Audio evidance in court?

jamesozzie

Is it legal to record somebody's converstaion without their consent and use it against them in court?

Our man in Havana

Are you looking for legal advice?

YeAh!

No, I dont think it is. Read on this website about law:
The sound recording can be presented in court if:
"The conversation elicited was made voluntarily and in good faith, without any kind of inducement.*6*"
See here.

jamesozzie

not advice, i was just wondering if it is legal, thats all!!

My former boss is being taken to court and he was setup. Really though, he is a really really nice man. he was setup bad and that why i was wondering.

any idea if tis legal?

jamesozzie

YeAh! wrote:

No, I dont think it is. Read on this website about law:
The sound recording can be presented in court if:
"The conversation elicited was made voluntarily and in good faith, without any kind of inducement.*6*"
See here.

thats great advice, thanks YeAH!!

Eru

YeAh! wrote:

No, I dont think it is. Read on this website about law:
The sound recording can be presented in court if:
"The conversation elicited was made voluntarily and in good faith, without any kind of inducement.*6*"
See here.

Thats an American website, no use whatsover for speaking about Irish law.

If the recording was genuinely not intended such as leaving a recorder on by accident and you didnt realise it would record anything of value then I believe it can be used however bugging is illegal in Ireland and even interviews and phonecalls can only be recorded when you are aware and consent in advance.

Our man in Havana

I thought that the state could obtain a warrant and then wire tap phones.

Eru

Bond-007 wrote:

I thought that the state could obtain a warrant and then wire tap phones.

Yeah but hes talking about a Joe Soap doing so from what I can gather.

Exon

Is it common for the Gardai to tap a small-time drug dealers phone?

dermot_sheehan

s. 98 of the postal and telecomuunications act prohibits "interception" of telecommunications messages http://www.acts.ie/zza24y1983.6.html#zza24y1983s98.

This appears to allow one party to record a call without violating this section, however the requirements of the data protection act 1988 http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZA25Y1988.html may still have to be complied with since the recording could be regarded as data (information in a form that could be processed). s. 2 of thact act requires the data to be obtained "fairly".

With regards to the rules of evidence, any illegaly obtained evidence should be excluded but may be admitted at the discretion of the trial judge. Any evidence obtained in violation of the constitution however must be excluded unless there are extrordinary and excusing circumstances (O'Brien v. AG). Kennedy v. Ireland held that wiretaps not in investigation of a crime pursuant to a warrant but rather for party political purposes violated the phone user's constituional right to privacy.


Also the heresay rule would exclude most audio recordings. Heresay is any out of court statement not made under oath, this would cover the vast majority of audio recordings. Confessions are an exception to there heresay rule provided not induced by any reward or coerced.

DublinWriter

jamesozzie wrote:

Is it legal to record somebody's converstaion without their consent and use it against them in court?

Nope. No way.

It's not illegal to record a conversation, but it wouldn't be admissable as evidence in *any* Irish court.

DublinWriter

Exon wrote:

Is it common for the Gardai to tap a small-time drug dealers phone?

The rules of evidence differ between Civil and Criminal cases.

Even if the guards do obtain a warrant from a judge to tap a phone, I guess it would only be in relation to allow them gather greater evidence against someone. The actual phone-tap wouldn't be used as evidence, even in a Criminal Case.

dermot_sheehan

DublinWriter wrote:

The rules of evidence differ between Civil and Criminal cases.

Even if the guards do obtain a warrant from a judge to tap a phone, I guess it would only be in relation to allow them gather greater evidence against someone. The actual phone-tap wouldn't be used as evidence, even in a Criminal Case.

The rules of evidence as far as I know are the same. Judges may be less inclined to admit illegally (but not unconstitutionally) obtained evidence in a civil case though.

The warrant is actually obtained from the minister for communications, not a judge. Reasons for a wiretap could include tactical information, there are also several exceptions to the hearsay rule that would make wiretap evidence admissable.

maidhc

gabhain7 wrote:

s. 98 of the postal and telecomuunications act prohibits "interception" of telecommunications messages http://www.acts.ie/zza24y1983.6.html#zza24y1983s98.

This appears to allow one party to record a call without violating this section, however the requirements of the data protection act 1988 http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZA25Y1988.html may still have to be complied with since the recording could be regarded as data (information in a form that could be processed). s. 2 of thact act requires the data to be obtained "fairly".

Recordings are generally regarded as "data".

Section 8(e) and/or (f) (as amended by the 2003 Act) should allow the requirments of the DPA be avoided easily enough. S.8(e) was used in EMI v. Eircom with little discussion.

I can't see why a recording would not be admissable, it isn't a wiretap, just a recording by one party.

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

when we were doing telephone interviews in college, we got a telephone recording advice to record the interviews. We were told by the college power's that be, that we couldn't switch on the recording device until we had got the permission of the person we were talking to.

Think that's why all those banks etc all warn you in advance that your call may be recorded.

That may have been wrong advice, but i was fairly certain that it is not only inadmissable, but even illegal to record someone without warning them (obviously, unless you have permission by way of a court's permission, to record them without their knowledge)