3 ms·

She only started recording meetings to collect evidence after being "bullied, humiliated, demoted and retaliated against in the most horrible way possible." Se

• PeterisP 6y ago
  As far as I understand, doing that (recording meetings without notifying other participants) is a crime in California (https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-632.html https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-632.html) and that justification does not make it permissible. So if she admits that she did record these meetings without informing the other participants, then in this defamation case - a key part of which is about the claim in HuffingPost "She also illegally recorded internal conversations within Tesla without anyone’s permission, which is clearly criminal conduct" - she has a good chance to lose, as it's not defamation if it's true.
  • gnicholas 6y ago
    Even if she broke the law when making the recordings, it's not clear that the recordings can't be used in court. [1] This would be different if it were the police illegally procuring evidence, under the 'fruit of the poisonous tree' theory, but here it's just a private citizen. So while she could surely be punished for breaking laws related to recording people, that doesn't seem to foreclose the possibility that she could use the recordings in court to prove her case. 1: https://acitylawfirm.com/recorded-conversations/ https://acitylawfirm.com/recorded-conversations/