Many arrests are recorded on police body cameras and/or cruiser cameras. Additionally, the vast majority of police stations in Massachusetts have cameras at their booking/breathalyzer stations.
Officers are required to warn you of such devices. In fact, most encounters with the police begin with the officer identifying himself and then immediately warning the citizen that “everything is being audio and video recorded.”
If an officer fails to give such a warning (which occasionally happens) the arrestee/defendant can file a motion to suppress the recording if the case goes to trial.
The basis for such a motion is found in the state’s wire-tap statute M.G.L. c. 272, § 99P.
Any person who is a defendant in a criminal trial in a court of the commonwealth may move to suppress the contents of any intercepted wire or oral communication or evidence derived therefrom, for the following reasons: (1) That the communication was unlawfully intercepted and (2) That the communication was not intercepted in accordance with the terms of this section.
The Appeals Court has held that “[f]or purposes of the statute, a recording is made ‘secretly’ when it is made without the actual knowledge of the person being recorded.” See Commonwealth v. Du, 103 Mass. App. Ct. 469, 478 (2023)