Commonwealth v. Murray

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Cohen:

The majority opinion proposes that the use by the private investigator of the extension telephone to overhear the conversation between defendant and the corporate employee was an interception and, that because defendant did not consent, the investigator’s testimony *64was inadmissible under the statute. This exact issue has not previously arisen in Pennsylvania, but was decided by the United State Supreme Court in Rathbun v. United, States, 355 U. S. 107 (1957). In that case, the accused was charged with transmitting a threatening interstate communication…