Dog Chapman’s son sold voicemail message to National Enquirer
It has been revealed that it was Duane Chapman’s own son Tucker who sold the voicemail message to National Enquirer, reportedly because he was angry that his father wouldn’t let him work in the bail bonds business. And he pocketed a cool five figures for selling out his dad (some figures quoting $15,000 while others quote $35,000).
The woman who was at the center of the voice mail - Monique Shinnery, refused to accept Dog’s issued apology to her. She has reportedly received death threats after the incident but me thinks she should be more concerned that Tucker will sell her out for cash now too.
I am also wondering if it was illegal for Tucker to sell that tape, because it is illegal to record phone conversations in some states. I would sure like to see any father sue their children for doing the kind of thing Tucker did.
One of Dog’s other children, Christopher, exclusively talked to TMZ about his father, stating that his father is not a racist. View the video here.
Dog the Bounty Hunter is a guilty pleasure of mine, I hope they bring it back!!
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
Tucker go back to prison! Family should always come first. The rag magazines for this month’s drugs and booze. Conversations with family stays with family. And one more this there is not one person in this world that has not said the N—-word. I know you have several times. But to say that you can not make money for your habits.
Besides there are all colors of N—!
Go Back to Prison
WHAT HAPPENED TO STICKS AND STONES WILL BREAK YOU BONES BUT WORDS WILL NEVER HURT YOU?
IT IS JUST WORDS
Put dog back on the air!!!
November 8th, 2007 at 11:37 am
It is illegal:
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 803-42: Any wire, oral or electronic communication (including cellular phone calls) can lawfully be recorded by a person who is a party to the communication, or when one of the parties has consented to the recording, so long as no criminal or tortious purpose exists. Unlawful interceptions or disclosures of private communications are punishable as felonies.
The one-party consent rule does not apply, however, to the installation of a recording device in a “private place” that will amplify or broadcast conversations outside that private place. All parties who have a reasonable expectation of privacy in that place must consent to the installation of a recording device. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 803-42(b)(3).
Civil penalties for unlawful interception or disclosure include the greater of actual damages or any profits made by the violator, $100 for each day of violation, or $10,000, along with punitive damages, attorney fees and litigation costs. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 803-48. A hotel room has been found by the Hawaii Supreme Court to be a private place where a recording device cannot legally be installed without the consent of the room’s occupants. Hawaii v. Lo, 675 P.2d 754 (Haw. 1983).
It is a felony to install or use a surveillance device in a private place to view a person in a “stage of undress or sexual activity” without the person’s consent. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1110.9. It is a misdemeanor to possess materials obtained in this manner. If the person is not in such a stage, it is a misdemeanor. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 711-1111.
November 8th, 2007 at 3:42 pm
What a sell out, TUCKER. Although, his father is a much bigger person than he will ever become, he chose to sell his personal conversation to the RAGS. Shame on you!!! I’m sure good will always rise to overcome evil, this issue is no exception. Bring back the DOG, We love you.