Comment

ACORN CEO's Press Release

638
SixDegrees9/16/2009 5:02:20 pm PDT

re: #449 Salamantis

These is a law against videotaping without consent in Maryland. But no such law in the other states the kids visited.

There’s nothing legal that allows those videos to be tossed out of court as inadmissable.

And let us remember that the Baltimore ACORN office was itself illegal. Yep; there’s a law on the books there prohibiting them from operating in the state. Which means that in that case, the kids were videotaping illegality on multiple levels.

It isn’t a question of whether the recordings were illegal - I’d guess there’s nothing illegal about any of them, given that I can turn a video camera on pretty much anywhere it isn’t explicitly prohibited, like in most courtrooms.

But such recordings, made surreptitiously, are almost always inadmissible as evidence in a court of law, for several reasons. Two prominent reasons: there’s no warrant authorizing such surveillance of private citizens; and there’s no chain of custody in place to ensure that the video hasn’t been tampered with in some way. There are others, as well; as you note, laws vary from state to state, but mostly you’re not going to see these videos presented as evidence in any court.

They might serve as the basis for launching an official investigation, but even here care has to be taken to ensure that any such inquiry develops it’s evidence independently of the original videos, or there’s a risk that it will be tainted through derivation from an inadmissible source.

If you’re hoping these videos can be used to bring any sort of charges against higher-level management at ACORN, I wouldn’t hold your breath. At best, they’ll cause much public embarrassment for the organization, but that’s about the extent of the damage they’ll directly cause.

Also, attempting to get these tapes admitted as evidence, as unlikely as that is, will inevitably demand a close examination of precisely how they were produced, and by whom. At the moment, there are a number of questions swirling around these matters; it isn’t clear whether those responsible would care to have their actions examined under the spotlight cast by a court of law.