Police Body-Mounted Cameras: With Right Policies in Place, a Win For All

[Tonitrus]

Isn't the point of life to batter ourselves?

As long as it is pancake batter.

[Barrister]

I just came from a info session by the local police to the Crown's office.

Take away lesson - these things are seriously constrained by battery life.  At present the units they have can only record approx. 90 minutes of video (though they can store much, much more).  So while they will be useful, there is no possibility of them being ubiquitous at this point, and lots of moments are going to go uncaptured.

that answered my one question as to battery life As the all popular go pro cameras have roughly 2-2 1/2 hours before they need to be recharged.

And police being police are not going to just buy any-old off-the-shelf consumer technology, instead going for a police-only model (though in this case one made by Panasonic).

[Darth Wagtaros]

Isn't the point of life to batter ourselves?

As long as it is pancake batter.

That isn't healthy. Go unbattered. 

[CountDeMoney]

And police being police are not going to just buy any-old off-the-shelf consumer technology, instead going for a police-only model (though in this case one made by Panasonic).

Ugh.  Or they'll get locked in on sole-sourced, proprietary bullshit.  Win on the RFP, lose big on the SLA.

[MadImmortalMan]

Hmm...

[jimmy olsen]

Now now MIM, no one is going to be swayed by anything as inadequate as facts or evidence.

[jimmy olsen]

Not quite on topic, but close enough.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-reverses-longstanding-interview-policy-under-new-directive-n112396

FBI Reverses Longstanding Interview Policy Under New Directive

Agents from the FBI and some other federal law enforcement agencies will soon begin recording interviews of suspects in custody under a new Justice Department directive that reverses long-standing policy, Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday.

The new policy, laid out in a memo issued last week by Deputy Attorney General James Cole, establishes a "presumption" that agents will record interviews with suspects who have been taken into custody but have not yet appeared in court. The policy, which is to take effect July 11, applies to agents from the FBI as well as the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the U.S. Marshals Service.

The new standard replaces the FBI's current practice, in which agents interview suspects without recording them, take handwritten notes and then produce a report summarizing the conversation.

It addresses concerns from civil rights groups and defense lawyers who have long argued that the absence of recordings creates evidentiary problems, leaving too many ambiguities as to what precisely was said during the interviews and whether agents' accounts are fully reliable.

"Creating an electronic record will ensure that we have an objective account of key investigations and interactions with people who are held in federal custody," Holder said in a video message announcing the change. "It will allow us to document that detained individuals are afforded their constitutionally-protected rights.

FBI Jon Elswick / AP
The headquarters building of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the J. Edgar Hoover building along Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, Sunday, Sept. 5, 2010.

He also said it would provide law enforcement with a "backstop" so that "they have clear and indisputable records of important statements and confessions made by individuals who have been detained."

The policy change allows for some exceptions, including if the suspect objects to the recording, if the recording is not practical or if the information provided in the interview could jeopardize national security. The memo encourages agents to make video recordings of interviews when available but says audio recordings may be sufficient.

Though it represents a dramatic departure from existing policy, the new directive is also limited in scope since it applies only to interviews with suspects who have already been arrested and are in federal custody.

- Associated Press

[jimmy olsen]

Those stats are very impressive.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/04/california-police-body-cameras-cuts-violence-complaints-rialto

    News
    World news
    California

California police use of body cameras cuts violence and complaints
Body cameras worn by police in Rialto, California have resulted in better policing – and now other forces may follow suit


    Rory Carroll in Rialto
    The Guardian, Monday 4 November 2013 17.00 GMT   
    Jump to comments (99)

Link to video: California police body cams show real-life dramas in Rialto

The occupant was said to be violent, so officer Carlos Ramirez approached the apartment warily. A dank smell wafted from inside. Ramirez bristled with body armour, radio, gun and Taser, but before knocking on the door he adjusted just one piece of equipment: a tiny camera on his collar.

A tubby, barefoot man with broken teeth and wild eyes opened the door. He appeared to be high. Ramirez questioned him about allegedly beating and evicting his stepson, a mentally disabled teenager. The man shifted from foot to foot and babbled about death threats.

The encounter, tense but polite, ended inconclusively, a routine police foray into family dysfunction – except for the fact it was all recorded. As he returned to his patrol car and next assignment, Ramirez tapped an app on his phone and uploaded the video. "Somewhere down the line something could happen and what that guy said, his demeanour, could be evidence."

Rialto, a small, working-class city that bakes in the San Bernardino foothills outside Los Angeles, appeared in the films Transformers and The Hangover. Among law enforcers, however, it is becoming better known for pioneering the use of body cameras on police officers.

Over the past year all 70 of its uniformed officers have been kitted out with the oblong devices, about the size of stubby cigars, and the results have emboldened police forces elsewhere in the US and in the UK to follow suit.

The College of Policing recently announced plans for large-scale trials of body-worn video in England and Wales, saying Rialto's experiment showed big drops in the use of force and in public complaints against officers. David Davis, a former shadow home secretary, has backed the idea. It follows "plebgate's denting of public trust.

Rialto has also become an example for US forces since a federal judge in New York praised its initiative.

"I think we've opened some eyes in the law enforcement world. We've shown the potential," said Tony Farrar, Rialto's police chief. "It's catching on."

Body-worn cameras are not new. Devon and Cornwall police launched a pilot scheme in 2006 and forces in Strathclyde, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, among others, have also experimented.

But Rialto's randomised controlled study has seized attention because it offers scientific – and encouraging – findings: after cameras were introduced in February 2012, public complaints against officers plunged 88% compared with the previous 12 months. Officers' use of force fell by 60%.

"When you know you're being watched you behave a little better. That's just human nature," said Farrar. "As an officer you act a bit more professional, follow the rules a bit better."

Video clips provided by the department showed dramatic chases on foot – you can hear the officer panting – and by car that ended with arrests, and without injury. Complaints often stemmed not from operational issues but "officers' mouths", said the chief. "With a camera they are more conscious of how they speak and how they treat people."

The same applied to the public; once informed they were being filmed, even drunk or agitated people tended to become more polite, Farrar said. Those who lodged frivolous or bogus complaints about officers tended to retract them when shown video of the incidents. "It's like, 'Oh, I hadn't seen it that way.'"

Cameras made officers more careful about using force. "It's still part of the business, they still do it. But now they make better use of what we call verbal judo."

Fewer complaints and calmer policing, said Farrar, would reduce lawsuits and expensive payouts.

Images of police brutality have shaken California since grainy footage of Los Angeles police officers beating Rodney King ignited riots in 1992. (Rialto police fished King out of his pool after he accidentally drowned last year).

In May sheriff's deputies in Kern county confiscated videophone footage of them fatally beating a father-of-four, David Silva, prompting suspicion of a cover-up.http://articles.latimes.com/2013/may/13/local/la-me-ln-bakersfield-beating-20130513 In those and other cases the officers did not know they were being filmed.

Farrar is a wonkish contrast to the stereotypical abrasive commander of TV dramas. He has several degrees, including a recent master's from Cambridge's Institute of Criminology, which planted the idea of methodically assessing the impact of body cameras.

Upon returning to Rialto (city motto: "bridge to progress") he obtained $100,000 (£62,640) in state and federal funding for the Taser-made cameras – about $1,000 each – plus servers and fibre-optic cables. Each officer has his or her own camera, mounted on collars, spectacles or caps, and is expected to activate it during interactions with the public. Encounters are logged and uploaded to a secure digital cloud service, evidence.com.

The chief advised bigger departments who wish to do the same to scale up incrementally, to iron out technical bugs and let officers get used to the idea.

In Rialto some bristled at the intrusion, fearing loss of privacy and autonomy. "I heard guys complaining it would get them into trouble, but I've had no problems so I'm OK with it," said Ramirez.

Most now accepted cameras as another part of the job, said Sgt Josh Lindsay. A self-confessed technophile, he said they provided context to contentious incidents partially captured by bystanders' phones. "Now you can see the [suspect] punching the officer twice in the face before he hits him with his baton."

Even more valuable, cameras aided evidence gathering, such as statements from domestic abuse victims, he said. "By the time those cases get to court often things have cooled down and the victim retracts. But with the video you see her with the bloody lip. There's nothing lost in translation."

Under California law police are not obliged to inform people of the filming. Local media coverage has spread awareness of the cameras but many, like the barefoot man questioned by Ramirez, appear oblivious. If there is to be a backlash, it is too early.

Even Orwell did not anticipate body cameras in 1984, but the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, a frequent critic of police abuses, said with the right controls accountability gains would outweigh privacy concerns. It urged the department to regularly delete videos, and keep them private, unless needed for prosecutions.

Farrar said controls were in place. "No one wants to see these videos on YouTube."

[The Brain]

"No one wants to see these videos on YouTube."

[Barrister]

I just saw my first file with body-worn video.

First off I have to say it's amazing - suddenly the entire transaction is captured on video.  There's no debating what the cop did or said.  I can't wait to play this in court.

Second - it really emphasized how "worn" it is.  Based on whatever the cop clipped the camera to, the entire footage isn't pointing straight forward, but rather about 30-45 degrees to the right of the cop.  And, the footage is badly tilted.

Third - though this cop did nothing wrong that I could see or hear, boy oh boy was he ever being a dick with this accused!

[Tonitrus]

I would tend to think a police officer being a dick is doing something wrong.  They should have a very high standard of professionalism.

[Ed Anger]

I would tend to think a police officer being a dick is doing something wrong.  They should have a very high standard of professionalism.

Weirdo

[DGuller]

I would tend to think a police officer being a dick is doing something wrong.  They should have a very high standard of professionalism.

Beeb acknowledging that a police officer can act like a dick is already a lot.  He still can't wipe his smile off for two days after every time he gets to talk to Mr. Policeman.

[CountDeMoney]

I would tend to think a police officer being a dick is doing something wrong.  They should have a very high standard of professionalism.

Guy once asked me why I was arresting him.  Wanton trespassing, I said.  Told me he didn't want no trespassing.