Jump to content

Federal judge rules Mass. law prohibiting secret audio recording of police, government officials is unconstitutional


WestVirginiaRebel

Recommended Posts

WestVirginiaRebel
federal_judge_rules_mass_law_p.html

A federal court judge Monday ruled a Massachusetts General Law prohibiting the secret audio recording of police or government officials is unconstitutional. 

Chief United States District Judge Patti B. Saris made the ruling on two similar cases -- one involving two Jamaica Plain residents who frequently record police officers and a second case involving Project Veritas, the undercover organization founded by conservative political activist James O'Keefe.

Both cases involved defendants who had not secretly recorded police but claimed that the Suffolk District Attorney's office and the Boston Police Department were interpreting state law in such a way that was preventing them from doing so without the risk of legal repercussions. 

Project Veritas argued it was being prevented from conducting the secret video recordings that are the bread and butter of its video reports here in Massachusetts due to the state's interpretation of the law, which would make such recordings illegal. 

The defendants in the cases are Suffolk District Attorney Daniel Conley and Boston Police Commissioner William Gross.

________

Those in power can still be held accountable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, WestVirginiaRebel said:
federal_judge_rules_mass_law_p.html

A federal court judge Monday ruled a Massachusetts General Law prohibiting the secret audio recording of police or government officials is unconstitutional. 

Chief United States District Judge Patti B. Saris made the ruling on two similar cases -- one involving two Jamaica Plain residents who frequently record police officers and a second case involving Project Veritas, the undercover organization founded by conservative political activist James O'Keefe.

Both cases involved defendants who had not secretly recorded police but claimed that the Suffolk District Attorney's office and the Boston Police Department were interpreting state law in such a way that was preventing them from doing so without the risk of legal repercussions. 

Project Veritas argued it was being prevented from conducting the secret video recordings that are the bread and butter of its video reports here in Massachusetts due to the state's interpretation of the law, which would make such recordings illegal. 

The defendants in the cases are Suffolk District Attorney Daniel Conley and Boston Police Commissioner William Gross.

________

Those in power can still be held accountable.

I don't think that ruling will stand the court tests / sorry folks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1720839956
×
×
  • Create New...