Pfizer Director Physically Assaults James O'Keefe & Project Veritas Staff
- Thread starter ziggy
- Start date
SmarterthanYou
rebel
NYS is a one party consent to record state. they didn't need his permission
Only because they expose the lefties for who they are.
Yes they did. You need permission to interview.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
No, you don't. New York allows one-party interviews. That is, so long as one party is aware of the conversation, recording it is perfectly legal. They have no obligation to tell the other party. So, O'Keefe's ambush interview of this Prick from Pfizer was perfectly legal. It isn't legal for the Prick from Pfizer to physically assault someone just because he was set up and is now fucked.
What is that anyway?
I hope it hurt. Okeefe's nothing but a lying, scumbag propagandist.
It's propaganda.
250.05 Eavesdropping.
A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he unlawfully engages in
wiretapping, mechanical overhearing of a conversation, or intercepting
or accessing of an electronic communication.
Eavesdropping is a class E felony.
A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he unlawfully engages in
wiretapping, mechanical overhearing of a conversation, or intercepting
or accessing of an electronic communication.
Eavesdropping is a class E felony.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
In one-consent states you can record a conversation you are having with someone else without having their permission. The state assumes that because you are part of the conversation, it is yours to record whether the other party knows or not.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
It wasn't eavesdropping. The person recording the conversation was also conducting the conversation. Eavesdropping refers to a third party that isn't part of the conversation recording it.
I'm surprised no one has treated James like a piñata or blown the back of his head off like an abortion doctor murderer.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
That's like trying to play Whack-A-Mole with the machine cranked up to lubricious speed. No matter how hard they try, people who have something to gain from having a copy of that information can easily have recorded and downloaded a copy they can then put back up anytime they want.
Where was the camera? Where was O'Keefe? The staff have been watching and listening in to the conversation the whole time while recording it without his knowledge.
That, my dear, is what eavesdropping is.
But so many have been successfully programed "If it is not on a clean/good/approved site then it is almost certainly alt-right fake news".
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
The woman that was sitting at the table had it in her purse, or something else on her person. O'Keefe is irrelevant at that point. It would have been eavesdropping if neither her nor the Pfizer dork knew they were being recorded. Because she knew, that makes it legal. It wasn't a third-party recording the conversation.
Again, the staff was eavesdropping. They are a third party. You can try to spin this one as hard as you can. But you won't convince anyone.
He had an expectation of privacy. The trust was violated. I see a lawsuit soon.
