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.
Australia, NO
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