# Russian wire taps OK to use in USA?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russian-wire-taps-ok-to-use-in-usa/657001
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion
**Created:** [April 29, 2013, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russian-wire-taps-ok-to-use-in-usa/657001 "2013-04-29T12:53:08Z")
**Posts on this page:** 4
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@cougar58](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cougar58)
#### Post date: [April 29, 2013, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russian-wire-taps-ok-to-use-in-usa/657001/1 "2013-04-29T12:53:08Z")
So the Russians have wiretaps they just presented to the FBI, of recorded calls between the Boston bombers and their mother, where it is apparent they were active in Jihad, or radical Islamic plans.
In the USA, unless there was a previous court order, wiretaps are not admissible (unless the Patriot Act fine print supersedes).
What about recorded calls from the USA that were wiretapped in Russia?
---
### Author:  [@pinqy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinqy)
#### Post date: [April 29, 2013, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russian-wire-taps-ok-to-use-in-usa/657001/2 "2013-04-29T13:04:13Z")
> [@cougar58](#):
>
> So the Russians have wiretaps they just presented to the FBI, of recorded calls between the Boston bombers and their mother, where it is apparent they were active in Jihad, or radical Islamic plans.
>
> In the USA, unless there was a previous court order, wiretaps are not admissible (unless the Patriot Act fine print supersedes).
>
> What about recorded calls from the USA that were wiretapped in Russia?
It would be illegal for the US to ask another country to do something the US could not legally do, but otherwise it’s fine.
An example would be that the cops can’t break in a house or ask a thief to break into a house to collect information, but if a thief broke into a house, discovered something illegal, and informed the police, then that would (usually) be probable cause for a warrant.
Illegally obtained evidence is admissible as long as the government didn’t request or encourage it.
---
### Author:  [@cougar58](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cougar58)
#### Post date: [April 29, 2013, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russian-wire-taps-ok-to-use-in-usa/657001/3 "2013-04-29T13:22:41Z")
> [@pinqy](#):
>
> It would be illegal for the US to ask another country to do something the US could not legally do, but otherwise it’s fine.
>
> An example would be that the cops can’t break in a house or ask a thief to break into a house to collect information, but if a thief broke into a house, discovered something illegal, and informed the police, then that would (usually) be probable cause for a warrant.
>
> Illegally obtained evidence is admissible as long as the government didn’t request or encourage it.
but what if I illegally record a convo, to later use to support my case, in court. they won’t allow it, right? (even thou they - the govt - didn’t request or encourage me to record the call)
how is this different?
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [April 29, 2013, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russian-wire-taps-ok-to-use-in-usa/657001/4 "2013-04-29T13:37:09Z")
If you illegally record a conversation and attempt to introduce it in a civil case, it won’t be admitted. If you illegally record a conversation and the government wants to use it in a criminal action, the recording generally won’t be admissible pursuant to the statute that bars such recording. However, the government can have you testify about the conversation, and there’s no constitutional bar to admission of the recording (United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 104 S.Ct. 1652.
As far as the OP’s question, there is a surprising amount of case law on the admission of evidence obtained by foreign sovereigns in a manner which would violate the US Constitution. Normally, it’s admissible:
> [@](#):
>
> The Fourth Amendment and its exclusionary rule do not generally apply to the acts of foreign officials. United States v. Barona, 56 F.3d 1087, 1091 (9th Cir.1995). There are two very limited exceptions to this general rule. First, if the circumstances of the foreign search are so extreme “that they shock the [judicial] conscience,” a court can require exclusion of the evidence. Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Second, “the exclusionary rule may be invoked if American law enforcement officials substantially participated in the search or if the foreign officials conducting the search were actually acting as agents for their American counterparts.” United States v. Behety, 32 F.3d 503, 510–11 (11th Cir.1994); see also United States v. Peterson, 812 F.2d 486, 490 (9th Cir.1987); United States v. Delaplane, 778 F.2d 570, 573 (10th Cir.1985); United States v. Morrow, 537 F.2d 120, 139 (5th Cir.1976). This second exception is typically referred to as the Joint Venture Doctrine.
>
> United States v. Ferguson, 508 F. Supp. 2d 1, 4 (D.D.C. 2007)