Could you, or anyone, cite the USC on this one - that video images only are allowed in public spaces and/or that audio recording is specifically not allowed?

Just curious what the workarounds are really. If the wiretap style "one party" rules were applied then it seems you could just make sure that you get your own audio on there too; or with audiovisual recording you could sit in the shot somewhere and record people so long as you also captured your own voice. It would seem intent primarily to record others (as opposed to it being incidental to the recording you made) would be close to impossible to prove under such circumstances.

Does that vary by state? Yesterday's Bay Area news reports about the suspect beaten after a chase had a private surveillance video recording with audio, made public.