repost Invasion of Privacy.-repost

Washington has a civil anti-harassment statute to protect against repeated invasions of a person's privacy. One form of “intrusion” is electronic eavesdropping, which is specifically governed by RCW 9.73. 030-. 250 of the Washington Privacy Act.

Intrusion into Seclusion

Intrusion upon seclusion is what people commonly think of as “invasion of privacy.” Intrusion upon seclusion occurs when someone intentionally intrudes into the private affairs of another person. The legal standard for intrusion upon seclusion requires that the intrusion be intentional and highly offensive to a reasonable person.[2]

The most straightforward case is when the victim is in a private location, such as a private home or hotel room. If an intruder infringes on these areas by planting a camera, peeping or otherwise violating the privacy of the area, that is a form of invasion of privacy.[3] Another area where intrusion into seclusion has been litigated is in the work place. Although people in a work setting are aware that others may hear what they discuss, there is an expectation that discussions among colleagues at work will not be surreptitiously recorded. So, the use of secret electronic surveillance can be considered an intrusion into seclusion under normal circumstances.[4]

Intrusion upon seclusion is not limited to cases of physical intrusion. The principle of invasion of privacy extends into any sphere in which an ordinary person could reasonably expect that others should be excluded. This form of intrusion includes seeking private information of a confidential nature, even if the information is not publicly disseminated.

In Nader v. General Motors, General Motors engaged in a campaign of intimidation against a popular critic of their practices. The company employed people to follow him around in public and conducted surveillance of his activities. The court found that General Motors’ committed an intrusion into seclusion when agents of the corporation spied on the plaintiff in a bank, looking over his shoulder to see his private financial records. This amounted to intrusion upon seclusion because the conduct was designed to elicit information which was not available through normal inquiry or observation.[5] Furthermore, the act of looking over an individual’s shoulder to see his private financial records would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.

Invasion of Privacy.

https://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.73.030

Elder Care Worker Fired After Breathing Into Reporter's Face on Camera at Anti-Lockdown Rally

By Sara Santora NewsWeek

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/elder-care-worker-fired-after-breathing-into-reporters-face-on-camera-at-anti-lockdown-rally/ar-AAKE3wi?li=BBnbfcL

A Black woman says she was racially harassed for years. Police acted only after her story went viral.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/black-woman-says-she-was-racially-harassed-years-police-acted-n1244220?fbclid=IwAR2Lmv0rq8SOCeoIg3o62Fk5XX7AGZY4b8RkVk7IvZTwJvn9PYolpaQ46Ao

Beyond Stress and Anxiety: How Stress Affects the Body and What You Can ...

Shared from ~ Stanford Health Care

Repost ~ Obstruction of justice

https://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/obstruction-of-justice.html
The crime can take any number of forms, whether it's bribery, tampering with evidence, lying to investigators, abusing one's power, or some other act intended to impede a criminal investigation. The federal obstruction of justice statute is written broadly and focuses more on the effect (or intended effect) of a particular action rather than the specific act itself. Therefore, seemingly innocuous acts could be construed as criminal activity if they have the intended effect of impeding justice.
Influencing or injuring an officer or juror generally (18 U.S.C. § 1503)
Obstruction of criminal investigations (18 U.S.C. § 1510)
Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant (18 U.S.C. § 1512)
Retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant (18 U.S.C. § 1513)
Destruction of corporate audit records (
18 U.S.C. § 1520)

§ 619. Obtaining information under false pretenses [15 U.S.C. § 1681q] Any person who knowingly and willfully obtains information on a consumer from a consumer reporting agency under false pretenses shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both.

§ 620. Unauthorized disclosures by officers or employees

[15 U.S.C. § 1681r] Any officer or employee of a consumer reporting agency who knowingly and willfully provides information concerning an individual from the agency’s files to a person not authorized to receive that information shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both.

criminal.findlaw.com

Manhood

Manhood · Mama Sol & Tha N.U.T.S. Inside Out ℗ Mama Sol & Tha N.U.T.S Released on: 2014-09-30

Change Your Mind