Microlighters

My buddy has been woken up at night on a regular basis by the neighbours dog . He has shouted, pleaded and spoken to him nicely with no change. Anyway last night he flipped and phoned the guy and gave him a fat rev & told him what he thought of him.
He now believes the call was recorded by the oke and the recording may be off to the lawyers.

So
1) Is it legal to record?
2) If theres a case will the recording be admissable?

Checking out the RICA act it appears its illegal for a 3rd party to record the call if the parties don't give permission. This also appears in our constitution. You must be made aware the call may be recorded (like insurance companies etc)

However it does not appear to be an issue if the recording is done by one of 2 people who are in conversation.

So when you use the mobile be careful what you say/sms, especially around contract negotiations and sensitive issues as it can drop you into a world of hurt.

Hells teeth... what on earth did he say ....

Im thinking if he vloeked at the oke harshly then perhaps a crimen injuria although that's really just a slap on the wrist. However of he threatened the guy or his family or his property he may have a bigger problem.

very helpful site - www.justanswer.com

I don't think he threatened anyone, just called him names and used a couple of non politically correct words.
It looks like the whole issue is a storm in a tea cup. A borrel whiskey met eish may solve the problem.
He will still have to listen to the dog but hopefully they can get onto slightly better terms.

Or if this goes to court etc, then at least make it worthwhile - go bliksem the oke good!

I was involved with a woman and due to her violent behavior started to recorded her as well as video taped her. When she charged me (one of over 40 charges she laid against me!) I submitted the tapes as evidence. The magistrate ruled that , if the recordings were the only way for him to make a fair finding he will admit them as it was a case of he said/she said. He did say it was illegal to record a person without informing them , but as it was a domestic case he will allow it.

What you can do is to insist that the recording is not how you remember it and that it was tampered with and that it should be verified by a specialist. Say before you lost your cool he first started calling you names and that those parts are now edited out, so it shows only your misconduct and not his . Then it starts to become expensive for the prosecution as they will have to pay for the analysis as well as for an expert to testify.

Remember....in court it does not matter what really happened , its what you can prove that counts.

Dunno which attorney would reccomend to pursue this in court but feel sorry for the oke who's provoked to go to such extremes.

I'm surrounded by little stoepk@kkers, Maltese couch cushions and bed warmers who also don't understand why they can fart and roll in the bed and claim the best couch but have to be chucked outside at around 05h00 and 22h00 when the the old bastard's bladder wakes him and forgets the shivering wimpering whiny yapping excuse of a guard dog / sole mate outside who's not in the mood for a dump which provokes the mix breed Jack Russel next door who's only too pleased to chunk back at him coz he's tired of chunking at the moon all night but the fossel is either deaf or can't finish his dump himself and probably only remembers the little f#@$%$^^&er outside when he looks for someone to share his breakfast off his plate.

Phone the bastard and when he answers, mimick the dog's bark and slam the phone down.

Or call him over to the wall and tell him it will be raining bricks everytime you feel he is being inconsiderate by not finding out why his dogs are stressed and expect you to understand the the dog does not understand 'shurrup,for f#$^k sakes'

Phone the bastard and when he answers, mimic the dog's bark and slam the phone down.

If you got his number - hell yeah!

Our neighbours dogs also tried that trick - bliksem but a crack or two of a whip really assists in tempering a dogs bark!

A mate of mine gave me this advice;- Here's what you do with a barking dog ..... you take this half inch plastic water pipe and cut it in pieces measuring about 4 inches. Then you take the dog, lift his tail and push a piece of this pipe in the hole underneath the tail. What happens now is that when the dog wants to bark ..... there's no back pressure to force the noise out of his mouth. You might hear a whishling noise from underneath his tail when he tries to bark but its not as disturbing as the bark. If the dogs owner complains about this, ..... you could use the same tactic on him. I could swear the guy who told me this said he was a vet or something ....... but I can't remember .... it was late at night already and they called for the last round, so there was a lot of noise around.

(Please ...... this is just a joke ....... I am an animal lover and I don't want the tree huggers on my case.)

I've heard this one before...but still breeelliant.... !!!

Hi,

Recording of telephone calls is not permitted unless both parties have specifically agreed or unless one party, such as a bank, has advised a caller right at the beginning of the call that the communication will be recorded for "control or security" purposes. In the event that you have been so warned and have elected to continue with the call, the recording may be used in a court of law, however, if you have specifically disagreed, any use of the recording would in itself be illegal and inadmissable in court. Even the security authorities have to obtain the permission of a magistrate for a wire-tap these days and that is not normally easily given.

Hey Peter, that is not the way I understand it. In the forensic world we routinely covertly record interviews between our investigators and a subject. My understanding is that as the investigator (one of the parties to the communication/conversation) is aware of the recording and the one doing the recording then it is admissible.

Refer to the Regulation of the Interception of Communication etc Act (copy and paste a bit buggered but you get the point):

Interception of communication by party to communication
4. ( I ) Any person, other than a law enforcement officer, may intercept any communication if he or she is a party to the communication. unless such communication is intercepted by such person for purposes of committing an offence.

I understand that it would certainly be an offence to record, for example, a telephone conversation between two other parties unless I was a duly authorized law enforcement person.

I would say that the recording described above would be admissible unfortunately.