English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

7 answers

Yes. Turn on the recorder and then ask the lawyer if it is ok to record the conversation. You will get the answer on tape. We did that and when the lawyer asked why we said, honestly, that we sometimes forget details and would have the tape to refresh our memory. Once the lawyer gives permission, it's admissible in court. Otherwise, it's not.

2007-01-26 03:58:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Dear Java:

There are two answers to this question. Legally, there are some states that allow taping of a conversation if one of the participants knows they are taping. In other states, both parties have to know that the conversation is being taped for it to be legal. Since I don't know which state you are in, you need to look up the law where you are.

There is a real problem with taping a legal consultation. Taping the conversation may break the attorney/client privilege so that whatever you say and whatever the lawyer advises you may not be protected. In that case, whatever the case against you may be, the other parties can discover the contents of the tape and use it against you. Why would you want to run that risk? And why would you want to consult with a person you don't trust?

2007-01-26 04:02:16 · answer #2 · answered by TLBFH 3 · 0 0

i'm no longer particular about a suspect yet once you're managing the a telephone verbal change then only one party has to verify about the recording. that is the phone regulation on your state: Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2933.fifty 2: Intercepting, recording or disclosing the contents of a cord, oral or digital verbal change if someone is a participant, or has received the consent of a minimum of one participant, is criminal until eventually it is followed through a offender or tortious purpose. less than the statute, consent isn't required for the taping of a non-digital verbal change uttered through someone who does no longer have a lifelike expectation of privateness in that verbal change. See definition of "oral verbal change," Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2933.fifty one. The Ohio splendid court has held that prisoners do no longer have a lifelike expectation of privateness of their communications, for applications of the wiretapping regulation. State v. Robb, 723 N.E.second 1019 (Ohio 2000). unlawful interceptions are felonies and also carry ability civil criminal duty for the more desirable of genuinely damages, $2 hundred in accordance to day of violation or $10,000, alongside with punitive damages, criminal specialist expenses and litigation expenditures. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2933.sixty 5. The recording of cordless telephone conversations picked up, initially inadvertently, by ability of a infant visual demonstrate unit without the consent of any party to the conversations became discovered to be an unlawful interception of both an oral and cord verbal change through the state's maximum court in 1994. Ohio v. Bidinost, 644 N.E.second 318 (Ohio 1994). Ohio has an anti-voyeurism regulation that prohibits surreptitiously invading a persons'' privateness for sexual applications. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2907.08.

2016-10-16 03:31:34 · answer #3 · answered by sharona 4 · 0 0

Yes, and if the lawyer says otherwise then it's time to find another one

2007-01-26 03:56:45 · answer #4 · answered by stacey c 1 · 1 0

As long as all parties are aware of the recording and are in agreement with it.

2007-01-26 03:56:09 · answer #5 · answered by cmredd 1 · 0 0

You'd better, because sooner or later he will deny everything.

2007-01-26 03:54:37 · answer #6 · answered by P.A.M. 5 · 0 1

with his consent, yes.

2007-01-26 03:57:24 · answer #7 · answered by pappy 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers