« Searching inquiries | Main | VFC press release even more misleading than their ad »
Sneaky devices 3
By Steven | November 17, 2011
The cameraman in the middle of cuppagate, Bradley Ambrose, is reportedly seeking a court declaration that he committed no crime because the recorded conversation wasn’t private. (That is, that the conversation did not occur in circumstances in which any party ought reasonably to expect that the communication may be intercepted by some other person not having the express or implied consent of any party to do so.)
Some of the arguments about whether this test is satisfied have been thrashed out in the posts and threads below. I think the balance of argument is that it can’t be a private conversation. (Even those, like me, who think it might be have to concede that eliminating this element beyond reasonable doubt is a tall order).
Still, I wonder whether a judge will want to grant a declaration about issues that are squarely in the middle of an ongoing police investigation.
Also interesting is Ambrose’s lawyer’s comment that Ambrose has yet to be contacted by the police. That means that police are apparently seeking search warrants against media organisations to obtain notes, out-takes, and other information about Ambrose’s conduct, before they’ve even interviewed him. Can it really be shown, as the Court of Appeal has required, that whatever evidence the media organisations are likely to hold “will have a direct and important place in the determination of the issues before the Court” when that evidence might be entirely unnecessary if Ambrose himself tells them what they need? (I’m not saying he will speak to the police, or if he does, that he’ll say much, but surely he needs to be asked before subjecting the media to a search warrant.)
A final point. As barrister Felix Geiringer has been saying for a while, even if it’s true that Ambrose committed an offence (and he thinks that’s highly doubtful, incidentally), it doesn’t follow that the media will also be committing an offence by publishing the tape or transcript right now. It would have to be shown that the media publishing the material know that it was illegally intercepted. Right now, at best the situation is unclear. If a media organisation published relying on a legal opinion that the tape did not seem to have been made illegally in breach of s 216B of the Crimes Act, then it would be hard to see how a prosecution could follow against that organisation.
Topics: Injunctions, Search warrants | 48 Comments »
48 Responses to “Sneaky devices 3”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
November 17th, 2011 at 8:57 pm
[…] Price has a new post. The cameraman in the middle of cuppagate, Bradley Ambrose, is reportedly seeking a court […]
May 31st, 2020 at 6:42 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
June 4th, 2020 at 5:59 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
June 5th, 2020 at 8:17 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
June 12th, 2020 at 5:46 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
June 25th, 2020 at 2:58 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
August 1st, 2020 at 5:22 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
August 10th, 2020 at 12:17 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
August 24th, 2020 at 6:51 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
August 25th, 2020 at 12:05 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
August 30th, 2020 at 9:57 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
September 1st, 2020 at 6:34 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
October 2nd, 2020 at 4:06 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
October 4th, 2020 at 8:14 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
October 6th, 2020 at 12:10 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
November 5th, 2020 at 3:08 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Information here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
November 6th, 2020 at 12:37 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you can find 67379 additional Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
November 8th, 2020 at 12:55 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
December 4th, 2020 at 9:53 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
December 5th, 2020 at 9:19 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 59536 more Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
December 11th, 2020 at 1:47 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
December 21st, 2020 at 2:51 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you will find 82128 additional Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
January 1st, 2021 at 2:57 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
January 7th, 2021 at 1:39 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] There you will find 64239 additional Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
January 12th, 2021 at 2:05 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
January 14th, 2021 at 10:14 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
January 16th, 2021 at 8:32 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
January 17th, 2021 at 6:46 am
… [Trackback]
[…] There you will find 4148 additional Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
January 24th, 2021 at 11:27 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
February 15th, 2021 at 10:32 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More on to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
March 30th, 2021 at 4:45 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
April 12th, 2021 at 11:53 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More Info here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
April 21st, 2021 at 10:21 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Here you can find 69321 additional Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
April 30th, 2021 at 11:26 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
May 3rd, 2021 at 1:16 am
… [Trackback]
[…] There you will find 49179 additional Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
May 19th, 2021 at 9:16 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
June 6th, 2021 at 1:38 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
June 26th, 2021 at 3:28 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
June 27th, 2021 at 4:03 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More Information here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
June 29th, 2021 at 1:54 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
July 4th, 2021 at 12:00 am
… [Trackback]
[…] There you can find 17899 more Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
July 4th, 2021 at 9:26 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Information on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
October 2nd, 2021 at 5:05 am
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
December 3rd, 2021 at 6:18 am
… [Trackback]
[…] There you will find 86198 more Info to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
December 8th, 2021 at 1:13 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Info on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
December 9th, 2021 at 12:55 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Find More on on that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
February 19th, 2022 at 10:02 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More here to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]
April 9th, 2022 at 11:09 pm
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More to that Topic: medialawjournal.co.nz/?p=519 […]