Not that this matters much... (Score 1)

I don't think that the video portion of the surveillance is what got this guy into trouble...it is the audio attached. It is perfectly alright under most circustances to record what someone _DOES_, but not necessarily what someone _SAYS_. From my understanding (limited though it is), this is because recording private (or assumed private) conversations is illegal in most states (this varies from state-to-state) unless you are law enforcement with a proper warrant. Video can also be considered illegal if it is considered a violation of privacy, but surveilling one's own property (or actions in the case of police videos) probably would not fall into this category. Also, in most of the police videos I've seen (on those cool "World's Greatest Chases" shows, etc.) _DO_NOT_ include audio...presumably for this very reason.

IANAL, but I doubt there will be much grounds for a defense (by the ACLU or otherwise) if the audio recording is a violation of state law. Sad, but probably true.