[Auntie Mame]

This judge's ruling is sobering. She says you have no expectation of privacy, standing out in the open. I know these guys are probably scumbags, but with this ruling, it's probably best for all to be concerned.

[glorgau]

So, unless you are in a cone of silence or on your own property (and your taxes are up to date) everything said is fair game.

[ThunderSleeps]

In this day and age of big-brother, nanny-state surveillance etc... I believe there are fascist wannabes out there in positions of power and authority that believe unless you are taking explicit and not insignificant steps to ensure your privacy, then you have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

In other words, there are lots of government types that feel if they can get at your information, then they are entitled to it without a warrant. "for your safety" "for the children" etc. etc. They can rationalize it however they want, but they just want to know what we're doing in case it might interest them and their dreams of power.

[bert]

-——She says you have no expectation of privacy——

in a public place..... she is right

collusion for illegal matters must take place in a secure location where there is in fact a right to privacy

[Cboldt]

-- This judge's ruling is sobering. She says you have no expectation of privacy, standing out in the open. --

Usually "reasonable" is decided by the jury. But when it comes to privacy, the government defines the reasonable expectation of privacy. Not many people know that SCOTUS first wiretapping decision concluded there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in any telephone call.

It is a mistake to think that the government will recognize any privacy that you don't deliberately and carefully create and guard.

[Real Cynic No More]

What’s sauce for the goose.....

Government conspirators better beware.

[circlecity]

I don’t have a problem with this ruling. It’s the same right that lets us record the public actions of police and authorities with cell phones and cameras. Besides, police have been using parabolic microphones to record public conversations of mob guys for years.

[rfreedom4u]

BUT what if you are speaking with your attorney? Or spouse?

Attorney-client privilege?
Spousal privacy?

[CGASMIA68]

Looks like we all need a private jet

[JimRed]

...the four did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy...

She says you have no expectation of privacy, standing out in the open.

With all due respect, I believe the key word is "reasonable". Of course that word IS subject to interpretation...

[Boogieman]

This judge is an idiot, and the ruling should be reversed on appeal I hope. If four people whispering to each other can’t have any expectation of privacy, then this is 1984...

[refermech]

The old saying: It’s best to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and prove it.

[MeganC]

Yeah, but if you were to record the judge or the FBI like that they’d put you in prison.

[Lazamataz]

Of course mice are allowed on court steps.

They are a little gross, and they spread disease, but they are NOT forbidden.

[tophat9000]

Wait.. these 4 guy just agree not to bid against each other in a public auction of property how is that illegal?.. they didn’t prevent anybody else from bidding.... they don’t have a monopoly of the business Market

If go to a public auction and bid on something and then I decide I want to team up with someone else there how is that illegal

Anybody ever see Storage Wars? sometimes those people bid against each other and sometimes they team up even Swap and sell it on themselves on the back side