tall stack, it was thought to symbolize a lifetime of prosperity. Eventually, the idea of stacking them neatly and frosting them together was adopted as a more convenient option.

    Although wedding cakes were once white inside and out, there are few rules about how they look today. Contemporary cakes can be any color, flavor or shape. Even if a couple prefers a traditional layered wedding cake, there are countless options for decoration.

    Saving a portion of the wedding cake is an old tradition that some couples still practice. As a sign of posterity, couples freeze the top portion of their wedding cake, thawing it out on their first anniversary to share with one another. Since normal cakes won't keep this long (and still taste good,) bakers can prepare a special layer that will survive for a year in the freezer.

    During the "marriage by capture" era, close friends of the groom-to-be assisted him when he kidnapped the bride from her family. The first ushers and best men were more like a small army, fighting off the brides angry relatives as the groom rode away with her.

    Bridesmaids and maids of honor became more common when weddings were planned. For several days before the marriage, a senior maid attended to the bride-to-be. This maid or matron of honor, as we know her today, ensured that the bridal wreath was made and helped the bride get dressed. All bridesmaids helped the bride decorate for the wedding feast.

    For a long time, bridesmaids wore dresses much like the bride's gown, while ushers dressed in clothing that was similar to the groom's attire. This tradition began for protection against evil rather than for uniformity; if evil spirits or jealous suitors attempted to harm the newlyweds, they would be confused as to which two people were the bride and groom.

    Before the use of flowers in the bridal bouquet, women carried aromatic bunches of garlic, herbs, and grains to drive evil spirits away as they walked down the aisle. Over time, these were replaced with flowers, symbolizing fertility and everlasting love. Specific flowers have special meanings in many cultures. In Hawaii, the bride and groom wear leis; newlyweds in India don floral headdresses.

    bwahahahahahaha

  • patio34
    patio34

    Dungbeetle, Thanks so much for that piece on wedding traditions and their "pagan" origins. It's obvious that the WT picks and chooses which pagan trappings that it will allow. They are so arrogant!

    Pat

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    What those dumb-dubs don't want to think about or admit is NOT whether recording a conversation without the other's consent is legal or not, but what that man in WTS legal actually SAID.

    What he actually said amounts to "do nothing, just walk away from it."

    I wonder why they aren't the least bit concerned that in "Jehovah's House" in Brooklyn, Watchtower Legal is indeed encouraging a "pedophile's paradise" whenever the laws will allow them to do it.

    They are only concerned about their phony image. Who gets damaged-for-life doesn't concern them in-the-least if to prevent that from happening would "bring reproach" on their Printing Corporation and its World Wide Cult Empire.

    Farkel

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    DB, you are beautiful!

    Ditto what the FarkMeister said.

  • bluesapphire
    bluesapphire

    The dubs also forget all the other things they do that have pagan origins like baptism.

    And they forget that God's holy people took circumcision from their neighboring pagan rituals.

    It's just a convenient excuse to be able to keep their beeks in the sand.

  • CaptainSchmideo
    CaptainSchmideo

    I was reflecting on how it is very apparent that Headquarters is going to let the individual congregations twist in the wind for "not following procedure."

    If I were an elder on a JC calling the Society for advice, I would,from this point on,start taping those phone calls, transcribing them, and having the whole thing notarized and certified and locked in a vault, as good CYA measures. When HQ then tries to escape from the legal entanglements that might result, what better smoking gun leverage than this?

    Welcome to the new arrangement of trust in Jehovah. And we can all thank the Society for this reign of paranoia...

    "Unlike me, many of you have accepted the situation of your imprisonment and will die here like rotten cabbages."-Number 6

  • detective
    detective

    wow! I can't believe I missed this. good to know!

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit