- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Sterling Punishment: Lifetime Ban, 2.5M Fine, Urging Owners 2 Force Sale of team
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:18 pm to Chad504boy
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:18 pm to Chad504boy
Exactly. Has anyone said, maybe he knew he was being recorded
0
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:18 pm to tduecen
quote:
Well did he know he was being taped or not?
you brought it up
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:20 pm to Chad504boy
His girlfriend is about to be put on some serious hitlists
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:22 pm to FourThinInches
quote:
for being a racist
What did he say that was so racist?
He probably is a racist though.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:22 pm to Chad504boy
quote:
do u know he didn't know he was being taped for starters?
This will all be about who you want to believe...
A money grubbing whore who could have been recording him for blackmail...or an alleged racist.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:23 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
A money grubbing whore who could have been recording him for blackmail...or an alleged racist.
why you put alleged in from of racist and not money grubbing whore?
u racist bro?
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:23 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
A money grubbing whore who could have been recording him for blackmail...or an alleged racist.
Sterling's wife is also suing her for embezzlement.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:24 pm to tduecen
quote:
The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002).
There was a third person in the room. Therefore, Sterling had no reasonable expectation that no is listening in. In fact, he knew of at least one person. Since the conversation is not "private", then the recording prohibition does not apply.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:25 pm to Chad504boy
quote:
why you put alleged in from of racist and not money grubbing whore?
you see who she is fricking right?
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:25 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
This will all be about who you want to believe... A money grubbing whore who could have been recording him for blackmail...or an alleged racist.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:26 pm to OFWHAP
quote:
Sterling's wife is also suing her for embezzlement.
which is why I think she baited him into what he said while recording it
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:26 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
you see who she is fricking right?
you see who he wasn't renting to right?
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:27 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
which is why I think she baited him into what he said while recording it
she seems like a sweet girl, i don't think that was her intentions. I think she was trying to help an ole racist fart see his evil ways.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:27 pm to Topwater Trout
The faster the Clippers gets bounced from the playoffs, the sooner espn will drop this
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
huh? you're creating a false dichotomy
i define racism as judging a person based solely on his/her race. it's irrational and i do not support it
it has nothing to do with me being offended or any sort of emotional thinking. it's an irrational belief i don't support
ehh, seems like you're just playing semantics.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:29 pm to Baloo
quote:
There was a third person in the room. Therefore, Sterling had no reasonable expectation that no is listening in. In fact, he knew of at least one person. Since the conversation is not "private", then the recording prohibition does not apply.
Doesn't matter because
If you are recording someone without their knowledge in a public or semi-public place like a street or restaurant, the person whom you're recording may or may not have "an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation," and the reasonableness of the expectation would depend on the particular factual circumstances. Therefore, you cannot necessarily assume that you are in the clear simply because you are in a public place.
If you are operating in California, you should always get the consent of all parties before recording any conversation that common sense tells you might be "private" or "confidential." In addition to subjecting you to criminal prosecution, violating the California wiretapping law can expose you to a civil lawsuit for damages by an injured party. See Cal. Penal Code § 637.2.
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:29 pm to Chad504boy
quote:
you see who he wasn't renting to right?
but he was honored by the NAACP...is the NAACP wrong Chad?
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:30 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
but he was honored by the NAACP...is the NAACP wrong Chad?
you really think i'm going to be hesitant to throw the ndoubleacp3 under the bus?
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:31 pm to Chad504boy
quote:
I think she was trying to help an ole racist fart see his evil ways.
i am just playing along chad but anywho....
but but but she says on the tape she doesn't believe he is racist
Posted on 4/29/14 at 3:31 pm to Baloo
quote:
There was a third person in the room.
Who was the third person?
Page 36 of 45
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News