DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
13 comments:
The man Speaks the truth!
Still a Democrat. Will get Hillary elected.
He points out the contradiction that is the Donald.
Both 255 and 316 look like complete asshats. There should be a moron button on this site that people can click every time idiots make stupid comments.
They are just trolls, 345. I agree with the Moron Button! I'll get to work on that right away!
Give me five reasons your voting for her and how it benefits you?
Maybe not wherever they were when the tape was made but here in MD if you record a conversation without consent you could be liable because you didn't get the other person's consent.
Keep in mind that the Soros funded Hillary campaign has all sorts of trolls posting to social media to try and sway you opinion.
Here's something I noticed. Going down Rt. 50 to the Eastern Shore last week here in Maryland, a BLUE state, I saw over and over again Trump signs. Hillary not so much. It was so obvious that when I came home I rode around in the Bowie/Silver Spring/Greenbelt and Laurel areas and didn't see a single Hillary sign. There were however a few Bernie signs still out.
If Blue State Maryland rallies this much support for Trump then I'm betting that all the hype against him is nothing more than Hate from the MSM and the "alt left" and that he will win hands down.
Got Trump!!!!
Then how do people record cops?
When they hold their camera out in plain view and record the cop knows he/she is being video taped. This was a private conversation. He probably wasn't aware of any recording device. Which means Billy taped it illegally.
Liar, liar, pantsuit on fire.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Maybe not wherever they were when the tape was made but here in MD if you record a conversation without consent you could be liable because you didn't get the other person's consent.
October 9, 2016 at 4:24 PM
False Assumption #1: Maryland law prohibits the "taping" or "recording" of conversations without the consent of all persons.
The Truth #1: Maryland law prohibits the "interception" of "communications" without the consent of all persons to the communication and does not even mention "taping" or "recording" anywhere in the part of the statute related to criminal violations.
Explanation #1: Maryland law states the following verbatim:
Unlawful acts. -- Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle it is unlawful for any person to: (1) Willfully intercept, endeavor to intercept, or procure any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication;
(2) Willfully disclose, or endeavor to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subtitle; or
(3) Willfully use, or endeavor to use, the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subtitle. Cts. & Jud. Proc. §10-402(a)(1)-(a)(3). (emphasis added)
Nowhere in the law are the words "tape" or "record" ever used.
Request to the Press #1: Stop incorrectly reporting that Maryland law prohibits the "taping" or "recording" of conversations without the consent of all persons and instead properly report that Maryland law prohibits the "interception" of "communications" without the consent of all parties.
The definition of "intercept" and its elements are crucial to not only understand but to prove to obtain a legitimate conviction. "Assuming" that intercept means the same as taping and recording is also not correct the federal and Maryland legislatures made this clear despite this distinction being ignored by many of the courts, and prosecutors.
Post a Comment