Also, the real journalists said he was charged with wiretapping, and I assume they’ve actually looked into the charges and probably got it right.

I would normally agree that a warrant shouldn’t issue, but in this case the grand jury had already indicted him, so that is a bit of a different case. And, while I would normally want to throw the book at people for this sort of thing, which is almost certainly a case of an asshole cop being pissed off at being show on video acting like a douche, the biker did violate the letter of the law. But, it would probably serve the public interest to bench slap a few of the cops involved, especially anyone who executed the warrant knowing the back story. Nothing major, just a week suspension, something to make people know there will be consequences in the future.

I know my crim law classes were a bunch of idealist bulldookie that gets thrown to the wayside in reality, but seriously? Isn’t there supposed to be a neutral party who reads this and says “guys, what the hell are you doing? What criminal activity is involved here?” And isn’t there an irony in the police swearing out a ridiculous warrant to bring a ridiculous charge on the basis that someone “violated their privacy?” This poor schmuck and his innocent family had their house trashed when only one of them was guilty of speeding all because some rambo mcnulty got shown to the world as the asshole that he is.

If they do, that still wouldn’t imply consent to be recorded by another person. First, when you decide to give consent, a large part of that consideration is going to be how much you trust the person recording. And, if that’s not legally relevant, then the second camera is not recording the same thing, it’s taken from a different angle and for a different length of time.

But, the dashboard camera raises another issue, what if the person being stopped doesn’t consent to the recording? Has the state committed an illegal wiretap? My guess is no. No expectation of privacy while stopped by the police.