Abusive Neighbors

[Razor Sharp]

I thought of that iqqi, my lawyer is putting together something official, along with measures to proceed with this case should I disappear or become the victim of foul play. I also have a friend of mine staying with me who is in Special Ops. He volunteered to be my armed bodyguard till this blows over.

@BibleBelt - I did not realize that might be illegal. I live in North Carolina and cant seem to find any relevant info. If you run across anything let me know

 

[5string]

I thought of that iqqi, my lawyer is putting together something official, along with measures to proceed with this case should I disappear or become the victim of foul play. I also have a friend of mine staying with me who is in Special Ops. He volunteered to be my armed bodyguard till this blows over.

@BibleBelt - I did not realize that might be illegal. I live in North Carolina and cant seem to find any relevant info. If you run across anything let me know

That's not illegal. Did Zapruder get in trouble for filming JFK's murder? No. Did the guy who filmed the Rodney King beating get in trouble? Of course not. Child abuse is a crime. If you can hear it all from your pad, it's public, not private. No ill intent on your part. If you heard two guys talking in your hallway about a crime they were going to commit, and you turned on a recorder and gave it to the authorities, you most certainly not get into trouble. Your attorney will tell you this. Keep the posts coming.

 

[iqqi]

I really respect what you are doing here.

 

[Bible_Belt]

If you heard two guys talking in your hallway about a crime they were going to commit, and you turned on a recorder and gave it to the authorities, you most certainly not get into trouble. Your attorney will tell you this. Keep the posts coming.

I only know the law of my state and not the other states, but I live in Illinois, which is a very corrupt state. Because of this corruption, the state legislators passed a law making recording any conversation without consent a felony. The point is to protect the politicians being recorded taking bribes. It is a bigger crime to make the recording than to take the bribe.

 

[horaholic]

This is a different situation though. The Op isnt spying here. What he's doing is most likely protected under freedom of press. he isnt doing it to dig dirt. he's doing it to protect, and i highly doubt any judge would see it any different, even if it WERE illegal..

 

[5string]

This is a different situation though. The Op isnt spying here. What he's doing is most likely protected under freedom of press. he isnt doing it to dig dirt. he's doing it to protect, and i highly doubt any judge would see it any different, even if it WERE illegal..

Exactly

 

[Mr.Positive]

Razor, much respect to you. You are doing a very good thing. I think you've been handling everything the best possible way.

Also, keep in mind, by him poking you in the chest...he engaged you first. He made physical contact first. That's battery, self-defense laws protect you under that. Just thought that was worth pointing out.

All the best, you are making a big difference in that lil' girls life. Rest easy, and proud.

 

[Bible_Belt]

I don't agree with all of these laws, but they do exist. And I wouldn't depend upon the law not being enforced for the sake of fairness, or because the child abuser is a bad guy. Especially if he is politically connected, an illegal recording is the type of thing that would put you in jail instead of him.

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/index.html

Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Be aware that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as “two-party consent” laws. If there are more than two people involved in the conversation, all must consent to the taping.

State-by-state summaries of laws:
http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states.html

 

[5string]

I don't agree with all of these laws, but they do exist. And I wouldn't depend upon the law not being enforced for the sake of fairness, or because the child abuser is a bad guy. Especially if he is politically connected, an illegal recording is the type of thing that would put you in jail instead of him.

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/index.html

Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington. Be aware that you will sometimes hear these referred to inaccurately as “two-party consent” laws. If there are more than two people involved in the conversation, all must consent to the taping.

State-by-state summaries of laws:
http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states.html

My thought is that if someone is yelling, arguing and basically carrying on so that others can hear, they have waived their right to privacy. On the other hand, if one were to call another on the phone and records the conversation without the others permission, that could be considered illegal depending on a particular state law as Bible Belt has noted.

 

[Bible_Belt]

The example that one of my law professors taught was that if your neighbor was standing in his yard screaming death threats at you, and you recorded those threats, then the recording would still be a felony...and the threats would probably be a misdemeanor.

As I said, the Illinois law is meant to protect politicians from being caught taking bribes. Recording the conversation would be the easiest way to catch them, so they made that a felony.

What I am trying to convey is that often the law is not fair at all. I think everyone should be able to record corrupt politicians and child abusers; most people would agree. But it is still a felony in Illinois.

 

[5string]

The example that one of my law professors taught was that if your neighbor was standing in his yard screaming death threats at you, and you recorded those threats, then the recording would still be a felony...and the threats would probably be a misdemeanor.

As I said, the Illinois law is meant to protect politicians from being caught taking bribes. Recording the conversation would be the easiest way to catch them, so they made that a felony.

What I am trying to convey is that often the law is not fair at all. I think everyone should be able to record corrupt politicians and child abusers; most people would agree. But it is still a felony in Illinois.

Bible Belt. I say this in jest to you so no offense ok? Is'nt this how they caught Blago? He was the IL governor (politician). His case is being tried right now and I predict he's gonna go down like a bag of hammers for trying to sell Obamas old senate seat to the highest bidder. At least I hope so.

 

[Bible_Belt]

Bible Belt. I say this in jest to you so no offense ok? Is'nt this how they caught Blago?

Exactly. Except "they" were the Feds, operating under a Federal warrant signed by a judge. In theory, the Feds are first supposed to show to the judge that enough cause exists to justify the warrant. Blago was not caught by a private citizen with a tape recorder stuffed in his pants. Not having a fear of being recorded, which was a result of a law passed by his corrupt politician friends, was ironically what led to his downfall.

And my apologies for derailing this thread, but I just don't want people to make the mistake of thinking that the law is fair, or that what is fair should be the law. It does not work that way at all. The law trumps everyone's sense of fairness, yours and mine.

 

[5string]

Exactly. Except "they" were the Feds, operating under a Federal warrant signed by a judge. In theory, the Feds are first supposed to show to the judge that enough cause exists to justify the warrant. Blago was not caught by a private citizen with a tape recorder stuffed in his pants. Not having a fear of being recorded, which was a result of a law passed by his corrupt politician friends, was ironically what led to his downfall.

And my apologies for derailing this thread, but I just don't want people to make the mistake of thinking that the law is fair, or that what is fair should be the law. It does not work that way at all. The law trumps everyone's sense of fairness, yours and mine.

I don't think the thread is being derailed. Sure do agree with your point that the law is not fair sometimes. Can't wait for the op to update us. And that Blago guy is a clown. Wish somebody would take a pair of sheep shears and give him a haircut. We should do a thread sometime about what laws are ridiculous with some real life examples. Bet that would be a good one.

 

[TheBucketOfTruth]

Careful about recording other people without their consent. That itself is a felony in Illinois, regardless of what they are doing at the time. The law varies by state.

But really he is just recording the noise in his apartment. Isn't it their fault for making their business loud enough for neighbors to hear? I don't know how it all works.

He may have shown the guy a thing or two for now, but I don't think much will change. He'll go back to beating his kid, perhaps even moreso to compensate for his increased inadequacy feelings after the OP schooled him. Have you talked to your landlord about this at all?

PS:

Did the guy who filmed the Rodney King beating get in trouble? Of course not.

Not then, but in some states it is now a crime to film a police officer at all. Your rights are slowly but surely being stripped away.

 

[sageproduct]

To Razor Sharp, I just want to say that reading what you did inspired me. I hope I am man enough to do the same thing in a similar situation.

 

[Razor Sharp]

Well it looks like BibleBelt was right. My lawyer says I cannot record anyone without their consent, even if they are shouting right inside my window it's technically illegal and could expose me to a criminal AND civil lawsuit!

WTF?

It really pisses me off how average, law-abiding citizens have no rights while people like Bush, Rumsfield and Co essentially get a green light on wiretapping the whole country without any consent from the people they record (or even a warrant!)

I dunno if its because of my restraint the other day, the unfairness of our legal/political system, or both but I really, really want to punch someone right now!

Anyways its been remarkably quiet around here, not a peep for days. I think the neighbors have gone on vacation for something, which worries me for the child's sake.

Still nothing from child services. I sent them the petition and haven't gotten a response. I think they just won't touch this case with a ten-foot pole because of the potential backlash. It's really disgusting to me how people will just look the other way and let this sh*t happen like it's nothing.

Human decency is a rare thing these days

 

[Powerlifter]

Protecting a child from an adult should make any man or woman think of the quote 'man's laws were made to be broken' and this is a perfect example of one.

It sounds like this diplomat is on the poor side of the fence for since when does a diplomat move into a complex with reasonable rent prices.. don't they have wealth that helps them stay in the finest motels....something to think about and something is just fishy about this whole situation.

Either way you have my permission to kick this dipsh*t butt for in my opinion he is not a diplomats son by any means if he's abusing his wife and child like you say he is.

Powerlifter

 

[CaptainJ]

Wow Razor Sharp, the state you live in sounds really corrupt, I can't believe they have a law making it illegal to record a conversation, that is seriously fvcked up.Seems like the "Land of the free" isn't as free as it's made out to be.

 

[CuriousGirl]

Well it looks like BibleBelt was right. My lawyer says I cannot record anyone without their consent, even if they are shouting right inside my window it's technically illegal and could expose me to a criminal AND civil lawsuit!

WTF?

It really pisses me off how average, law-abiding citizens have no rights while people like Bush, Rumsfield and Co essentially get a green light on wiretapping the whole country without any consent from the people they record (or even a warrant!)

I dunno if its because of my restraint the other day, the unfairness of our legal/political system, or both but I really, really want to punch someone right now!

Anyways its been remarkably quiet around here, not a peep for days. I think the neighbors have gone on vacation for something, which worries me for the child's sake.

Still nothing from child services. I sent them the petition and haven't gotten a response. I think they just won't touch this case with a ten-foot pole because of the potential backlash. It's really disgusting to me how people will just look the other way and let this sh*t happen like it's nothing.

Human decency is a rare thing these days

This is unbelievable. You see this kind of thing in films, or it's the kind of thing you associate with dictatorships, it never really occurs to people this kind of thing is going on in democratic western society!

If it were to happen again, could you not be filming something in your apartment and it's 'heard in the background'?

It seems like the only leverage you have is about taking it to journalists, and tbh, all they need is smoke and then they create the fire. All they need are yours and your neighbours' 'accusations' and if the public are stirred enough then the case will have to be looked into, politicians wanna keep the public content.

 

[TheHumanist]

Out of displeasure of realizing Massachusetts have the same law, I looked u some stuff about two-party consent laws. Out of the 12, 10 does have a provision that recording in public areas is legal, though it doesn't stop cops for arresting at the moment of recoding. Warning, I'm not a lawyer (ironically, I'm typing this inside a law school...).

The rest of the states does have wiretapping laws, which may or may not hold up in court. I guess it all based on the judge's interpretation and all the energy it takes to take it to court.

More on topic, all I can say is wishing you luck against this son of a diplomat. It is good that you have some leverage (assuming you're not lying about the networks thing). A lot of people would have nothing to hold against a person with such connections.