Do you have to notify police you are recording them during an interaction.... | GTAMotorcycle.com

Do you have to notify police you are recording them during an interaction....

LoneRonin

LoneRonin

Well-known member
and you intend to use in court? I cannot find anything concrete on this. Pretty much buddy and I were already at side of the road, cops showed up were pricks, did not follow proper procedure and ****ed over my friend and I. He recorded an hour and forty minutes of audio.

If the cops hope to get anywhere in court they're going to lie and then we will pull out the audio. When it comes to court we should be given the benefit of the doubt, however everyone knows that's not what happens and it usually the pigs that are given the benefit of the doubt but an audio recording will force them to be honest or they will perjure themselves.
 
You can use an audio, recording in VERY limited circumstances. However the main point is you are required to notify and supply the crown with a copy of the ENTIRE audio file, in advance, if you intend to use it in your defence. Disclosure is a two way street. So you can't just, (after the officer has testified), wipe iout the phone and begin playing the recording...lol The crown will no doubt challenge the audio, as there is no way to verify it's authenticity. Not saying it won't be of benefit just a VERY steep hill to get it admitted in a trial.

They will also likely challenge it because one assumes from your question that you didn't notify the officers that they were being recorded. Remember they must advise you if you are being recorded, Video, (without audio track), is normally admissible. However, different rules of evidence under the Canada Evidence Act exist for audio recordings. I would have to read the Act as it has been a VERY long time since I last read it. It would also depend on the charges if they are Criminal then the Canada Evidence Act applies if they are HTA or another provincial statute, then the Provincial Evidence rules apply.

LoneRonin said:
and you intend to use in court? I cannot find anything concrete on this. Pretty much buddy and I were already at side of the road, cops showed up were pricks, did not follow proper procedure and ****ed over my friend and I. He recorded an hour and forty minutes of audio.

If the cops hope to get anywhere in court they're going to lie and then we will pull out the audio. When it comes to court we should be given the benefit of the doubt, however everyone knows that's not what happens and it usually the pigs that are given the benefit of the doubt but an audio recording will force them to be honest or they will perjure themselves.
Click to expand...
 
Call your lawyer... your going to court, so let them sort it out, it's their job.
 
Here's a summary of what Canadians should know about this:
There is no law in Canada that prevents a member of the public from taking photographs or video in a public place (other than some limitations related to sensitive defense installations);
There is no law in Canada that prevents a member of the public from taking photographs or video of a police officer executing his or her duties in public or in a location lawfully controlled by the photographer (in fact, police officers have no privacy rights in public when executing their duties);
Preventing a person from taking photos or video is a prima facie infringement of a person's Charter rights;
You cannot interfere with a police officer's lawful execution of his or her duties, but taking photos or videos does not, in and of itself, constitute interference;
A police officer cannot take your phone or camera simply for recording him or her, as long as you were not obstructing;
These privileges are not reserved to media -- everyone has these rights;
A police officer cannot make you unlock your phone to show him or her your images; and
A police officer cannot make you delete any photos
 
^^^^Didn't some city just ban taking pictures un public parks?
 
Talk to your lawyer, but I don't think there is any expectation of privacy in a public place.
 
Further to a couple of points already made ... One of the persons being recorded has to know that they are being recorded. That person can be you. It doesn't have to be the police officer.

Evidence that you plan to use in court is subject to disclosure (to all parties concerned i.e. to the officer in this case) prior to trial. That said, the other party has to ask for it. I don't know what happens if you have such evidence but they don't ask for it. All I can say is that if that happens in a provincial court for a speeding ticket (e.g. you fail to ask for disclosure prior to trial) it sure doesn't stop the cops from presenting and using that evidence against you ...

If the situation ends up in court, let the lawyers sort it out.
 
If recent actions are an example, all you have to do is record it, then give it to the media and let them do their thing ?
 
Just to clarify if you have evidence that you plan to introduce during a trial you ARE REQUIRED to disclose this to the other party, in this case the crown, (they do NOT need to ask for it). You must produce the recording for them to review prior to trial. Failing to do so will result in the crown likely successfully arguing that they have not been given an opportunity to review the evidence, and therefore it should be excluded. The crown only needs to provide disclosure on evidence that you already know exists, (officers notes etc), when it comes to evidence that the crown can't possibly expect exists then you are required to disclose such evidence. They, (crown), just as you can with disclosure even request a typewritten transcript, (it MUST be an EXACT transcript, of the recording). The disclosure need ONLY be provided to the crown it is the crown's responsibility to get it to the officers and others who may "have an interest" in the recording.

If this is a criminal incident then yes you will require a lawyer to assist you with all this. If it is merely a HTA charge, (or other provincial act), which is likely to result in a small fine and be heard by a JP, remember JP's have NO formal legal training and the crown is likely to argue to have it excluded.

To give you a reasonable response in which way to proceed, we need to know what the charges were.

Now on a different tactic you said the officer's didn't follow procedure, if you wish to expand upon this, then it is possible that you could file a complaint with the PSU, (Professional Standards Unit, or "internal affairs" of the force involved). The level of having them use the recording is MUCH lower than it is involving the courts.

Brian P said:
Further to a couple of points already made ... One of the persons being recorded has to know that they are being recorded. That person can be you. It doesn't have to be the police officer.

Evidence that you plan to use in court is subject to disclosure (to all parties concerned i.e. to the officer in this case) prior to trial. That said, the other party has to ask for it. I don't know what happens if you have such evidence but they don't ask for it. All I can say is that if that happens in a provincial court for a speeding ticket (e.g. you fail to ask for disclosure prior to trial) it sure doesn't stop the cops from presenting and using that evidence against you ...

If the situation ends up in court, let the lawyers sort it out.
Click to expand...
 
Discussion here is limited by not knowing all the facts (and don't change that, keep whatever happened out of public until it shakes out) ... BUT ... As far as filing a complaint against the police, I would want charges against me dropped first, or in conjunction with that happening ... Again, if the situation is serious, it is a job for the lawyers to handle.

(Why does evidence that an accused person has, need to be disclosed to the crown without them having to ask for it, but you have to ask for what evidence they have? Why can they present evidence that wasn't presented to you (if you didn't ask for it) and not have it thrown out, but anything you have that wasn't presented to them, isn't admissible? Doesn't seem right)
 
I know in civil court both parties must file their evidence before trial. It cannot be presented during or after the trial the defendant in our case just tried these and ended up getting quite the scolding from the judge.
 
Ive actually always wanted to know this. So if i get pulled over...do i need to inform the officer that i am recoreing him. Simple yes or no.
 
No, you don't. Only one of the parties involved has to know that they are being recorded ... that would be you.
 
CruisnGrrl said:
As far as I understand wiretap laws in Canada require that one of the parties being recorded know about the recording while it's being recorded. So recording your interaction with some one, perfectly fine. Recording your wife's calls because you suspect an affair, not fine.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is correct
 
Brian P said:
No, you don't. Only one of the parties involved has to know that they are being recorded ... that would be you.
Click to expand...
I thought that applied on my to phone calls?
 
kiwi said:
I thought that applied on my to phone calls?
Click to expand...


I don't believe that is specifically mentioned. Although it may have bren tried already, with the wiretap laws applied. Anyone with more knowledge on this??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom