Fani Willis Accused of Illegally Recording Trump Defendant’s Lawyer

a reply to: Boomer1947
According to Matthiesen Wickert & Lehrer, S.C.

www.mwl-law.com...

"Federal Law

In most cases, both state and federal laws may apply. State laws are enforced by your local police department and the state’s attorney office. Federal wiretapping laws are enforced by the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s office. It is a federal crime to wiretap or to use a machine to capture the communications of others without court approval,or the parties have given their prior consent. It is likewise a federal crime to use or disclose any information acquired by illegal wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping. Violations can result in imprisonment for not more than five years; fines up to $250,000 (up to $500,000 for organizations); in civil liability for damages, attorney’s fees and possibly punitive damages; in disciplinary action against any attorneys involved; and in suppression of any derivative evidence. Congress has created separate, but comparable, protective schemes for electronic mail (e-mail) and against the surreptitious use of telephone call monitoring practices such as pen registers and trap and trace devices.
The Federal Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.A. §§ 151, et seq.) provides that no person “not being authorized by the sender shall intercept any communication and divulge or publish the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect or meaning of such intercepted communication to any person.” 47 U.S.C.A. § 605. In Nardone v. United States, 308 U.S. 338 (1939), it was held that this section prohibits divulging such communications in federal criminal prosecutions and prohibits the use of information thus obtained in such prosecutions (the “fruits of the poisonous tree” doctrine).
Evidence obtained by wiretapping in violation of § 605, is rendered inadmissible in a state court solely because its admission in evidence would also constitute a violation of 47 U.S.C.A. § 605. Lee v. State of Fla., 392 U.S. 378 (1968). The mere interception of a telephone communication by an unauthorized person does not in and of itself constitute a violation of § 605. Only where the interception is followed by the divulging of the communication, as by introducing it into evidence, would there be a violation of § 605.

The Federal Wiretap Act, found at 18 U.S.C. § 2520, protects individual privacy in communications with other people by imposing civil and criminal liability for intentionally intercepting communications using a device, unless that interception falls within one of the exceptions in the statute. Although the Federal Wiretap Act originally covered only wire and oral conversations (e.g., using a device to listen in on telephone conversations), it was amended in 1986 to cover electronic communications as well (e.g., emails or other messages sent via the Internet)."