Oh Fani - get ready for your mugshot

[chizzy]

Think u r wrong. Phone call recording has to take into consideration both laws when it involves out of state recording. Federal law has nothing to do with it. It's alittle murky but respo se saying fanni didn't cross state lines has nothing to do with it


You.may be right but it is not a slam dunk

https://www.rev.com/blog/productivit...0Lehrer%20says.

[eyecu2]

Originally Posted by chizzy

Think u r wrong. Phone call recording has to take into consideration both laws when it involves out of state recording. Federal law has nothing to do with it. It's alittle murky but respo se saying fanni didn't cross state lines has nothing to do with it


You.may be right but it is not a slam dunk

https://www.rev.com/blog/productivit...0Lehrer%20says.

Typically when there is multi-state jurisdiction considerations, the legal perspectve falls to the the federal laws, and in the Fed's case, -it's a one person consent requirement. That said, I'm not an attorney and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express. Nor did I storm the capital on Jan 6th, or participate on any attempt to overthrow the legally counted votes in GA.

I think everyone should want to have the truth come out vs. hiding it from testimony. If Don JR. and Hunter can testify- EVERYBODY can. It would be healthy for the population to know that the entirety of events is being truthful vs. the claims of it being unfair or towards one side or another. I for one, would prefer that the Fairness Doctrine be reinstated to ferret out all this bullshit reporting, and sensationalism. That seems like 1987 and the removal of it was the beginning of the downfall of news reporting and the nexus of "alternative reporting and all the trappings of that".

[bambino]

She committed a felony under Maryland law. Pure and simple.

https://www.newsweek.com/fani-willis...action-1887799

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

It's another nothing burger. In GA- 6An individual can record in-person conversations where either the person is a party to the conversation or at least one of the participants has consented to the recording. Ga. Code Ann. §§ 16-11-62, -66(a).

The statute only applies to the “private conversation of another which shall originate in any private place,” so consent would not be required to record conversations occurring in public. Ga. Code Ann. § 16-11-62(1).

As long as one person who was part of the conversation is okay with the recording, then that's all that's needed. Obviously Fani counts as one of those persons, so the recording is legal.

Sorry to burst bubbles. What's more shocking is how many deflecting techniques in actions that the GOP and conservatives are trying to use to discredit Fanny for putting the truth out into the light of day. What's so problematic about the truth?

Summary
An individual may record or disclose the contents of an in-person, telephone or electronic communication if he or she is a party to the communication or has received prior consent from one of the parties.

Once again, you are wrong

While Georgia is a one party consent state, Maryland is not. And the individual recorded was in Maryland while the act occurred. Hence - this would be a violation of Maryland’s Wiretap Act, under which recording a private conversation without consent from both parties is a crime punishable by up to five years in prison and fines up to $10,000.

You can't break another state's law by claiming oops, that is not the law where I live

[Salty Again]

... Oh Fani! ... Ya surely might wanna get ready for yer mugshot! ...

### Salty