Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the Day

Posted in:

Illinois

Posted by Barton Lorimor (@bartonlorimor)

* You may recall last month the Illinois Supreme Court struck down the state’s eavesdropping law. Among other things, the law required a person recording conversations to receive consent from all participating parties before pushing the “Record” button. Now a days, you don’t even need that. It’s all fair game.

Assume everyone is wearing a wire is right, huh?

From Andrew Maloney…

“We cannot let this stand, because right now, you can record anybody, any time with or without (their) knowledge and use it for whatever purpose — and there’s nothing to control that,” said Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat. “I think that’s a situation we really need to fix.”
…
Ideally, Nekritz said, she’d like to have a new eavesdropping statute proposed before the end of the General Assembly’s spring session on May 31. But with lawmakers focusing more on the state’s finances than criminal law, she’s not confident a bill will advance.

She wants to keep one of the primary provisions in the old law — that all parties in a conversation give their consent before any recording is made — and add in exceptions for conversations that cannot reasonably be deemed to be private.

Question: Are there any provisions in the old Eavesdropping Law you would like to see in a hypothetical new statute?

Emphasis on explaining your answer.

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Apr 18, 14 @ 5:47 am

Comments

Today, none.

When police are raiding homes to seize computers with warrants from judges, I have a hard time swallowing the argument that government needs more power to monitor and regulate private communication.

Ask me again Monday, hopefully I will be in a better mood.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Apr 18, 14 @ 6:54 am
No

Comment by PublicServant Friday, Apr 18, 14 @ 8:34 am
No.

They need to start fresh and not say “here is what I liked about the old law”. Maybe they should think “we are no the ONLY state that has to do this… Maybe we should look to other states and see what works”

but I doubt that will happen. Our politicians often think Illinois is so unique each law has to be designed by them or it wont work.

Anyway, ANYONE on the public payroll should be able to be recorded. Private citizens acting in a private capacity in a PRIVATE conversation may expect some protection, but public officials and employees, for sure in ANY official capacity or discussing ANY public policy, law, anything that touches policy should be fair game to be recorded (on or off the clock).

Comment by RonOglesby Friday, Apr 18, 14 @ 9:39 am
Nothing scrap the whole mess.

Comment by Mason born Friday, Apr 18, 14 @ 11:28 am
==on or off the clock==

Just because you are a public employee doesn’t mean you forfeit all of your rights. If a public employee is off the clock then what they do is none of your business.

Comment by Demoralized Friday, Apr 18, 14 @ 1:51 pm
Its very simple - never say anything you don’t want repeated! Period!

Comment by Mama Friday, Apr 18, 14 @ 2:55 pm
Anything is public is fair game. You don’t like it? Stay at home, or keep your mouth shut.

If government cameras can legally record me walking down the street, I certainly can legally record a cop who stops me on said street.

Or we can move to a Berlin style or law, where no one in public is legally allowed to be recorded. Check Google street view. Faces blurred out all over Berlin.

http://guidedmunich.com/german-privacy-laws/

Comment by Anonymous Friday, Apr 18, 14 @ 2:58 pm