Thank you again WTF. For me, the question now becomes "reasonable expectation of privacy". But I will start another thread on that much later. Do I have to audio record my self saying I consent to the monitoring? Or is just knowing that I am recording enough to make it legal? Like uncle LEO with his sternum GoPro.
And, from that, since uncle LEO is a public servant, is anything he does on duty considered private? What if I don't know or realize I'm recording, like "butt dialing" (I hate the "what if game"); does the recording become illigal? Even in a public setting?
P.S. Although I don't think anyone believes you didn't know how old this thread was, I'm still glad you bumped it TeeDub.
Texas is a "one party consent state" meaning that as long as one of the parties consents to the recording it's legal. Texas Penal Code § 16.02(c)(4)(a)
I'm not sure how legal it remains though if the other party has a "reasonable expectation to privacy" such as in their own hotel room, bedroom, or during a sexual act. It may become a felony at that point.
Either way, even if it is legal it's fucking creepy and I'm surprised he admitted to it...
**Honesty Alert**I'm not an attorney but I've fucked a couple and stayed at a number of Holiday Inn Express 
Originally Posted by SpiceItUp
As long as I know, it's all Kosher?
And this too shall pass..next thing, someone else will do something stupid and this thread will die down..
Originally Posted by hornfreak
I'm with Citizen, this smart guy took a very attractive girl away from us
Originally Posted by dowork2012
Recording people without there verbal consent is not OK
Originally Posted by Guest021217
Depends on the state?
You do realize that in the state of Texas it is legal to record a conversation between two parties as long as you have the consent of one party.
Originally Posted by WTF
Why do I have to give myself consent?
DM, here is the count.
Party#1 = provider
Party#2 = Papi
Legally, he gave his consent and the recording is legal.
Now, is it OK to do here? THAT is another question/
Originally Posted by Pistolero
But he said he Didnt tell them he was recording so how is that consent?
I'm googling this
Originally Posted by Guest021217
He doesn't care if they know! "It was there "in plain sight"".
Pistolero
Here is the law
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/gath...te-information
Its illegal because its not a public place smh
Read the article
Originally Posted by Guest021217
Question of "reasonable expectation of privacy".
It is not illegal to record a conversation in the state of Texas in you have the consent of one party. In this case papi. So admit your mistake and move on.
Originally Posted by WTF
Actually you need to read up....in the state of Texas you can record a private conversation as long as you have the consent of one of the parties involved.
What you posted does not involve one of the parties involved consent.
Think about what i have posted before replying. You can record a phone conversation if you want...you just have to have the consent of one of the parties involved. Now go eat a bugger and quit bothering me.
Originally Posted by WTF
LMFAO
Had to quote DM on this.
Sweetie, you need to read the relevant parts of the law. This is the correct page for your website above.
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/texas-recording-law
Originally Posted by Pistolero
I know it was easier for you to just read the title, with those big letters. But, if you read the first paragraph you would understand . Tell ya what, I will highlight the relevant parts.
Texas makes it a crime to intercept or record any "wire, oral, or electronic communication" unless one party to the conversation consents. Texas Penal Code § 16.02. Therefore, if you operate in Texas, you may record a conversation or phone call if you are a party to the conversation or you get permission from one party to the conversation in advance
Originally Posted by Pistolero
As long as the one recording knows there's a recording?
But if its in fucking private and intimate activities are happening then its fucking illegal are you not fucking reading the shit
Its called INTRUSION UPON SECLUSION
Originally Posted by Guest021217
Point of order! Is this the same question as "reasonable expectation of privacy"?
Gathering Private Information
If you physically enter a private area, photograph or take video of people engaged in private activities in places where they reasonably expect to be private, or in some other other way intrude into a person's privacy (by, for example, opening the person's mail), you could be liable for a violation of what is called "intrusion*upon seclusion." If you collect certain personal data, this can also intrude into a person's private affairs. In the newsgathering context, the actual collection of the data could be seen as intrusion if the method you use meets the*four general elements for an intrusion claim.
Generally speaking, however, you will not be liable for intrusion if you photograph or capture video of people in public places, even if they have not consented to being recorded, because individuals cannot have a reasonable expectation of privacy when in public. Nor will you be liable for intrusion if you gather private information from documents that are available to the general public.
If you plan to gather private information or take photographs or video of people engaged in private activities in places where they could reasonably expect to be private, you should:
Originally Posted by Guest021217
Maybe, maybe not Dorthy. The public vs private thing you're linking to is regarding whether or not it's ok for a third-party to record conversations. What you are probably intending to talk about is a separate issue which is, does the legality of one party consent change if there is a "reasonable expectation of privacy" such as in your own home, hotel room, bedroom, etc?
Even if it does, the Texas wiretap statute is still the one in play, it covers all oral communications.
BTW, I already said all of this in post #22 of this thread as well as linked to the relevant Texas statute.
Originally Posted by SpiceItUp
No, a third uninvolved party can record you on a public street without consent. You can record yourself in private without the other party's consent because Texas is a "one party consent" state.
You're confusing two different things.
Originally Posted by SpiceItUp
I think I got my answer. Partly. Do I have to note audibly that "I consent to this recording?"
omg yall still going, lol....
Originally Posted by Kammye
I know right? And TW didn't know it was this old.
But in private example home hotel etc you have to have consent believe what you want its on the internet..
Originally Posted by Guest021217
Originally Posted by oilfieldscum
Getting ourselves in hot water. I know.
You do not seem to realize what people are upset about.
An attempt to get BBFS is no big deal. Happens all the time, every day. The fact is that you made recordings without the knowledge of the provider. As you have confirmed. Nobody has to ask other providers anything. Removing the condom is not a big thing. It goes on constantly with many people.
But recording without permission, tho legal, is very unethical. As someone said above, LE could have a field day with those recordings.
And the shot deal, I am not even going to go there. But if you care at all about your "reputation" you will not say another word and will let this thread die.
Originally Posted by Pistolero
Papi not posting doesn't mean this thread will die...I don't give a fuck if he remembers it happened...it's more important that another group remembers it happened...
Originally Posted by Wakeup
[QUOTE=Pistolero;1057402944]
Please tell me which guideline he did not follow
No, Spice pointed you for insulting remarks. Read the PM on the violation.
What protections are these of which you speak? You violated a guideline and got penalized. Spice did not even edit what you said, so it is still out there for all to see.
And you know if he has been pointed how? You have no idea what has happened with him
Again, what protection has he received? There has been nothing edited out.
Exactly.
[QUOTE=WTF;1057402151]
Very interesting thread. One where my man Pistol has been misunderstood! 
Hurts doesn't it?
Quote from Natalie Mori
Originally Posted by SpiceItUp 
. Thus far, with very few exceptions, this thread has been a good example of how people can be fucking pissed at a member and let him know it without crossing the line.
Hmmmm I sure have got points for it...
Don't lie. You have not gotten one point or warning about anything you said in this thread.
Personally I think it's a huge deal not that the guy allegedly asked for BBFS necessarily but that he allegedly did it anyway without her consent. To me, if true, that is tantamount to rape because he took away her choice and didn't respect her decision to say no.
Agreed.
Some people seem to want to blame staff for not getting rid of Papi. He did nothing on the board to justify a ban. We are not the hobby police. We do not have resources to investigate if off board activities are reported truthfully.
All mods can see a copy of every RTM on the board. And it is an everyday occurrence of some guy trying to get BBFS by slipping a condom off. It comes up in every forum.
I know there are some in this thread who do not like the rules when they apply to them. But they want people disciplined for acts that do not violate the guideline. Not gonna happen.
And any argument you might try to make is weakened when you post things that are not true. Just to help an agenda.
As long as we follow guidelines, ethics be damned.
They get Pointolero to do the dirty work here because he's in another county. The local HouTards don't want to lose their modPussy. They only get involved when it's gonna get them some free head.
Originally Posted by GlobeSpotter
Then the pistola comes out. Because his thumb is the strongest.
A audio tape recording is not a PHOTOGRAPHY OR VISUAL RECORDING.
Get your facts straight. You can audio record your own conversation with another. Period. Why are you trying to lie about this? Do you not want the ladies to be able to protect themselves?
Originally Posted by WTF
They still going lol
Originally Posted by Kammye
I know right! And TW still thought he would bump a two-year old thread.
No need for all the surveillance equipment - I'll just bring a pen, pad, and some crayons.
Originally Posted by cr76
This thing is still going?
Originally Posted by Wakeup
Your right you're licking his dirty butt hole.
No I'm not a lawyer ,are you saying LL is? I do know that i inquired with more than one lawyer over this very issue. It is legal in Texas to audio record two people in this exact setting we are discussing if one has given their consent. Even LL knows this and in fact has conceded that point long ago by not disputing it any longer. He did try and confuse some dumbass with his convolution of video recording and audio recording. They are two separate issues.
I thought you had the weekend off to un-retire with old friends...wtf happen none show up?
Originally Posted by WTF
As long as I know. But do I have to acknowlege myself on the recording. Semantic smart-ass!
Is it consent from one of the parties? Or is it that you can record as long as the other party has been advised of the recording? Semantics. I know. But what is the law if not simantics?
"What is the definition of is?" William Jefferson Clinton
Any ruling from the legal forum? I've asked in a previous post.
Post 692
Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
Quoting myself:
Glad you asked, maybe LL and Dorothy can learn something. This all pertains to audio recording btw.
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/reco...-conversations
Who must give permission to record a telephone or in-person conversation?
Federal law permits recording telephone calls and in-person conversations with the consent of at least one of the parties. See 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). This is called a "one-party consent" law. Under a one-party consent law, you can record a phone call or conversation so long as you are a party to the conversation. Furthermore, if you are not a party to the conversation, a "one-party consent" law will allow you to record the conversation or phone call so long as your source consents and has full knowledge that the communication will be recorded.
In addition to federal law, thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia have adopted "one-party consent" laws ** and permit individuals to record phone calls and conversations to which they are a party or when one party to the communication consents. See the State Law: Recording section of this legal guide for information on state wiretapping laws.
** Texas is of the 38 that are one-party consent States.
Below is what seems to be tripping up LL and Dorothy. They seem to be having trouble differentiating between two people engaged in conversation and one party recording it and a third party secretly recording two other people's conversation in which the third party is not a part of
Can you record a phone call or conversation when you do not have consent from one of the parties?
Regardless of whether state or federal law governs the situation, it is almost always illegal to record a phone call or private conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent from at least one party, and could not naturally overhear. In addition, federal and many state laws do not permit you to surreptitiously place a bug or recording device on a person or telephone, in a home, office or restaurant to secretly record a conversation between two people who have not consented.
Originally Posted by WTF
Thank you again!
Federal law and several states require only that one party to the conversation consent to the recording. If you are a party to the conversation that you are recording, then your consent is sufficient. New York, Louisiana, and Texas adhere to this requirement.
However, even if the recording is the type of evidence that is admissible, you still may not be able to introduce the tape in court due to a lack of predicate. Predicate refers to the foundation that you must establish to ensure the evidence is reliable. For example, until you establish that the voice on the tape is actually belongs to the person you are claiming it does, the recorded conversation is hearsay and will not be admitted.
Read more: http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/c...#ixzz3qzXsmTE7
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @FreeAdviceNews on Twitter | freeadvice on Facebook
Originally Posted by Guest040816
Does this answer my self acknowlwdgement question?
As long as I'm ok with recording a phone call or audio recording a conversation, the other party need not know? Or just need not consent?
Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
The other party need not know as long as you are ok with it....in Texas. If they are calling from another state, you might need to check that states laws.
In regards to client/provider relationship, which is really what we are talking about here, either party may audio record without the others permission.
I'm not sure why LexusLover is trying to confuse folks about that fact on here.
.
Originally Posted by WTF
Was it recorded audio or video that yo..er.he did?
Originally Posted by TryWeakly
