Recording in states where you're not supposed to?

[VIDEO: "What is parental alienation?"]

Hi All,

Does anyone have experience with recording conversations/arguments/rages in states where you're not supposed to?

Thanks,

zaqsert

[zaqsert]

Hi All,

Does anyone have experience with recording conversations/arguments/rages in states where you're not supposed to?

Thanks,

zaqsert

[Nope]

You need to actually look up the law in your particular state. It seems that in *most* states as long as the recording is being made by one of the parties being recorded it is still good. The problem is that if you are really in a state where no recording is possible without the knowledge of both parties then you really can't do it because it won't be admissible. As a matter of fact, you could potentially get in big trouble for it.

Of course, BPD people being as crazy as they are, if you can't legally do it without their knowledge, you can always try just telling them upfront that you are recording the conversation that may just trigger them and then you've got all of that to work with and it's clear from the recording that you informed them that you were doing it.

[Finallyblooming]

Do you want it to be admissible into court?

[Finallyblooming]

Oops, looks like Nope got that.

[ForeverDad]

Federal laws on recording or wiretapping... . My understanding is that it restricts recordings without the approval of someone who is part of the conversation.  This is most often applied in serious criminal cases.  Most members here, I would venture to say, are not, um, criminals.

State laws vary, some are two party states, some are one party states, but there may be exceptions.  For example, an abuser should not be protected if the target or victim decides to use recordings to document the abuse.  Yes, courts would rather avoid the whole thing but the fact is that most DV happens in private settings, precisely why the abuser/controller feels free to misbehave.

From a practical staNPDoint, I think it's rare for someone to be charged for trying to protect oneself.  I've been here several years and many here have recorded (carefully, not shoving a recorder in the other's face of course) but only in maybe a handful of cases did a member report a judge ordering them to stop recording.  I don't recall anyone going to jail or fined for recording.

Also, so many devices record today - cell phones, MP3 recorders, cameras, video cameras, pencams, etc - that an expectation of not being recorded is decreasing as the devices become more universal and being prosecuted for recording the contact with risk of conflict is small too.

When you compare the relatively small risk of legal consequences and the larger risk of undocumented abuse, DV, threats, false allegations, framed for arrest, etc, then a person in most cases can make a reasonable decision whether to record or not.

Of course, voice mails are not at issue since there is no reasonable expectation of later privacy.

In my case, I live in a one party state and I recorded but even if I didn't I still would have cautiously and quietly recorded since I viewed it as a special form of 'insurance' to reduce the risk of arrest and to document that I wasn't the one acting abusively.

Ponder the laws, relatively low risk of official consequences and your risks of being involved in an incident where your pwBPD could get you into legal trouble or ex could continue hiding the poor behaviors.

[scraps66]

From what I understand, recording and whether legal or not is only an issue if you take it to court.  At that pointit is inadmissible.  But, I don't think there would be an issue with using a recording up to the point you go to court, like lawyer to lawyer.  If nothing else, the conversation/rage can be translated to paper and used in court.

[ForeverDad]

Scraps made a good point, unobtrusive recording can be kept under wraps, if not known or used then it shouldn't become an issue.  That is, it can be kept in reserve and hopefully not needed, just like insurance.  Needed how?

A recording could be used to defend yourself if police become involved and the other makes false allegations.  Then you would have reason to use it, even if not in court, to show you weren't misbehaving.  In fact, it may help to reduce the risk of allegations making it any further than a police response or a police inquiry.  Remember, without independent proof otherwise, your statements are seen as "he said, she said" and the default preference is to favor those of the female gender* or the one showing bruises or the one making the most extreme claims.

* In the USA there is a "Violence Against Women Act", not "Violence against Targeted Men and Women".

To explain further my case.  When I called 911, my ex had just threatened my life.  Police arrived shortly thereafter.  By then I had picked up my preschooler, sobbing because of her, and waited for them outside.  By the time they arrived she had transformed into posing as the angry victim.  They spoke with her, then with me, asking me to hand over our son to her, but when I tried, he shrieked and clung tighter.  (What child refuses to go to his mother?)  The officer just stood there looking at me for a long moment, said "work it out" and they left.  I didn't realize it then, I thought he just wanted to talk to me, but I have since concluded my child's reactions saved me from a scary ride in a police car and maybe even an overnight in jail.

After they left, my ex was so furious.  She ridiculed and belittled me that evening.  She even told me they had given her DV contact information, something I wasn't given, clearly we had been treated differently.  My recorder's speaker didn't work, so I had to copy it to a computer and later played it for an officer.  I was able to make a report, she was arrested, she refused plea deals, I played it at trial including the part when she snubbed her own child's crying, in court she admitted threatening me and yet the judge dismissed the entire case, saying she wasn't guilty of "imminent" threat of DV since she didn't have a weapon in her hands.  So she skated legal consequences, but we stayed separated, a few months later I filed for divorce and she made endless allegations.  I have never been in a private setting since with her, I know she has legal disinterest as long as she doesn't have a weapon while making threats.

[zaqsert]

Thank you so much, ForeverDad, Scraps66, Finallyblooming, and Nope!

Although I do live in a two party state in the US (California) and temporarily live in a two party country in Europe, the "insurance" point does make a lot of sense.

[casper324]

Lets hope I can use recordings!  I am in NJ and it is a two party state.  I began recording my BPDH for years because some of the lies and things he said were simply not true or just plain hurtful and he'd forget he ever said it. 

Last week he was verbally attacking my daughters guest who is visiting the USA with her from Europe.  He attacked her emotionally and verbally for days prior to me having the police visit.  The police visit was prompted by his telling my daughters BF to gt the F out of his house and take his fat f"ing pig of a girl friend with him.  I came to his defense audio recorder in pocket.  During the encounter you can hear me begging him to stop this nonsense as they really have no where else to go.  He then tried to deflect the argument to he can't even cut grass right in my eyes and I agreed the last time he cut it it was half done and not done well.  He then tried to blame me for his short comings in the maintenance department and I used an example of molding that has never been nailed in in 6 years.  He broke that moulding and threatened to destroy my kitchen.  I called the police and was granted a TRO.  He filed a TRO against me a week later saying I said I wished he was dead. My recording from that morning from the minute I left the bed room to when the police arrived is on tape and I never said that.  I wouldnt give a rats butt that he's got a TRO on me but he included our disabled daughter.  My other daughter who is visiting dropped her TRO and him his counter because he added her sister and 85+ year old grand parents to the TRO and she only comes from Europe 2 times a year.  She didn't want to miss seeing them since it very well could the the last time.