If the police have nothing to hide, then they
have nothing to fear about being required to wear video cameras.
The Associated Press is
reporting that 36 police officers will begin wearing body
cameras next week. If they prove effective, then body cameras will
be issued to the entire department by the end of 2015. Requiring
police to wear video cameras should be universally adopted sooner
rather than later.
In my 2013 column, “Watched
Cops Are Polite Cops,” I reported:
Earlier this year, a 12-month study by Cambridge University
researchers revealed that when the city of Rialto, California,
required its cops to wear cameras, the number of
complaints filed against officers fell by 88 percent and the
use of force by officers dropped by almost 60 percent.
People who know that they are on camera (unless it’s part of the
Real Housewives franchise) tend to act better. The Baltimore
Sun is
reporting that a city cop has been charged with assault and
perjury after his sucker punch attack on a citizen was revealed on
a video from a city surveillance camera. See below.
The fact that it took three months for the Baltimore
surveillance camera video to surface highlights the need to
establish speedy and secure chain-of-custody rules for video taken
by body-worn cameras. In my “Watched Cops Are Polite Cops” column,
I outlined some rules for the proper handling of cop videos
including that officers should notify people that they are being
recorded; officers should be subject to stiff disciplinary
sanctions if they fail to turn on their cameras each time they
interact with the public; failure to record an incident for which a
patrolman is accused of misconduct should create a presumption
against that officer; and videos should be retained for no more
than 30 to 60 days, unless flagged.
In its September series, “Undue
Force,” the Baltimore Sun reported that the city has
paid out $5.7 million in taxpayer funds since January 2011 over
lawsuits claiming that police brazenly beat up alleged suspects.
The newspaper noted that sum would cover the price of a
state-of-the-art rec center or renovations at more than 30
playgrounds. And that the payments didn’t count the $5.8 million
spent by the city on legal fees to defend these claims brought
against police. It seems to me that the city can’t afford not to
equip its officers with cameras.
To reiterate, requiring police officers to wear video
cameras…
…will accomplish an important democratic task as well: turning
the tables on the functionaries of the surveillance state. It gives
citizens better protection against police misconduct and against
violations of their constitutional rights. And it protects good
cops against unfair accusations, too.
from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/1pbwiIg
via IFTTT