First final post Body Cameras #9

“It is so much controversy about police brutality in America, justice for victims of police brutality remains elusive despite three years of intense public pressure, and fatal police shootings of black Americans continue to go unpunished.” All across the United States police officers are the number one target when its deals with police brutality and the shooting of unarmed black males. Now this topic can be put to rest. What can help prevent this topic are body cameras? Body cameras are small video cameras worn on the body, typically used by police officers to record arrests, receive evidence from crime scenes, and much more. Body cameras, also known as BWC, came into existence around 2005 in the United Kingdom to record an officer’s daily interaction with citizens. The main type of body worn camera that is used by law enforcement is the 64 G - 32MP.  The police body cameras have 64GB of storage and an image resolution up to 32 megapixels. The unit contains a removable Lithium-ion battery which can last to about 12 hours.  Each officer is given two lithium batteries, with dimensions of 77 x 56 x 22. At the end of each shift, the video footage is then summited in to the servers to be stored. Each body camera is assigned to each officer so there is no mix up on any officer’s body camera. Each department needs servers, preferably three servers to store the video footage.  Some officers and police departments feel that body worn cameras aren’t needed because body cameras are expensive and can invade citizen privacy.

Due to the concerns of body worn cameras being so expensive, according to Sheriff Mike Williams of the Jacksonville police department, the average cost of a body camera is a $1000 apiece. His department has 1,600 officers who need to be equipped with them. When you do the math of 1,600 officers needing a body camera, it’ll cost about $1000. Then in total, his department will need to spend $1,600,000 just on body cameras. Stated by Captain Jeff Martinez of the Middle Tennessee State University police department, body cameras for his department cost $700 apiece. He has about forty-three officers which needed body cameras. The cost for storing the video in three servers is about $10,000 apiece, stated by Captain Martinez.  When you do the math for his department, $30,000 was spent on just the servers and for forty three officers the cost for the department to spend for each officer to have body worn cameras is $30,100. Therefore body worn cameras are expensive because of the cost of the body cameras and the servers.

However, some police officers, police departments and I all feel that body cameras aren’t expensive due to grants. According to Eileen Sullivan, who works for the Washington Bureau, stated President Barack Obama showed support by using body cameras. Also, his administration pledged millions of dollars to local departments. According to Captain Jeff Martinez with the Middle Tennessee State University Police department, there are grants for body warn cameras. In Detroit Michigan, released by the office of Michigan Rep. Brenda Lawrence stated the Department of Justice granted $1 million the Detroit Police Department which  is expected to cover the cost of 800 body-worn cameras for the department, which is working toward a goal of deploying up to 2,500 officers with the cameras over the next three years. Another example is that in Arizona, the U.S. Attorney John S. Leonardo, announced that $1,333,998 in federal grant from the department of justice have been awarded to four Arizona law enforcement agencies to support the use of body worn cameras by patrol officers. If there are grants from the Department of Justice for police departments to get body cameras then why aren’t police captains going to apply for them? This is why body cameras aren’t expensive due to grants from the Department of Justice.

Some officers and police department feel body worn cameras invade citizen’s privacy.  Most police officers and departments feel that body cameras records distraught victims, grieving family members, people suffering from illness and citizens exercising their right to free speech and civil disobedience stated by Eileen Sullivan. For example, on January 19^th, 32 year old man named Michael Moynihan during a demonstration to police violence his full name, address, phone number and birthdate were publicly available on a body camera video. Since most states have the have a policy to release all police-recorded video which is the open records act which means footage of the inside of a person’s home or at a hospital would be available. Another example of privacy invasion with body cameras is police in Seattle under the state’s open records law they decided to proactively release videos on a YouTube channel that have been overly censored according to Eileen Sullivan. Most police officers and police departments feel body cameras invade citizen’s privacy.

However some police officers, police departments and I feel that body cameras citizen privacy aren’t invade due to privacy laws. Police officers can record people in public place and does not require consent of the person being recorded. However, when an officer wearing a body camera enters a person’s home to investigate a possible criminal offense, the citizen may request that the video be turned off.  Since the police departments have to release information to the public due to Freedom of Information Act requests, some parts of the video may be required to remove images of minors and crime victims. According to the U.S Department of Justice, some police agencies have taken a stance that officers have a legal right to record inside a citizen’s house provided that they have legal justification to be in that persons house. Also according to the U.S department of Justice if an officer is inside the house while on a duty for service with the consent of the homeowner, or during the execution of a search warrant, officers may record. Since it is legal to record people in public by video, the audio recording of the citizen encountered may vary by state. There are 12 states that requires two-party consent to make an audio recording of a conversation between to people these states are  California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington.* Pennsylvania recently added an exception for police officers using body-worn cameras. For example of two-party consent was a situation in one of the two-party consent states where three men was stopped in under suspension, the officers was required to advise all the men that they are being recorded and one of the gentlemen refused to be recorded, another officer had to come and watch him while the other officers talked to the two gentlemen. Privacy laws are in place so that citizen’s privacy is protected.

Some police officers, police departments and I feel that body cameras can be allowed as evidence. According to the Federal Justice System in federal court video recordings as photographic evidence is governed by Rule 1001(2) of the Federal Rules on evidence. In order for video evidence to be allowed as evidence it has to have the following criteria’s: is the recording device was capable of recording the activity, is the recording is authentic and unchanged or not tampered with, the operator was competent to operate the recording device, and the persons being recorded are identified. Janne E. Gaub, David E. Choate, Natalie Todak, Charles M. Katz, and Michael D. White who work at the Arizona State University in the school of Criminology and Criminal Justice as administrator conducted research on officers perception on body cameras before and after they was deployed, they notice that body cameras helps the prosecutor office. I believe that body cameras being allowed and use as evidence is wonderful because it does help the prosecutor office build a concrete case on the person who committed the offence.  Also from research, I’ve notice that body cameras used in domestic violence case help show the truth to what had happen. Another example of how helpful body cameras are when people in domestic case aren’t willing to testify they shed the truth on what happen. Body cameras are the best thing for officers because they can be allowed as evidence and used as evidence.

Some police officers, police departments and I feel that body cameras can help prevent complaints. According to Sheriff Mike Williams, his sheriff office receives 700 to 800 complaints a year and that number could drop dramatically. If every police department had body cameras then complaints wouldn’t be high. The whole incident would be recorded and supported with recordings. Also from Captain Jeff Martinez with the Middle Tennessee State University police department he stated body cameras have cut down the amount of complaints against the department. Captain Martinez illustrated a time where his body camera help prove the complaint to be false. In California body cameras was implemented in 2012 and, in one year they saw a 60 percent drop in police use-of-force incidents and an 88 percent drop in complaints against officers. In the incident, the report recounted, an excessive-force charge against a police officer was dropped after video showed the teenager had jumped on the officer's back before he was hit in the face According to James Burger who’s a news reporter for Barkerfield Californian who had interviewed the officer. Since body cameras have been implemented study and reports have shown that body cameras have decrease the number of complaints the police department have faced each year.

Some police officers, police departments and I feel that body cameras can help change police behavior from the past to the future. In the past when police officers have stopped citizen they tend to over excise their use of authority with a citizen. When officers aren’t being watched they tend to excised their use of force on citizen. For example in Minnesota a police officer shot and killed an African American by the name Philando Castile after Mr. Castile alerted the officers he had a firearm on him the officer pulled his gun out and shot Mr. Castile. For another example the death of Eric Garner being choked out by the officers and Mr. Garner alerted the officer that he could not breathe, the officer continued to use excessive force. Both examples are situations that happen when officers weren’t being recorded. Therefore without body cameras officers tend be more aggressive because they’re not being watched.

In the future with all police agencies using body cameras officers’ behavior will change. They will think before they make a decision on using force on citizens because they are being watched. For example with the death of Eric Garner being choked out by an officer would not have happened if the officer was wearing a camera. Another example was with Philando Castile’s death after being shot multiple times by an officer all because he alerted the officer he did in fact have a gun in the car the officer would have handle the situation completely differently if he was wearing a body camera. In both examples given both officers in these tragic situations would have been more cautious in make a split decision to take a person life. While wearing a body camera I feel that police officers would be more professional. Therefore body cameras would change the officer’s behaviors because they are under supervision.

Body cameras are big top in the police community. Some officers and police departments feel that body worn cameras aren’t needed because body cameras are expensive. For example, according to Sheriff Mike Williams of the Jacksonville police department, the average cost of a body camera is $1000 apiece. His department has 1,600 officers who need to be equipped with them. When you do the math of 1,600 officers needing a body camera, it’ll cost about $1000. Then in total, his department will need to spend $1,600,000 just on body cameras. However, some police officers, police departments and I all feel that body cameras aren’t expensive due to grants. For example released by the office of Michigan Rep. Brenda Lawrence stated the Department of Justice granted $1 million the Detroit Police Department which  is expected to cover the cost of 800 body-worn cameras for the department, which is working toward a goal of deploying up to 2,500 officers with the cameras over the next three years. Some officers and police departments feel that body worn cameras aren’t needed because body cameras can invade citizen privacy. For example, on January 19th, 32 year old man named Michael Moynihan during a demonstration to police violence his full name, address, phone number and birthdate were publicly available on a body camera video. However some police officers, police departments and I feel that body cameras citizen privacy aren’t invade due to privacy laws. For example, according to the U.S department of Justice if an officer is inside the house while on a duty for service with the consent of the homeowner, or during the execution of a search warrant, officers may record. Some police officers, police departments and I feel that body cameras can be allowed as evidence. For example, in order for video evidence to be allowed as evidence it has to have the following criteria’s: is the recording device was capable of recording the activity, is the recording is authentic and unchanged or not tampered with, the operator was competent to operate the recording device, and the persons being recorded are identified. Some police officers, police departments and I feel that body cameras can help prevent complaints. For example, in California body cameras was implemented in 2012 and, in one year they saw a 60 percent drop in police use-of-force incidents and an 88 percent drop in complaints against officers. Some police officers, police departments and I feel that body cameras can help change police behavior from the past to the future. For example of past experience is the death of Eric Garner being choked out by the officers and Mr. Garner alerted the officer that he could not breathe, the officer continued to use excessive force. Lastly for example of future is while wearing a body camera I feel that police officers would be more professional. Therefore body cameras have more of a positive side then a negative side I feel.