Skip to main content

Surreptitious Recording of Conversations in Illinois and the Law

Chicago, IL—Illinois has had a criminal law on the books for many decades that bars the recording of any conversation public or private unless all parties to the conversation give their consent.

The statute itself has never been changed, despite the reality that the law was all but gutted in a 1990 decision by the Illinois Appellate Court in, Illinois vs. Jansen. Jansen is still the law of Illinois today.

The current state of affairs is that most people are unaware of their rights under Jansen. The court ruled that the use of a recorder is merely enhanced note taking when the recorder, is not a government agent.

That means that any and all video or audio recording accomplished in a public place within your earshot by private citizens is legal. That also means recording telephone conversations is also legal as long as they are conversations you’re participating in.

Since 1990 at least in Illinois you should smile, because you could be on Candid Camera!

This does not cover potential civil remedies that may exist should the recording be used in a way intended to cause harm or unnecessary embarrassment. Civil remedies are generally not available for people recorded making threats, harassing or engaging in fraudulent or other criminal activities. You may have a rather nasty civil problem when you sell that sex tape you avoided telling your girlfriend you shot on the sly.

Audio and video recordings take the guess work accuracy of testimony taken in courts. Should a witness testify to something inconsistent to a video or audio recording efforts will be made to admit the recordings to impeach and expose the deception.

The difficult part of this ruling is that it does not cover police recording civilians! Cops can be still be charged if they are doing it in their official capacity.

Ill Recording Law People vs. Jansen 561_N_E_2d_312-1

Comments

Anonymous said…
But check out this case: People v. Nestrock, 735 NE 2d 1101 - Ill: Appellate Court, 2nd Dist. 2000, which cites a 1994 amendment to the eavesdropping statute which in effect overrules Jansen and Beardsley.

Quoting Neatrock:

In denying defendant's motion to suppress, the trial court relied on our supreme court's interpretation of the eavesdropping statute in People v. Beardsley, 115 Ill.2d 47, 104 Ill.Dec. 789, 503 N.E.2d 346 (1986), and People v. Herrington, 163 Ill.2d 507, 206 Ill.Dec. 705, 645 N.E.2d 957 (1994). In Beardsley, the supreme court held that the primary factor in determining whether eavesdropping has occurred is whether the nonconsenting participants "intended their conversation to be of a private nature under circumstances justifying such expectation." Beardsley, 115 Ill.2d at 54, 104 Ill.Dec. 789, 503 N.E.2d 346. Relying on Lopez v. United States, 373 U.S. 427, 83 S.Ct. 1381, 10 L.Ed.2d 462 (1963), the court further held that the eavesdropping statute should not prohibit a party to a conversation from recording that conversation. Beardsley, 115 Ill.2d at 56, 104 Ill. Dec. 789, 503 N.E.2d 346. Likewise, in Herrington, the supreme court held that "there can be no expectation of privacy by the declarant where the individual recording the conversation is a party to that conversation." Herrington, 163 Ill.2d at 510, 206 Ill.Dec. 705, 645 N.E.2d 957, citing Beardsley, 115 Ill.2d at 56, 104 Ill.Dec. 789, 503 N.E.2d 346.

However, by adding the definition of "conversation" to the statute in 1994, the Illinois legislature "extended the coverage of the eavesdropping statute to all conversations, regardless of whether they were intended to be private" (People v. Siwek, 284 Ill.App.3d 7, 14, 219 Ill.Dec. 444, 671 N.E.2d 358 (1996)). See also In re Marriage of Almquist, 299 Ill.App.3d 732, 736-37, 234 Ill.Dec. 910, 704 N.E.2d 68 (1998) (holding that the amended statute "prohibits the recording of any conversation without the consent of all parties regardless of any party's expectation of privacy"). The amended statute was in effect at all times relevant to the present case. Based on the plain language of the statute and the fact that the conversation was recorded without defendant's consent, we cannot ignore the trial court's grave error of law in admitting the tape recording.
Anonymous said…
See this article: http://gizmodo.com/5553765/are-cameras-the-new-guns

A "street artist" in Illinois was arrested and charged with felony eavesdropping for videotaping his own arrest in 2009. It's still winding it's way through the courts. Here's his blog: http://www.c-drew.com/blog
call recording said…
I'll definitely share this article, thank you very much.

Popular posts from this blog

A 40 Caliber Nightmare Is Caught On Tape.

So you’re confident that that .40 caliber S&W service round will keep you safe. Maybe you’ll have second thoughts after you see this video. One hot summer night in 1994 Tempe and Mesa Arizona police were involved in a pursuit with this suspect who ran into a stranger’s apartment to hide after being shot TWICE in the chest. He was shirtless and you can see the blood pumping out of those two wounds. What’s really frightening is just how agile this fellow is as he struts to the ambulance. If he was not handcuffed and had a knife or a gun, ask yourself if he could still hurt you, your partner or a hostage? If your jurisdiction demands that officers carry either the 9MM or the .40 Caliber S&W it’s time to show this video to your bosses and lobby to have the .45 ACP round authorized. The switch may well reduce the screaming by self-appointed community activists about how many rounds police had to use on a suspect. The really talented and courageous video journalist, Karen Ke...

The origin of the feature film, COME FRIDAY…

CLick On the pictures to see full size versions. Long ago there was a young lady I had the hots for in a big way (Yes, I know that hots is not a word). She was pretty, incredibly bright, and had some real elegance about her. She had a love for children and basic kindness that you don’t often see in someone her age. I met her parents and could understand she came from a much more stable home than mine. I was raised by a single, welfare mom and suddenly found myself way out-classed. For whatever reasons things did not workout they way I had hoped. Sadly for me, we went on our separate ways. From time to time I’d run into this lady in various places where our job had taken us. Whenever this happened my heart would skip a beat or two. I left my hometown Chicago, and moved to Arizona where I founded my detective agency. As a private eye and soon a TV news producer too, my career took me to the highest profile criminal events in Arizona and throughout the country. There’s no question that ...

America Will See Its Worst Race Riot Yet This Summer

Star Prosecution Witness, Rachel Jeantel Sanford, FL —Yes, the George Zimmerman trial here has thousands of African-Americans getting ready for some serious bloodletting. I don’t want to make idle and dire predictions but this nation has never been so divided and racially sensitive.  Our African-American President took sides on this case at the very beginning.  That ratified a George Zimmerman guilty verdict in the minds of millions. There’s just one little problem, and that is the murder case should have never been filed.  It was filed purely for political reasons despite the fact that it was a simple justifiable homicide.  Zimmerman was on the block watch lookout program and followed a suspicious Trayvon Martin after he used an improper entrance to a gated community.  Zimmerman was acting as the eyes and ears of the Sanford Police Department. Martin did not like being followed and knew that he could easily beat up the out-of-shape...