I'm no legal expert, but it seems to me that telling her to record conversations and allowing her to make those recordings public are 2 separate issues.

I'm no legal expert, but it seems to me that telling her to record conversations and allowing her to make those recordings public are 2 separate issues.

 

But at this point that is between him and her not the NBA. Should have absolutely no impact on what the NBA is trying to do.

What could he get from her? Going to cost him more to sue her than he could win. I don't know if criminal charges could even be brought in this case...I think he would have to go the civil route and there just isn't much to get there.

 

If it is an illegal recording it has to be criminal doesn't it? Civil court doesn't prove legal/illegal does it?

I'm no legal expert, but it seems to me that telling her to record conversations and allowing her to make those recordings public are 2 separate issues.

 

She is saying she didn't make them public and doesn't know who did. She says she recorded them but didn't leak them last I heard.

If it is an illegal recording it has to be criminal doesn't it? Civil court doesn't prove legal/illegal does it?

I'm not sure about California law but I don't think it is Criminal unless law enforcement or a third party were to record it. If one person in a conversation records it I don't think it's criminal but may open her up to civil liability since she used it to his detriment...but I could be wrong, that's just how I see it.

I'm not sure about California law but I don't think it is Criminal unless law enforcement or a third party were to record it. If one person in a conversation records it I don't think it's criminal but may open her up to civil liability since she used it to his detriment...but I could be wrong, that's just how I see it.

 

Gotcha. Would it need to be proven that she released the tapes?

Gotcha. Would it need to be proven that she released the tapes?

 

Probably, but she says she didn't and I'd bet TMZ (or whoever played them) won't tell.

But at this point that is between him and her not the NBA. Should have absolutely no impact on what the NBA is trying to do.

 

I would suspect that Sterling is bringing up the status of the recordings as it pertains to whatever clause in his NBA franchise agreement the league is using to punish him. Why would his camp bring it up, otherwise?

California is a two party state (not many states are two party states). Both parties have to consent to the recording. It's illegal and civil and criminal penalties could apply.

 

As to Stern's motivations for not pressing charges as far as that goes: there isn't a lot for him to be gained in terms of recovery and punishment that would be handed to her.

 

Also, I'm guessing that it would just be another thing that would play into the NBA's hand of negative public perception that harms their business. He probably doesn't want to go into a trial where he and his crazy girlfriend go on the record about the terms of their relationship.

California is a two party state (not many states are two party states). Both parties have to consent to the recording. It's illegal and civil and criminal penalties could apply.

 

So far it appears they both consented. Would it need to be proven otherwise?

California is a two party state (not many states are two party states). Both parties have to consent to the recording. It's illegal and civil and criminal penalties could apply.

 

As to Stern's motivations for not pressing charges as far as that goes, I'm guessing that it would just be another thing that would play into the NBA's hand of negative public perception that harms their business. He probably doesn't want to go into a trial where he and his crazy girlfriend go on the record.

 

Thanks, any idea what the criminal penalties could be?

Would Sterling have to press charges or could the DA do it on their own?

So far it appears they both consented. Would it need to be proven otherwise?

 

I'm not really sure. If it's just a he said, she said, it may end up being up to the judge/jury to believe who is more credible.

Thanks, any idea what the criminal penalties could be?

Would Sterling have to press charges or could the DA do it on their own?

 

CA Codes (pen:630-638)

 

Section 632(a) is probably the one that would apply here.

 

Maximum, she's looking at a $2,500 fine or less than a year in jail if there's nothing else.

 

Just a guess, but I'd imagine that this is a law where the harshest portions of the punishment phase comes in how being punished with this in conjunction with another crime, and the penalties are really enhanced when the two separate charges combine. That's just a guess though.

 

Not sure about the DA and charges. Since it requires two party consent, it is probably one where someone other than an aggrieved party bringing a case isn't practical. Could be wrong on that though.

She is saying she didn't make them public and doesn't know who did. She says she recorded them but didn't leak them last I heard.

 

Surely you don't believe she doesn't know who released the tapes? Who would have access to them or even know where to look or even what's on these tapes without her telling them? Someone else may have released these tapes but I'd bet a bottom dollar she had them do it.

Surely you don't believe she doesn't know who released the tapes? Who would have access to them or even know where to look or even what's on these tapes without her telling them? Someone else may have released these tapes but I'd bet a bottom dollar she had them do it.

 

 

I don't disagree. Can you prove it? Can Sterling prove it? Can anyone prove it?