|
|
Posted by Nigel Brooks on 07/11/06 13:44
"NoNoBadDog!" <Diespammers@notme.com> wrote in message
news:XeudnSO9p8qwCC_ZnZ2dnUVZ_uidnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net...
>
> "Anne R" <no@nomail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns97FBF0E4670385D4AM2@127.0.0.1...
>> On 01 Jul 2006, :::Jerry::::<me@privacy.INVALID> wrote:
>>
>>> "Anne R" <no@nomail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns97F3C793C66874C1H4@127.0.0.1...
>>>> I'm in the UK and am looking for a secret camcorder similar to
>>>> what they probably use in TV documentaries.
>>>>
>>>> I'm getting really messed up by a doctor (NHS hospital doc) and I
>>>> want to record the stuff I have to go through in consultations as
>>>> proof for a complaint. The consultations are only discussion and
>>> not
>>>> a physical exam. Hard to explain but can't change doc easily.
>>>>
>>>
>>> <snip crap>
>>>
>>> A, what you are proposing to do is probably [1] very close to being
>>> illegal (before TV companies use secret cameras they clear it with
>>> their legal depts.), any evidence gained might not be admissible in
>>> any form in legal, disciplinary and other proceedings whilst it
>>> could lead to a claim against you. You will also need to spend more
>>> than you will be able to afford I suspect - the pin hole camera
>>> that you need can be bought cheaply BUT you then need a small
>>> portable video recorder and this will set you back around a 1000
>>> USD / GBP.
>>
>> I don't expect to ever get near the courts. The video may well be
>> accepted by a variety of other people such as complaints invstigators.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> If you really want to make a secret recording, and as you say that
>>> the consultations are non physical why wont a simple audio
>>> recording do?
>>
>> I have made audio recordings but I want video.
>
> Either one is inadmissible as evidence, and probably illegal.
You most certainly can do it yourself depending on the particular
jurisdiction you live in.
For example - some jurisdictions in the United States prohibit covert
recordings unless both parties to the recording are aware that it is being
done. Linda Tripp was prosecuted by Maryland for secretly recording a
conversation she had with Lewinsky.
But that is not the case in all jurisdictions, in fact most jurisdictions
allow covert taping if one of the parties to the conversation has consented
(in other words the person who is doing the taping).
Either way - the contents of the recording are admissable as evidence
regardless of how they were obtained. The rules regarding admissability
apply to evidence obtained by and sought to be introduced by the
Government - not private individuals. For example, in a criminal
prosecution the Government may introduce evidence unlawfully obtained by a
private individual as long as it can be shown the Government did not cause
or recruit the individual to gather the evidence.
> It is not hard to understand...you cannot do it yourself.
It is easy to understand actually - you might be prohibited from doing it,
or it might be perfectly permissable. It is totally dependant on the
jurisdiction you are in.
> If video or audio is to be used as evidence, it has to be done under court
> order, under controlled conditions, by certified methods, and the chain of
> possession must be demonstrable.
Rubbish - Chain of Custody does not have anything to do with audio or video
evidence. If the evidence is permitted then all that has to be done to
properly introduce it is to ask the person who is testifying about it - if
the recording or the video accurately represents what happened.
Court orders have nothing to do with audio or video evidence - unless it is
obtained non-consensually (wiretap etc). The whole issue revolves around
"consent" - if one party to the conversation consents then it is ok and no
court order, warrant or any other legal process is required.
The person asking the question was from the UK and it might be perfectly
legal for a private individual to make a consensual recording. It is not
illegal for individuals to tape conversations providing the recording is for
their own use, under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA).
Nigel Brooks
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|