Posted on 04/29/2014 9:43:13 AM PDT by sickoflibs
This sure appears to say that the bimbo V. Stiviano by recording Sterling committed a crime:
“California's wiretapping law is a “two-party consent” law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to “confidential communications” — i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989). “
California Recording Law
Only one of them broke the law but the MSM doesn't care about that.
I’ve noticed that every single news report refers to her as “V”, without mention what the V stands for. Do these reporters really not know her real name, or real first name? Is the V Stiviano name a stage name or alias? What do we really know about this girl?
Yes, generally, when you're recording a conversation, you state (at the beginning) that you're taping/recording the conversation, and then ask that all understand and consent. That way you have proof of consent contained within the recording itself.
we’ll see as this plays out. My guess is that the tapes were part of a blackmail plot. When she was unable to blackmail him, she decided to release the tapes publicly, in an attempt to destroy him.
I’m glad the issue of her making these tapes is getting some attention now. Why was she making tapes, and why did she publicize them, are very good questions. Alongside the question of whether laws were broken in the process. She may find herslef in legal trouble. We’ll see. See if any of these Al Sharpton types, who decry the racism of the tapes, will pay her legal bills.
I don't have much sympathy for him but I do find this entertaining,
He should refuse to sell his team and should have her prosecuted, to cause as much trouble as possible
Keep em busy on MSNBC..
>>>RE :”Her attorney is saying that Sterlinlg was aware he was being recorded and consented to it.”
That doesn’t pass the smell test. <<<
If that is the case, I’m sure she will have no problem producing a recording of him giving his consent. /sarcasm
It’s only a crime if you are recording leftist criminals confessing their crimes, in post Rule of Law America.
Not a great idea to do it in a state that make it illegal to record someone in a private setting wo their knowledge.
I thought of this because my state has such a law.
Not just MSNBC, but FNC didn't even pick up on this last night, not even Megyn Kelly.
I wonder if the fact that the recording is apparently an illegal one will hamper the NBA’s effort to punish Sterling.
Suppose Silver gives him a huge fine and long suspension and he goes to court to fight it. Would the recording even be admissible in court? I think as far as a court is concerned there would be no evidence at all that he ever made those idiotic, racist comments.
Certainly, the gold digger is not going to cooperate with the NBA investigation if it means admitting she made the tape(s) as it would open her up to criminal charges.
I’m not sure if 2 people ever deserved each other more than Donald and V.
LOL! Yeah, I think you might be right about that.
IT better be more than that. Lawyers will do and say anything.
He better be able to prove it in court otherwise just He say/She say.
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=630-638.
She better be offloading any assets because her “beau” will have her hung out to dry in civil court.
Love you long time, for enough time, to get your money.
That certainly is a foolproof way of protecting yourself .
If she was to claim that he gave his OK (which she is) and wo proof it doesn't pass the smell test.
Unless he was to let her off the hook.
If there was a violation of the law, the way the media immediately jumped on this should also be investigated, for evidence of complicity in the crime.
she has bad skin... and her nose is way too small for her very prominent facial features—cheek bones, lips... she probably has a spectacular body...
You bring up some great possible scenarios.
Those would lead to a very entertaining unfolding of events.
“...she probably has a spectacular body...”
Bought and paid for by her Sugar Daddy.
Its hard to find good women these days, but I think he was looking for the bad ones... and that's her.
yes--likely... but why would he not find someone who already has all that? perhaps to keep her under his control?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.