Eric wrote:
> 
> "Communications law,"  huh?  you must be joking.  This is a matter of
> criminal law.  Communications lawyers, if there is such a thing, would
> specialize in the regualtion of the airwaves--i.e., FCC stuff.

I'm not so sure that it would stop there but I'll leave it at that...

> Look, everyone agrees it is not a violation of ARIZONA law to tape a
> conversation with only ONE person's consent.  The issue here is MONTANA law,
> and ITS requirements.  The only issue here is how to get around the MT
> requirement that ALL parties to a conversation consent.  Several suggestions
> have been made.

So, just tell them that it is being taped on your side too and leave it
at that.  Actually that is a good stratigy anyway. it say that I am
paying attention to the details and we are playing on a relatively level
playing field...  If this causes them to play streight and not lie then
I win.  If they lie and I then take them to court after playing by the
rules I have a good chance of winning...

 EBo --