Reviving this thread.
Spoke to a friend of mine that is "wiretap certified" with a state agency.
He tells me that in circumstances where LEO are
secretly taped by citizens, during execution of their official duties, they (LEO) never win in court. One such controlling case law he claims is the most relevant: Commonwealth v. Henlen, 564 A.2d 905 (Pa. 1989).
Quote:
Commonwealth v. Henlen, 564 A.2d 905 (Pa. 1989), where Henlen, a prison guard at a county jail, was suspected of stealing the personal property of an inmate. During an interrogation by state police at Henlen’s work site, Henlen secretly recorded the conversation with the intent of using it as evidence in a
harassment claim he would later file against the police. Henlen’s argument was similar to that of the Commonwealth in Myers: the conversation was not an “oral communication” protected under the Wiretap Act since the trooper had no reasonable expectation of privacy while he was acting in his official capacity during the interrogation of a suspect.
|
He also says this precedent has been clarified with the wiretapping div of the state AG's office.
Apparently, since LEO's are performing public service, their interaction is not considered private. He also mentioned that any conversation w/LEO is not private because they will potentially create a report containing the info you and he discussed.
So, according to someone who does this as part of his official duties,
his words "you can always tape the police if they are performing work related duty, even secretly, even over the phone"
FWIW, 3rd hand info, but I know this individual personally and he is quite confident of his info.
In doing my own research it is my belief that this is correct.
Commonwealth v. Brion and Commonwealth v. Henlen, commonwealth v.Agnew all seem (to my reading) to uphold that in order for the expectation of "non-interception" to trump a the lack of "expectation of privacy", as the statute makes mention itself: "expectation must be justifiable under the existing circumstances".
In recording LEO's they have apparently found the circumstances are not warranting expectation of non-interception by virtue of the public servants job.
================================================== =====
Obviously, in the above, we are talking about
secret interception. If you disclose you are recording or your recording eq is in plain view your 100% good to go because the visible presence or verbal disclosure completely covers you under the PA statute
================================================== =====
The above is only my OPINION on what I have read and been told. I AM NOT A LAWYER. Take it FWIW! I am confident in MY OPINION that we can tape LEO, without disclosure, during a typical public interaction. Don't whine to me if you get arrested for same 