Australia, NO

Listening and Surveillance Devices Act 1972

http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/LISTENING%20AND%20SURVEILLANCE%20DEVICES%20ACT%201972/CURRENT/1972.112.UN.PDF

4—Regulation of use of listening devices

Except as provided by this Act, a person must not intentionally use any listening
device to overhear, record, monitor or listen to any private conversation, whether or
not the person is a party to the conversation, without the consent, express or implied,
of the parties to that conversation.

Maximum penalty: $10 000 or imprisonment for 2 years.

所有跟帖： 

• 謝謝！再問： -牛鮮花妹妹- ♀ (480 bytes) () 11/03/2014 postreply 12:30:25

• 我假設 澳大利亞法庭證據規則和英美區別不大 -lexm5- ♂ (501 bytes) () 11/03/2014 postreply 12:43:37

• 我作為當事者親屬（車是我老公買的），我的話能作為證據麽？ -牛鮮花妹妹- ♀ (0 bytes) () 11/03/2014 postreply 13:07:16

• 親眼看到，親耳聽到的，都是直接證據（direct　evidence），可以出庭 -lexm5- ♂ (134 bytes) () 11/03/2014 postreply 13:10:25

• NND，我要是學法律的就好了。他們有律師團，已經開始耍陰謀了。 -牛鮮花妹妹- ♀ (93 bytes) () 11/03/2014 postreply 13:20:03

• 你說那是錄音整理，陪審團無法聽錄音，無法知道你有沒有添油加醋，斷章取義。 -lexm5- ♂ (96 bytes) () 11/03/2014 postreply 13:25:10

• 找律師也需要我有足夠的證據，讓我想想該怎麽辦？？？ 再次謝謝您的幫助：） -牛鮮花妹妹- ♀ (0 bytes) () 11/03/2014 postreply 13:32:32

• Your lawyer knows how to "Discover" evidence -lexm5- ♂ (220 bytes) () 11/03/2014 postreply 13:35:53