ACORN filmmaker arrested

Giggywig said:
So she's not currently involved in the wiretapping investigation. You just brought her up because of... well I don't know and I'd rather not speculate. Sorry for the derail.
Click to expand...

Known associates of criminal conspirators are sometimes included in indictments for on-going crimes committed by that conspiracy. Giles is known to have participated in earlier crimes with two other members of the team that invaded Landrieu's office. They work for the same criminal mastermind.

She's screwed.
 
fuelair said:
Just curious - since no one here so far has given a counter sample : can you name a state that allows audio recording of another person, without their permission OR a court order? And, if so, please do.:)
Click to expand...

Texas. IIRC, roughly half the states allow the recording of conversations as long as at least one party to the conversation knows about it.
 
leftysergeant said:
Known associates of criminal conspirators are sometimes included in indictments for on-going crimes committed by that conspiracy. Giles is known to have participated in earlier crimes with two other members of the team that invaded Landrieu's office. They work for the same criminal mastermind.

She's screwed.
Click to expand...
Was she convicted or even indicted for her "earlier crimes?"
 
fuelair said:
Just curious - since no one here so far has given a counter sample : can you name a state that allows audio recording of another person, without their permission OR a court order? And, if so, please do.:)
Click to expand...

Start here. In Arizona, where I live:

An individual must have the consent of at least one party to a conversation in order to legally intercept a wire or electronic communication, including wireless and cellular calls, in Arizona.
Click to expand...

What this means is that people can tape their own calls, without telling the other party that they are taping. You may recall that this became an issue in the Monica Lewinsky case as Linda Tripp had recorded their phone conversations.
 
The wiretapping allegation is apparently false. The criminal affidavit (or whatever it's called) it's alleging intent to destroy the communications gear, not bug it.

Patterico has a good piece on what's actually in the criminal complaint. And as he's a prosecutor in L.A. he kind of knows what he's talking about.
 
Newtons Bit said:
The wiretapping allegation is apparently false. The criminal affidavit (or whatever it's called) it's alleging intent to destroy the communications gear, not bug it.
Click to expand...

LAME. They had a listening device. That may be a crime right there. Posing as phone company employees is a crime in some places. Criminal tresspass is illegal pretty much everywhere. There just is no way the maggots are getting out of this without felony charges, and, most likely, convictions.

Latest updatre I have seen shows pimp boy and Dai and another man carrying suitcases into the court house. They had best be packed with K-Y Jelly.

Flannagan was not with them.

Have you ever heard the term "roll over" used in terms of interogation of a suspect?

:D
 
leftysergeant said:
Known associates of criminal conspirators are sometimes included in indictments for on-going crimes committed by that conspiracy. Giles is known to have participated in earlier crimes with two other members of the team that invaded Landrieu's office. They work for the same criminal mastermind.

She's screwed.
Click to expand...

Good deduction, lefty, according to the world you live in anyway. :(
 
leftysergeant said:
LAME. They had a listening device.
Click to expand...

Which was . . . .what, exactly? A dictaphone?

And who, exactly, had this device?

That may be a crime right there. Posing as phone company employees is a crime in some places.
Click to expand...

Which places? What crime?

Criminal tresspass is illegal pretty much everywhere. There just is no way the maggots are getting out of this without felony charges, and, most likely, convictions.
Click to expand...

It is specific, insightful legal analysis like this, based on the comprehensive review of facts and legal precedent, that puts the E right in the JREF for me.
 
leftysergeant said:
Just too obvious what would be my reaction to the thought of the torment that pimp boy is going to go through in the slammer, what with his being such a little wussie with a real purdy mouth.
Click to expand...

Presumably you're against waterboarding, but you get off on prison rape? :confused:
 
leftysergeant said:
LAME. They had a listening device. That may be a crime right there. Posing as phone company employees is a crime in some places. Criminal tresspass is illegal pretty much everywhere. There just is no way the maggots are getting out of this without felony charges, and, most likely, convictions.
Click to expand...

The "listening device" was "blocks away" according to an unnamed source. It was probably a cell-phone. It's not even listed in the affidavit.

There's a lot of speculation going on here, but none of it is grounded in fact. The affidavit did not list that these men had bugs or equipment necessary to tap a phone on them. That probably means they didn't actually have that equipment on them and weren't planning on actually bugging the phone line. We'll probably get evidence to what was turned up (and if it actually included a means for bugging a phone) when they were searched later. What they were planning on doing is another matter.
 
Newtons Bit said:
The "listening device" was "blocks away" according to an unnamed source. It was probably a cell-phone. It's not even listed in the affidavit.

There's a lot of speculation going on here, but none of it is grounded in fact. The affidavit did not list that these men had bugs or equipment necessary to tap a phone on them. That probably means they didn't actually have that equipment on them and weren't planning on actually bugging the phone line. We'll probably get evidence to what was turned up (and if it actually included a means for bugging a phone) when they were searched later. What they were planning on doing is another matter.
Click to expand...

My own speculation (and I will gladly identify it as a wild guess with absolutely no support): attempts at having people call Landrieu's office had not been getting through - the phones were continually busy. IIRC, Lan's staff claimed there were efforts to jam up the phone lines. I suspect the "phone company employees" wanted to get to the phones and verify whether the phones were working. Bonus points if the person with the "listening device" was going to call in at a certain time to test whether they got a busy signal.

That's my prediction for the MDC.
 
Newtons Bit said:
The "listening device" was "blocks away" according to an unnamed source. It was probably a cell-phone. It's not even listed in the affidavit.

There's a lot of speculation going on here, but none of it is grounded in fact. The affidavit did not list that these men had bugs or equipment necessary to tap a phone on them. That probably means they didn't actually have that equipment on them and weren't planning on actually bugging the phone line. We'll probably get evidence to what was turned up (and if it actually included a means for bugging a phone) when they were searched later. What they were planning on doing is another matter.
Click to expand...


I appreciate the link leading to the affidavit. Thank you for that. It does seem to suggest that the wire-tapping allegations may be somewhat premature.

I am going to wait for more information before I even attempt to draw any conclusions. Like charges brought forward, for example. After all the dust settles.

Affidavits are usually prepared with the least amount of information required to garner a warrant. Much of the real detail in any case comes to light long after any initial charges or arraignments.

On the face of it there does seem to be an indication that this episode will be viewed with a bit more gravity than the ACORN shenanigans. I don't know if this is a 'good thing' or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom