Some interesting info

I was looking up the recording laws for my state on a whim here just to check. Found this site:
http://www.pimall.com/nais/n.tel.tape.law.html

Its sort of helpful in a way since it lists them all accordingly.  There may be a catch 22 thats kinda iffy though. I was reading about how one state may have 2 party law against the one party states so it would appear that if the state you live in is one party, but the call comes from a 2 party state, you could possibly still be breaking the law..    But there's still some interesting stuff on this page.

Let em suck rocks, if they don't like it!
It gave me a chuckle.
Going through some tape recordings, and had forgotten about #21, almost ready for YT- Code name; “David, The Law abiding card service qualifier”. May not be the same idiot on tape 3
He gets all condescending when he’s told he’s “on the air“. After ranting about being recorded for YT, goes into a recital of all the areas of law *he’s* breaking!!
He ends with a threat, saying he’ll be calling tomorrow. He didn’t call the next day, but may have almost a year latter!
Initial voice check is similar to several other calls.

I wish you had chosen a less generic title for an important issue of barriers we all face when documenting critical evidence of tele-phonies.

Anyway, I was just browsing that mail order site some weeks ago. It would have a natural interest in educating customers who are considering surveillance gear, chiefly to prevent them from blaming the seller for their own legal ignorance. I don't have a serious problem with the material, though its author missed a 'p' in Linda Tripp's name and made little sense in asserting "the sticker law would apply".

The same page does include a welcome link to the best primer on the subject of evidence recording I know of, hosted by a legal support group for journalists.
http://www.rcfp.org/reporters-recording-guide/introduction

There is no one-size-fits-many way to apply the rules, particularly regarding interstate phone calls. Conflicts of consent tend to rest on two principles, the "expectation of privacy" and the purpose for recording. The choice of law problem arises when two different state laws mismatch and someone wants to bury a shameful truth. Absent other factors, the law providing the most protection of privacy wins the coin toss. Sometimes the side asserting the stronger law loses ground to an opponent who can show a lack of malicious intent or that total privacy could not be assumed. In such conflicts it's less clear which party deserves the most "protection" and from what harm.

There was discussion in April 2012 which may help. It stemmed from Diana Mey's historic eight-figure beatdown of a vile debt collector, in which her recordings of foul language and sexually charged abuse were like sticks of dynamite in her prosecution.

https://800notes.com/forum/ta-3cc0be064ac04b8 ... 048715965495068

As a minor update to this discussion, I was recently reviewing an ambitious proposal made last month by the National Consumer Law Center to upgrade outmoded state laws on asset seizure and debt collection. One of the model law provisions would essentially enforce a special single party consent, sidestepping both the Wiretap Act and all-party consent laws when the recording purpose is strictly to gather evidence of naughty collector behavior.

"Notwithstanding any other law, it is lawful for a consumer to record any telephone conversation between the consumer and a debt collector or debt buyer, without the knowledge or consent of the collector. Any such recording shall be admissible in federal and state courts or other legal proceedings respecting debt collection practices or seeking collection of a consumer debt."

from the Model Family Financial Protection Act
http://www.nclc.org/images/pdf/debt_collectio ... tection_act.pdf

Sorry about that. I was mainly interested in who's laws where what and what ours was when I went looking.  I thought the list showing might be helpful to some extent.  

Now I can get behind that law on the recording for debt collectors behaving badly.  That I see as a good thing! Might help to curb some of the abuse by the real ones, but it won't stop the criminals as usual. Still, having recordings of their voices might help put those ones behind bars.

If I did not have these recordings, I could not gain information. To what end its usefulness may serve I don’t know.
I can give another example, which is very strange, to say the least. I was more carefully reviewing #11 Code Name; Oh my God, an older recording from Nov, 2011.  Something not clearly noticed before emerged.  The last thing thought to have been said by the fronter was “Oh my God!”, after a ph # was given. But, now after cleaning up the audio some, you can hear more, as she’s pulling away,  perhaps talking to the idiot in charge of the boiler-room antics that day.
She clearly says, “Oh my god, its him”!
That tells me they must have had an early notice all about little ol me, around that particular boiler room!  Now, By this time, I count five calls in in that time frame, and I messed with all, but a couple that didn’t connect to the fronter jerks.  A pattern of calls can be isolated, and its still early to post em up, but I’ll bet, I now know who these particular culprits be!

The RCFP site has a much nicer and better detailed chart. They also reproduce the actual statutes for each state, and discuss several case law examples. If that's not enough, the whole kit can be downloaded for free as a handsome PDF. Looks like it was updated in August 2012. I think it's a must-have for anyone interested in fraud-busting.

What D/M is getting at illustrates the high value of quality media recording for evidence gathering. While you still end up writing contemporary notes, if you're doing it right, there can be gaps in both perception and comprehension. Memory fades and writing can be inaccurate, but a preserved recording isn't going to change itself. I look at recorded evidence the way a good archaeologist regards an artifact. You can photograph and scan and 3D-model the hell out of an item, but never, ever discard the original. It might tell you something tomorrow you could not have guessed at today.

I might add that having recordings and transcripts and talk-off sheets of the most elusive lawbreakers does at least enable teaching of the patterns we should look for in phone thugs.

Thanks for the Links Resident! I have the links bookmarked for reference.  I did read through the thread and also read the story on the lady who won the court case.  

DM I'm glad your working on those guy's! They are so annoying .. well, I had more then my fair share of the rachel calls previously. Not so much now. Finally got the DH tuned into look before answering on the cid and to pick it up and hang it up.  I'm still less then 5 calls a month on the robo callers. Never seems to be the same one twice either.  I get maybe those 1-4 calls in about 2-3 day's then no more. I'll keep letting you know though when I get those *cough* rachel calls..

Thanks for the info, All
While this thread is covering similar subjects, Ill ask away.
 
There have been other times, and other recordings that have given up hints. Past experience with some of the telemarketers, dialers, and their council, have left things in a weird uneasy truce of some sort. That didn’t stop me from trying to get more inside info out of various “cardholder services” operations.
 
Does anyone know if such a site exists, and where it might be?

Rumor has it there is an underground non-compliant telemarketing website, where in part, they trade alerts on the most aggressive of the Consumers fighting back, and numbers better left alone. I believe  the hidden site was once eluded to on FB. The hint I was given from certain individuals indicating they knew, and had control over who’s calling in a given area.
In a separate incident, and one of the only times I intentionally gave a phone number out to a dialer, just for that individual to contact me, a special robo-message was sent. It was as to say- “we’re going robo-call, and you cant stop us”. The dialer and the so called *counselor* may have transferred info via this illusive web site. The timing was perfect for it.

That wouldn't surprise me one bit if there was a site like that..  And I keep thinking its all a matter of time before these CC services duds are caught.  Karma catch's up with them in the end.  

One place I miss reading at is castle cops. Its too bad that site went down, they did a lot of good online. Not to mention all the scammy stuff they got taken down.  I learned a lot on that site also though. And I only read there.

} they trade alerts on the most aggressive of the Consumers fighting back

Sort of a black ops "WebRecon", eh? TCPA cases have spiked in the past couple years. Segregating the tigers from the indifferent would certainly be in the interest of lawbreakers and their attorneys. Promising nothing, but will be alert for the bread crumbs.

Spelling Patrol Corrections:
"was once alluded to" ... "this elusive web site"  (unless the site is imaginary, in which case "illusive" works)