Illinois can i record a conversation

In , Bridgeport resident Michael Allison was charged with a felony for recording his own court hearing after the court did not provide a court reporter. The same year, Chicagoan Tiawanda Moore was charged with a felony for recording conversations with Chicago Police Department investigators regarding her sexual misconduct complaint against an officer.

Federal law and a majority of states allow for one-party consent. But during lame-duck legislative session in December , the Illinois General Assembly passed and Gov. Pat Quinn signed a new eavesdropping law. And is it fair to expect Illinoisans to know where to draw that line in their everyday lives? How does one tell when there is a reasonable expectation of privacy when recording police officers, for example?

Exception: Open and Conspicuous: The first exception is if you're open about the fact that you're recording. Recording your kid at a soccer game, or your spouse in a drunken stupor or anyone in public is okay and the recording may be evidence if you're open about it and not doing it surreptitiously, That's the word the law uses: "surreptitious. For purposes of this [law], "surreptitious" means obtained or made by stealth or deception, or executed through secrecy or concealment.

So, if you want to record someone and just pull up your phone's video camera and say "I'm recording," there should be no problem. If the person being recorded says "I don't want you to record me, I don't consent to the recording, and I want you to turn that off;" so what? Who cares what that person wants? You're not being surreptitious about it so there shouldn't be a problem.

You can't get all up in their business and harass them -- harassment is a crime. Openly recording others, even without their consent, however, is okay under Illinois law. Exception: Obtaining Evidence: You may record surreptitiously when you reasonably suspect that a crime is about to be committed or has already been committed against you or someone in your household. You have to be a party to this conversation, too.

You don't have to be open about it -- you can be surreptitious -- but you DO have to be part of the conversation. Here's what the law says:. The following activities shall be exempt from the provisions of this [law]:. The "open-and-conspicuous" exception doesn't always apply. Not In "Privacy Rooms" Without Consent: Video recordings, unless consented to, are forbidden in restrooms, tanning salons, locker rooms news media are exempted changing rooms, and hotel bedrooms.

Not Inside Residence Without Consent: Video recordings of a person inside that person's residence made inside the residence are forbidden unless consented to. Not Outside Residence Without Consent: Video and audio recordings of a person inside that person's residence made from outside the residence are forbidden unless consented to.

No " Up-Skirts " Without Consent: Video recordings of another "under or through the clothing" are forbidden without consent.

Exception to the Exceptions to the Exception: The audio portion of a video recording allowed under the "obtaining evidence" exception to the Eavesdropping law does not put the recorder in jeopardy of "disorderly conduct.

A few law school-style examples:. Wife is in a custody fight with an alcoholic, abusive husband who cleans up nice for court and, to the judge, looks like the world's greatest. Husband comes home drunk and angry and Wife knows what's coming because she's been down this road a thousand times.

She turns on her phone's video camera and hides the phone under a napkin on the table and engages Husband in a talk. In the talk, Husband threatens to beat her and the children, but Wife defuses the situation.

That surreptitious recording doesn't violate the eavesdropping law and will be good evidence in court. It shows she was a party to the conversation and she reasonably suspected that a crime was about to be committed against her or the kids. It doesn't matter that she recorded the talk surreptitiously. It doesn't matter that the crime didn't actually happen. She's not at risk of a "disorderly conduct" charge.

Wife engages in a pattern of behavior calculated to drive husband crazy to get him to move out of the home. She destroys his audio equipment and television, keys his car, and cuts holes in his clothes. She comes into his area of the house uninvited and he turns on the video camera on his phone and surreptitiously places it where it can see everything. He asks her to leave him alone and she pushes him and tells him she intends to get his childhood baseball card collection out of the attic and burn one card each day he remains in the home.

The recording is good evidence: the recording was made surreptitiously but he reasonably suspected that a crime was about to be committed against himself and, indeed, the wife pushed him assault and battery and she announced her intent to commit another crime destruction of property.

He is not at risk of a charge of disorderly conduct. Husband learns wife has extra cash and suspects she's doing something illegal. He turns on his phone's video camera and drops it in his shirt pocket. He confronts wife who admits she's reconnected with a high school flame who got her back into old habits and she's been dealing drugs on the side. That recorded conversation is NOT good evidence and the husband has probably violated the eavesdropping law.

It was made surreptitiously but, although wife admitted to committing a crime, husband did not reasonably suspect a crime was about to be or had been committed against him or someone in his household.

If she calls the cops and they find the recording, he may face a disorderly conduct charge. You're invited to your neighbor's holiday party, start recording, and the neighbor asks you to stop. Disorderly conduct. You're not invited to your neighbor's holiday party and, hurt, you hide in the bushes recording what goes on in the home. You record inside the home and your spouse slurs out the words "please stop recording me in my own home.

Spouse calls the cops. You show them the video. You face disorderly conduct. You argue with your gangster neighbor. He invites his "friends" to his house for a get-together. You reasonably suspect they intend to harm you and your family. You turn on your phone's video camera, drop it in your pocket, and confront the gang.

They threaten you, reveal some of their intended plans to do you harm and you capture it all. Thanks to the exception-to-the-exception-to-the-exception above , however, you're in the clear. ACLU of Illinois v. Alvarez, F. Your email address will not be published.

Notify me of new posts by email. Personal Conversations: You may not record conversations without the consent of all involved parties. Illinois Video Recording Laws It is against the law to intentionally transmit live video or record video footage of another person without that persons consent in: A restroom, tanning bed, tanning salon, locker room, changing room, or hotel bedroom.