| ShyShy |
10th December 2004 07:47 |
Mom's eavesdropping violates Privacy Act
Quote:
Mom's eavesdropping violates Privacy Act
06:06 PM PST on Thursday, December 9, 2004
Associated Press
SEATTLE - In a victory for rebellious teenagers everywhere, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a mother violated Washington's privacy act by eavesdropping on her daughter's phone conversation.
Privacy advocates hailed the ruling.
The mother, however, was unrepentant.
"It's ridiculous! Kids have more rights than parents these days," said mom Carmen Dixon, 47, of Friday Harbor. "My daughter was out of control, and that was the only way I could get information and keep track of her. I did it all the time."
The Supreme Court ruled that Dixon's testimony against a friend of her daughter should not have been admitted in court because it was based on the intercepted conversation. The justices unanimously ordered a new trial for Oliver Christensen, who had been convicted of second-degree robbery in part due to Dixon's testimony.
The case started with a purse-snatching that shocked the island town of Friday Harbor, population 2,000. On Oct. 24, 2000, two young men knocked down an elderly woman, breaking her glasses, and stole her purse. Christensen, then 17, was a suspect.
San Juan County Sheriff Bill Cumming asked Dixon, whose daughter was friends with Christensen, to be alert for any possible evidence. When Christensen called the Dixon house later, Lacey Dixon, then 14, took the cordless phone into her bedroom and shut the door. Carmen Dixon hit the "speakerphone" button on the phone base and took notes on the conversation - in which Christensen said he knew where the purloined purse was.
The ruling will likely not result in parents being prosecuted for snooping, Cumming said. But it forbids courts and law enforcement from using the fruits of such snooping.
Federal wiretap law has been interpreted to allow parents to record their child's conversations. But Washington privacy law is stricter. Washington is one of 11 states that requires consent from all parties involved before a conversation may be intercepted or recorded.
"The Washington statute... tips the balance in favor of individual privacy at the expense of law enforcement's ability to gather evidence without a warrant," Justice Tom Chambers wrote in the unanimous opinion.
That right to individual privacy holds fast even when the individuals are teenagers, the court ruled.
"I don't think the state should be in the position of encouraging parents to act surreptitiously and eavesdrop on their children," agreed attorney Douglas Klunder, who filed a brief supporting Christensen on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union.
He noted that parents can find other ways to control their teenagers: "They can restrict the use of the telephone, for example."
In an unrelated case, Carmen Dixon recently pleaded guilty to misappropriating $129,000 from the Postal Service when she was postmaster of Friday Harbor. She admitted in U.S. District Court that she issued money orders to herself and her family from bulk mailing fees and took money from stamp sales. The money was diverted between January 2002 and last May.
Dixon faces a maximum 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine when she is sentenced April 1.
Lacey Dixon, now 18, graduated from high school and is attending a massage therapy school, her mother proudly reported.
Christensen's whereabouts are unknown, although Sheriff Cumming thought he might be in Alaska.
Dixon has a 15-year-old son still at home, whose phone conversations she sometimes secretly monitors. She said she'll have to stop that now.
"If it's illegal, I won't do it," she sighed.
The case is State of Washington v. Oliver Christensen, No. 74839-0.
http://www.king5.com/index.html
|
First of all, the daughter probably acted out to a point that the mom did feel it necessary to monitor phone calls. It's not uncommon.
But, then again, the lady has her own legal troubles to be worrying about.
*sighs* Only in America. |
