Federal judges have consistently ruled that recording public officials in the performance of their duties is a right under the first amendment. As a member of the public, you can record your interactions with police without their consent.
You can do it without their consent, but can you do it without their knowledge?
It is much less clear that it applies to a private conversation with a senior officer in a police station.
> conversation with a senior officer in a police station
Are you seriously suggesting that conversing with a public official at their place of work about official business doesn't qualify as part of their official duties?
(Aside, two party consent is a genuinely broken system for a wide variety of reasons. I consider violating it to be a laudable act of civil disobedience.)
Attorneys argue things like this all the time. And Judges rule on their arguments.
What I’m asking about is whether any existing ruling makes this point clear.
I think it would be hard to argue that a conversation with a CCW applicant in which you ask for stuff in exchange for issung a CCW isn't acting in an official capacity. The only person who can issue it is the person holding that office. Not to mention, the calendar/schedule/sign-in book should have a memo a out the purpose of the visit (the pretext he was called down to the station).
You do sometimes see cases where a police union defends an officer accused of some crime, but that's usually because they're putting up some BS story about how they actually were doing their duty, eg an officer busted in possession of drugs who tries to argue it was actually an undercover investigation of the drug scene.