Main > Everything Else
Land of the free?
quarterback:
--- Quote from: daywane on March 05, 2005, 09:02:05 pm ---I have just sent a email to his show and asked for a link.
sent to.
oreilly@foxnews.com
Bill. need a link please. i some people at a web sight not believing me about a show you did.
I don't remember the show well . A mother picked up the phone and listened in on her teenage daughters call.
She (the mother) put a stop to it.
Next thing the mother knew she was in trouble for invasion of privacy of her teen daughter.
would you please inform my doubting friends. I did a search for ( mother teen daughter drugs ) but I did not find the info at your web sight. Thanks
daywane.
PS here is the link to the sight I am talking on.
http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php/topic,32892.0.html
--- End quote ---
LOL
RetroJames:
--- Quote from: daywane on March 05, 2005, 08:39:48 pm ---
--- Quote from: 1hookedspacecadet on March 05, 2005, 07:59:19 pm ---
--- Quote from: daywane on March 05, 2005, 09:09:51 am ---Bill orally fox news
spelling is off but you know who I am talking about
--- End quote ---
Now I'm very skeptical... ;)
Any links to the text of the news story would be appreciated.
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
DrewKaree:
This is the story you're referring to. I believe you're recalling O'Reilly's example he brought up, which is why you were having a hard time finding it.
www.foxnews.com - The O'Reilly Factor Story
It fits most of the criteria you are speaking of.
I agree mom has a right to listen to her daughter's conversations if she feels the need, but I believe this story is about the police using the information mom gained by listening to the conversations to go after the person her child was hot for. In essence, they used mom as their "wiretap", instead of getting an actual wiretap for the phone. THAT, I do not agree with. Tapping your phone requires a judge's order, I believe, and the police have to demonstrate their case and why they need to do this. It leads me to believe they couldn't convince a judge to do so, and saw an opportunity.
All of that is irrelevant, though, to mom having the right to listen to conversations on her telephone and to act in her child's best interests. That story goes beyond that scope.
quarterback:
EDIT: DK beat me to it! But I couldn't let all my eloquence merely be tossed into the wind... :)
daywane, does this sound like what you heard:
--- Quote ---O'REILLY: All right, so if I move to Seattle tomorrow and I monitor - - and I pick up the phone and my 14-year-old daughter is on the phone with a heroin dealer, I can't bring that information to the cops, sir?
TARIO: You can bring that information. It depends how you gather it. And...
O'REILLY: I heard it on the phone just the way this woman heard it on the phone. My 14-year-old's arranging a drug deal. I can't go and testify against the drug dealer who agrees to sell her drugs? Come on. That's what this is all about.
--- End quote ---
The case that's being discussed is NOT a case of a mom being arrested for invading a teen's privacy.
RetroJames:
I also found this snippet;