HomeMy WebLinkAbout31111 - MINUTES - City Commission x
V A R O N. S T A H L AND P E R L I N
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS
FORT LAUDERDALE,FLORIDA 33301
JOSEPH A.VAPON COURT HOUSE SOUARE BUILDING
® STEADMAN 5 STAHL.JR. 200 SOUTHEAST 61^ STREET
MORTON J.PERLIN TELEPHONE 523-6421
STEVEN LOVELAND
LEROY H.MOE HOLLYWOOD.FLORIOA 33020
2432 HOLLYWOOD BOULEVARD
TELEPHONE 923-1548
DIRECT MIAMI TELEPHONE 949.1241
® PLEASE REPLY TO:
August 31, 1967 Hollywood Office
Hon. Clarke Walden
City Attorney
Dania, Florida
Dear Mr. Walden:
Please be advised that the writer represents Mrs. Mary
Thornhill, City Clerk of Dania, Florida, who has turned over to me
for attention your very scholarly and lawyer-like letter of August 23,
• 1967, addressed to the Mayor and City Commissioners. I have read
the same with great interest and am impelled to concur with you in
your evaluations of the legal problems presented by the factual situa-
tion contained therein.
The only portion of the controversy that excites my
interest is the veiled references to improper surveillance of Mrs.
Thornhill in her official capacity. Your affirmative recommenda-
tions are quite meritorious and I am constrained to agree with your
recommendation that the City Commission and the Chief of Police
should openly acknowledge that they have received no information
as the result of any investigations or Police Department reports
which cast aspersions on the City Clerk or her conduct in office.
Unquestionably there has been a violation of Mrs. Thornhill's civil
rights.
® It is my considered opinion that under the prevailing
law Mrs. Thornhill's privacy of her office was unnecessarily and im-
properly invaded. Be that as it may, no accusations are made toward
0
- 2 -
® anyone, but agreeable to your recommendation we must demand that
a Resolution be promulgated by the City Commission in accordance
with your page 13, article 2 thereof. This will satisfy and preserve
the integrity and reputation of Mrs. Thornhill.
® Speaking as lawyer to lawyer I agree with you that
electronic devices can conceivably be utilized in a legal manner in
the exercise of better law enforcement; however, this dangerous
instrumentality when used improperly may become a devastating
weapon. May I respectfully suggest that under no circumstances
® should there be any "bugging" of telephonic communications or
eavesdropping within the confines of private or semi-private office
conferences.
Since July, 1965, the United States Government through
its foremost investigative agency, the F.B.I. , the Internal Revenue
• Service and all other administrative agencies, has abandoned the use
of electronic devices on telephones, places of business, offices and
homes.
May I respectfully call your attention to Sec. 822. 10
• of the Florida Statutes that makes it a crime to attach any unauthor-
ized device or equipment to any telegraph, telephone, radio, pole,
cable, etc. , or to connect by wire or any means whatsoever to a
telephone line so as to hear, or be in a position to hear, any mes-
sage going over said line, etc. The object of this statute is to pre-
vent interference of communication by an unauthorized person.
This is similar to the Federal Statute found in Title 47
USC, Sec. 605, but which relates to interstate communication. The
state statute, of course, is limited to intrastate communications, as
® you know. This would indicate that under no circumstances should
telephone interference be utilized because not only does it make the
information improperly procured inadmissible in a Court of law, but
may well be the subject of civil rights litigation.
•
..$� f e ^i i LY y5 -Yrfhs {h✓P ' e= ,e-'r .is;,`- ,r '.i+
mom
.:1
- 3 - s y,,•
We would appreciate very much if you could read this
y Commission
next public meeting so that they could act upon the proposed Re-
yourof lu p you have suggested and
solution which
concur.
With best wishes, I am
• Very truly yours,
• is
A. Varon
JAV:lw
•
•
•
•