So now that thugs behaving thuggishly is being recorded...it's not as good an idea any more.https://www.themaven.net/bluelivesmatter/news/bodycam-advocates-now-claim-body-cameras-are-a-threat-to-civil-rights-RZI2tR4e9UaYyZdz6Ce3pA?full=1
Police body cams are a problem now?
- Thread starter Gilligan
- Start date
So now that thugs behaving thuggishly is being recorded...it's not as good an idea any more.https://www.themaven.net/bluelivesmatter/news/bodycam-advocates-now-claim-body-cameras-are-a-threat-to-civil-rights-RZI2tR4e9UaYyZdz6Ce3pA?full=1
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
Real advocates of body cameras worn by police understand that while the footage may be used to identify cases of misconduct by potentially bad officers, it can, and should, be used to exonerate officers being wrongfully accused of a crime. It must work both ways for it to be fair.
That being said, the quote by Gilligan is a bit of a stretch by the author as the report they are talking about goes into the fact that officers are reviewing body camera footage before making reports. Their reports should reflect their experience in a particular situation and not be based on body camera footage. Are they likely to match up most of the time? Sure but I also will bring up the case in Baltimore and elsewhere where the 30 seconds of footage recorded prior to pressing the button on the camera shows an officer planting drugs, only to arrest someone for them. All while other officers watch. If the officer has unrestricted access to that footage, he's more likely to create a scenario where benefit of the doubt can be had by a jury (if it came to that).
That being said, the quote by Gilligan is a bit of a stretch by the author as the report they are talking about goes into the fact that officers are reviewing body camera footage before making reports. Their reports should reflect their experience in a particular situation and not be based on body camera footage. Are they likely to match up most of the time? Sure but I also will bring up the case in Baltimore and elsewhere where the 30 seconds of footage recorded prior to pressing the button on the camera shows an officer planting drugs, only to arrest someone for them. All while other officers watch. If the officer has unrestricted access to that footage, he's more likely to create a scenario where benefit of the doubt can be had by a jury (if it came to that).
Last edited:
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Yes: It's against their civil rights to use a body cam against them.
It's fine to use them against cops though.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
But that's not really what's being discussed, nor what is identified in the report they link to. The report does not say body cameras in general are a threat to civil rights (as the author states), but does say that unrestricted access to that footage prior to writing their reports can alter their perception or accounts of the incident that was recorded.
Why should a police officer NOT review body camera footage?
Defense attorneys love minor discrepancies in officer statements as it allows them to paint the officers as unreliable or liars. Facts and consistent witness statements are the defense attorneys enemy.
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
No one is saying they can't review it at all, but why should an officer be allowed unrestricted access to review footage prior to writing a report?
Grumpy
Well-Known Member
Sure seems like you danced around the question..
Why not ?
You got to ask yourself: Why do you want to see inaccurate police reports ?
Chris0nllyn
Well-Known Member
You're right. If we change up the reason behind officers wearing the cameras in the first place. I don't recall the argument that police need them to be sure their own accounts of a particular situation line up.
It's my understanding that they are used for transparency.
Allowing unlimited access can actually produce innaccurate reports as evidenced in the report itself pointing to research that shows "that watching video replays can easily change people’s memories, often subconsciously."
https://www.teamupturn.org/reports/2017/the-illusion-of-accuracy
Because the question asked was silly. No one is questioning the cops' ability to review footage in entirety. Which was the question.
In fact, the report at the heart of this thread specifically says:
They're actively stating that officer CAN, and SHOULD be allowed to view the footage. The contention is
PsyOps
Pixelated
So, he gets his facts right?
The officer should be allowed unrestricted access because he or she is going to be the person on the witness stand being interrogated by a defense attorney at any minor inaccuracies.
PsyOps
Pixelated
That's point behind seeing what actually happened, rather than rely strictly on memory. If I remember something a certain way, then watch what actually happened, that will change how I remembered it, and I will have a more accurate report based on FACTS, rather than my flawed memory.
I look at it this way... Cops have an extremely stressful job, where adrenaline can rule how you perceive things. Have a about 150 events happen in one incident, and it all happens in a matter of minutes. You expect a cop to rely on his/her memory when writing a report on that incident? Have this happen a dozen times a day, and a cop's memory is going to be really messed up.
Last edited:
General Lee
Well-Known Member
You know how many "incidents" a typical officer handles in a shift? They are human, nothing wrong reviewing an incident 10-12 hours prior to recall the fine details he needs to put in a report.