Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And can I just say===
Any attorney who would make a recording of ANYONE he was in dealings with--client or adversary--and then replay them for others is just a piece of offal...
Ha Ha you beat me to it. I think both parties need to know the conversation is being taped for it to be admissible in court. Don't know what the law is in New York
So in conversation with someone in another state==say California--that might have different law--
As long as the recording is made in NY state, that is legitimate and useable as evidence in court if legally obtained?
Before any of those pieces fit, there should be something to prove Michael Cohen was in Prague. As far I know, that disputed allegation hasn't been verified by anyone.
Ha Ha you beat me to it. I think both parties need to know the conversation is being taped for it to be admissible in court. Don't know what the law is in New York
So in conversation with someone in another state==say California--that might have different law--
As long as the recording is made in NY state, that is legitimate and useable as evidence in court if legally obtained?
The wisest course of action would be to observe the stricter of two state laws with regard to consent in recording. Meaning if CA requires all parties’ consents, the recorder should observe the CA statute.
If there is a dispute involving the recording after the fact, it probably matters where the dispute is arbitrated and how the courts in that jurisdiction have handled this patchwork of consent requirements between states. CA state courts may, for example, choose to apply the CA statute in a dispute litigated within its court system. I think they had a case like this where the recording party resided in a one-party consent state and the other party resided in CA. I don’t think there is consensus in how disputes arising from differing state consent requirements are handled throughout the country. I’m also not sure if preemption by federal regulations could be entertained in these types of cases where different requirements across states create friction. You’ll probably have to ask someone with actual legal knowledge and specifically in the area of privacy and communications.
More importantly, tapes? Someone PUHLEEEASE leak a few juicy details.
Apparently Cohen had long time habit of making tapes of conversations between himself and variety of people-
And keeping them on his computer
So the FBI got the computer and there is strong possibility that they got those tapes
If so---
Turn out the lights...the party's over...
If you find yourself in a hole that's getting to be over your head, dig faster. Maybe you'll come out somewhere.
What difference does it make if these tapes can be admissible as evidence or not in the long run? It's the leads that these tapes will provide for the investigation going forward.
Tapes of possible threats to people, payoffs, illegal dealings, who knows maybe even murder? Cohen and Trump are in deep, deep trouble. Comey said Trump acted like a mobster. I knew this was about more than Stormy.
Tapes of possible threats to people, payoffs, illegal dealings, who knows maybe even murder? Cohen and Trump are in deep, deep trouble. Comey said Trump acted like a mobster. I knew this was about more than Stormy.
I'm more interested in Trump admitting to doing things he claims not doing. But this fan club will probably find a way to dismiss anything he says just like they did the Access Hollywood tape. "locker room talk" in your lawyer's office
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.