Legalities of recording a conversation in the ACT?

HenryBG said :

I think I know the same guy. Most patient man in the world. I would have gone nuts if I’d had to put up with just half of what he’s gone through. And to think that crazy, crazy woman is employed by the ACT government as a teacher….rioters, maker sure she isn’t involved with *your* offspring.

Interesting.

This particular gentleman is in Queensland, which apparently has no monopoly on crazy women who need recording.

So which part of Section 4, (1) (a) or (b) is so hard to understand?
(1) A person must not use a listening device with the intention of—

(a) listening to or recording a private conversation to which the person is not a party; or

(b) recording a private conversation to which the person is a party.
Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to—

(a) the use of a listening device under an authority granted by or under a law of the Commonwealth; or

(b) the unintentional hearing of a private conversation by means of a listening device.

(3) Subsection (1) (b) does not apply to the use of a listening device by, or on behalf of, a party to a private conversation if—

(a) each principal party to the conversation consents to that use of the listening device; or

(b) a principal party to the conversation consents to the listening device being so used, and—

(i) the recording of the conversation is considered by that principal party, on reasonable grounds, to be necessary for the protection of that principal party’s lawful interests; or

(ii) the recording is not made for the purpose of communicating or publishing the conversation, or a report of the conversation, to any person who is not a party to the conversation.

(4) Subsection (3) (b) (i) does not apply so as to exempt a person from the application of subsection (1) if the relevant listening device is used by or on behalf of the Territory.

Funny how you can’t opt out of having your image recorded when you go shopping etc….

Disinformation said :

This particular topic comes up reasonably regularly and I have given non legal advice on it before based on practical experience.
A friend of mine has had an incredibly bad divorce. It has cost him at least half a million dollars.
Eventually I persuaded him to carry out all conversations via a “communications book” that went back and forth with his kids. All pages are scanned as they get filled out to so that nobody can “lose” the book.
His ex then decided to use the phone to make various threats.
Because he had listened to what I assured him was likely to happen, he had recorded all conversations from the time I mentioned it.
.

And he’s had no troubles using those recordings in court to disprove the insane, nasty, ridiculous crap the mad cow keeps trying to sling his way.

I think I know the same guy. Most patient man in the world. I would have gone nuts if I’d had to put up with just half of what he’s gone through. And to think that crazy, crazy woman is employed by the ACT government as a teacher….rioters, maker sure she isn’t involved with *your* offspring.

Myles Peterson said :

A common trick is to record the conversation, then transcribe it immediately afterwards and claim the notes are an accurate account of what was said (which they are). The notes can then be used in court, but have to be constructed in a particular manner, similiar to police note-taking. There’s a term for it that I can’t remember. Heard this (possibly dodgy) advice given several times, but I won’t disclose the circumstances.

Please don’t take my advice as accurate or expert in any way, I dropped out of law school.

Yes you can record the conversation, as long as your cat knows about it and the notepad you are using to transcribe is made of 100% recycled hemp paper off cuts dipped in lime for colour.

This particular topic comes up reasonably regularly and I have given non legal advice on it before based on practical experience.
A friend of mine has had an incredibly bad divorce. It has cost him at least half a million dollars.
Eventually I persuaded him to carry out all conversations via a “communications book” that went back and forth with his kids. All pages are scanned as they get filled out to so that nobody can “lose” the book.
His ex then decided to use the phone to make various threats.
Because he had listened to what I assured him was likely to happen, he had recorded all conversations from the time I mentioned it.

There are no problems with recording your own conversations without notifying other parties under any laws I can find in Australia.
However, what they are able to be used for (other than for your own personal recall) is where the problems of permission and notification start.

Regardless of this, when someone discovers that all their conversations have been recorded, they tend to lose all interest in following courses of action based on claims of content within conversations that they assume weren’t recorded.

Even if that information isn’t technically legally admissable as evidence, that doesn’t mean at all that it can’t end up in the public domain for other people to have an opinion about. My, how the convenience of the internet has changed things….

I’m also willing to bet that the punishment for crime of “illegally” recording a conversation isn’t really of much incentive if it prevents having no access to one’s children, or some other similar occurance.

If someone wants to see if the legalities of it have been tested in court, it would be useful to compare the results against payout figures in divorce cases. Historical evidence does tend to beat out theoretical legal implications that haven’t been tested.

If you only get ten years for murder in the ACT, you’re probably likely only to get advised not to do it again for illegal conversation recordings.

A common trick is to record the conversation, then transcribe it immediately afterwards and claim the notes are an accurate account of what was said (which they are). The notes can then be used in court, but have to be constructed in a particular manner, similiar to police note-taking. There’s a term for it that I can’t remember. Heard this (possibly dodgy) advice given several times, but I won’t disclose the circumstances.

Please don’t take my advice as accurate or expert in any way, I dropped out of law school.

TheDancingDjinn said :

Anything i can find says if your going to use the recordings in court of any kind the person has to be notified they are being recorded. If they leave an incriminating message on your voicemail or answering machine then that’s a different issue – but if your using it as evidence you cant record it.

http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2010/03/can-you-legally-record-phone-calls-in-australia/

http://www.privacy.gov.au/faq/individuals/q1

there are a few more sites – but it seems to say the same thing, if you want it as evidence you have to warn people – like a call center.

Incorrect

What

pptvb said :

OK,
Basically my understanding, from a Master Security Licence holders perspective, is:
– You cannot record a conversation, as a third party, without a court order.
– You may record a conversation you have with others, as long as one party of the conversation
(you) are aware it is being recorded.

These are the the guidelines the AFP operate under when recording.

Correct

Anything i can find says if your going to use the recordings in court of any kind the person has to be notified they are being recorded. If they leave an incriminating message on your voicemail or answering machine then that’s a different issue – but if your using it as evidence you cant record it.

http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2010/03/can-you-legally-record-phone-calls-in-australia/

http://www.privacy.gov.au/faq/individuals/q1

there are a few more sites – but it seems to say the same thing, if you want it as evidence you have to warn people – like a call center.