Hi CIPAWorld! The Baroness here and I have an interesting filing that just came in the other day.
This one involves alleged violations of the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5703, et seq., and the Federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2511, et seq.
Pursuant to the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5703, et seq., a person is guilty of a felony of the third degree if he:
(1) intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, electronic or oral communication;
(2) intentionally discloses or endeavors to disclose to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication; or
(3) intentionally uses or endeavors to use the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know, that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication.
Seven police officers employed by the City of Pittsburg Bureau of Police team up to sue Matthew Lackner (Commander) and the City of Pittsburgh.
Plaintiffs, Colleen Jumba Baker, Brittany Mercer, Matthew O’Brien, Jonathan Sharp, Matthew Zuccher, Christopher Sedlak and Devlyn Valencic Keller allege that beginning on September 27, 2003 through October 4, 2003, Matthew Lacker utilized body worn cameras to video and audio records Plaintiffs along with utilizing the GPS component of the body worn camera to track them.
Yes. To track them.
Plaintiffs allege they were unaware that Lacker was utilizing a body worn camera to video and auto them and utilizing the GPS function of the body worn camera. Nor did they consent to have their conversations audio recorded by Lacker and/or the City of Pittsburgh.
Interestingly, Lackner was already charged with four (4) counts of Illegal Use of Wire or Oral Communication pursuant to the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act. 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5703(1) in a criminal suit.
So now Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, including actual damages or statutory damages, punitive damages, and reasonably attorneys’ fees.
This case was just filed so it will be interesting to see how this case progresses. But this case is an important reminder that many states have their own privacy laws and to take these laws seriously to avoid lawsuits like this one.
Case No.: Case 2:24-cv-00461
