Body-worn video: LE use in the USA?
A colleague and I recently discussed the use in the UK by LE of modern technology, in particular the use of mini / head-cameras.
The UK is well known for having millions of CCTV cameras, sometimes the results seen in “fly on the wall” documentaries, using CCTV, vehicle-mounted video cameras and still a cameraman. I was in the USA over Xmas and noted when watching a few police TV shows none used the mini-cameras.
The impetus for head-cameras here came from a bar threatened with closure for disorder etc and their website is: http://www.robocamuk.com/node .
There is a short CNN News clip:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKjZIm9nNgs
Wearing these cameras has become an option for non-law enforcement personnel, notably in high-risk actions or locations, for example door staff at clubs and bars. Here is an example of a cyclist –v- a ‘road rage’ motorist:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zWt1SYTlZU
Are there reasons for the apparent lack of interest in head-cameras?
NYPD told to have 1k body cameras
Quote:
U.S. District Judge Shira Scheindlin ordered a pilot program of the cameras and other major reforms to the New York Police Department's stop-and-frisk policy this week, after she found the NYPD intentionally discriminated against minorities.......In New York, Scheindlin ordered one police precinct per borough where the most stops occur to host the yearlong pilot program. That means possibly more than a thousand officers would be recording with cameras on their eye glasses or lapels.
Link:http://online.wsj.com/article/APf61b...KEYWORDS=lapel
SF Fire Chief Bans Helmet Cams
Not LE but close. San Francisco Fire Chief has banned helmet cameras.
http://news.msn.com/videos/?ap=True&...om=en-us_msnhp
Three questions about body-worn video: my UK answers
Quote:
Originally Posted by
flagg
I wonder how much this will adversely effect command latitude for police officers?
I don't think anyone really knows. The UK police have a habit of one police force (we only have 43 in England & Wales) adapting a new piece of kit, within a short time everyone else follows suit. Rarely is there a proper evaluation after deployment, let alone an independent one. There is a Home Office (Interior Dept) technology / scientific assessment process before deployment and in the last few years an ethical assessment has arrived in a few places.
Quote:
Is there potential something meant to help will actually hurt?
Yes. We should recognise we are in the so-called 'digital age' and for at least twenty years here live audio and or visual recordings are seen by virtually everyone as essential. No video can become no evidence.
Body-worn video (BWV) is an extension of this. I doubt many would advocate the removal of in-car video systems (although in the UK only a small proportion of patrol vehicles have them).
I do wonder whether every member of the public will want their presence, let alone engagement with the police recorded. They also become potential witnesses for clever, aggressive criminals and lawyers to pursue.
So if a citizen wants to help how do they say to an officer "Turn video off now, then I will help" and will official rules allow this?
Quote:
Will officers be reluctant to use personal judgement and latitude when everything is recorded?
Maybe, especially where targets apply or a top-down emphasis exists. In the UK personal discretion has steadily been eroded; yes, discretion has been wrong exercised too.
Not so fast, say researchers
Well, well someone is asking where is the evidence. An article from The Guardian, with many links:http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...ner?CMP=twt_gu
Citing Michael D White, an Arizona State University criminology professor:
Quote:
Although advocates and critics have made numerous claims regarding body-worn cameras, there have been few balanced discussions of the benefits and problems associated with the technology and even fewer discussions of the empirical evidence supporting or refuting those claims...e. The overwhelming theme from this review is the lack of available research on the technology.
Cameras change the justice system
Body worn video cameras for the UK police are spreading fast, although locally a number of issues remain unclear and no-one wants to hear that several US police departments, Seattle PD IIRC being one, baulked at the cost of storage.
As if on cue here is a laudatory press article, but it does draw attention to some of the issues:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a6905691.html
Two very different reports
A report from Cambridge University, based on data from four UK police forces and two in the USA:
Quote:
Police body cameras can dramatically reduce the number of complaints against officers, research suggests. The Cambridge University study showed complaints by members of the public against officers fell by 93% over 12 months compared with the year before. Almost 2,000 officers across four UK forces and two US police departments were monitored for the project.
The author is cited:
Quote:
I cannot think of any [other] single intervention in the history of policing that dramatically changed the way that officers behave, the way that suspects behave, and the way they interact with each other.
Once [the public] are aware they are being recorded, once they know that everything they do is caught on tape, they will undoubtedly change their behaviour because they don't want to get into trouble. Individual officers become more accountable, and modify their behaviour accordingly, while the more disingenuous complaints from the public fall by the wayside once footage is likely to reveal them as frivolous.
Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37502136
Taking a very different stance based on practice in the USA 'Atlantic' weighs in:
Quote:
recent events subvert the idea that the devices help or increase the power of regular people—that is, the policed. Instead of making officers more accountable and transparent to the public, body cameras may be making officers and departments more powerful than they were before.
Link:http://www.theatlantic.com/technolog...werful/502421/
Body Worn Camera resource
Discovered this website after a Tweet on a new academic article on the impact on video: 'Exploring the Potential for Body-Worn Cameras to Reduce Violence in Police–Citizen Encounters and it is American.'
Added as a potential resource.
Link:http://www.bwctta.com/
Body worn cameras thanks to Taser
An article from the New Yorker on policing in the era of body worn video cameras alongside Taser. It is clearly dependent on Taser, now Axon's help, but does cover many of he issues.
Link:https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-police-abuse?
Police Body Cameras Aren't Having the Effects Many Expected
An article that reflects the mainly US experience and sub-titled:
Quote:
What’s likely the most comprehensive review of research on body cameras shows that they're most often used to prosecute citizens, not police. And while they've led to fewer citizen complaints, their impact on other aspects of policing, such as use of force, is less certain.
That’s the conclusion of a
new report from the Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy at George Mason University.
Link:https://www.governing.com/topics/pub...gmu-study.html
I have amended the thread's title to reflect the change from head to body-worn video (BWV).
