Securus — a Texas company that provides services to jails and prisons across the country — told The Topeka Capital-Journal that the Leavenworth facility was responsible for designating the attorney’s number as a private, non-recorded number. The company acknowledged allegations have been made in other places in the past regarding recording but said it rechecks its system each time and has always found it works properly.
But a proposed class action lawsuit in San Diego, California alleges that Securus recorded private and confidential phone calls from detainees to the San Diego county Public Defender’s Office and Alternate Public Defender’s Office, as well as other criminal defense attorneys, without their permission and without any warning at various times from at least 2013 until at least August, 2014.
The lawsuit alleges during the period from May 2013 to July 2014 attorney-client calls, including to the Public Defender’s Office, Alternate Public Defender’s Office, and other attorney offices, including without limitation Plaintiffs’ lawyer, were recorded without permission or warning.
The plaintiffs go on to allege that Securus knew these calls were being recorded unlawfully and covered it up by suppressing and concealing the true facts and had a duty and was bound to disclose its unlawful eavesdropping and recording due to its superior and exclusive knowledge of the true facts which were not known or reasonably accessible to Plaintiffs. Instead, Securus actively concealed, suppressed, omitted, and failed to disclose these true facts concerning the recording, storage, and security of private, confidential, and privileged attorney-client phone calls with the intent to induce Plaintiffs to continue to purchase Securus’ communications services.