Missouri bill would bar access to police camera footage

Here's a good open records resource for individuals who show up and "contribute" on every thread imaginable: https://ohioauditor.gov/publications/13SunshineManual.pdf

Chapter 2 (A), (pages 22-31 of the pdf) is particularly valuable for potential mimicking by those who claim to have influence in MO politics.

LMTD said:

25 bucks an hour to research the 911 call, record it on to a cd in .wav form plus postage was the response to a 911 mwg call.

No estimate on number of hours it would take.

I am not saying it is legal at all, I am saying it is reality for a citizen.

If you do not have the time to take off work and go down to the office only between 9 and 4 then you pretty much are at their mercy or have a lawyer do it.

Click to expand...

There's no doubt, record requesting can be a undertaking if one is desiring to examine more than one record.

Normally, agencies can decide how a record is produced, especially electronic records.


610.029 notes:
For purposes of this section, a usable electronic format shall allow, at a minimum, viewing and printing of records. However, if the public governmental body keeps a record on a system capable of allowing the copying of electronic documents into other electronic documents, the public governmental body shall provide data to the public in such electronic format, if requested.

I would think that just listening to a 911 recording is a "viewing" .. but it maybe that no court has ruled that way. Its clear the intent of the legislature; that e-records SHALL (ie mandatory) be available for inspection.

This is better than my state's FOIA although I've only run into this issue a few times .. where they ask for like 200 bucks to make a DAT e-file into a hardcopy pdf version. Yet I asked for the actual DAT file (not a hardcopy of it) and they claimed that it MAY contain exempt information ~ of course, the law requires them to more than guess about it...some of those cases are pending appeals as we speak.

Sparsely populated counties have issues at the courthouse,too.

I was doing some background research on a case and went to the local courthouse to review civil/criminal cases......I asked the clerks to point me to the card catalog and/or computer....they stated the judge had to approve it. I requested them to ask the judge if I could review them (none were sealed cases). The judge came out asked who I was and why I needed to see the material....explained I was doing some research....he wanted to know the individual, told him, he said they had nothing in cases on this person and walked backed to his chambers. Requested once more to view the material; the judge came out, requested the bailiff to escort me out of the courthouse or be placed under arrest for contempt. The bailiff came out, said I could handle this the easy way or the hard way......I chose the easier way.

I got in my vehicle, called a couple of attorneys I was working with...they were flabbergasted. They asked me to leave and they would make some phone calls. I got a call the next morning from one of my attorneys and they stated to go back.....if it happened again, stand and be in contempt.

i went back....the judge came out again and stated the same...who then made some comment about some people can't learn....called the bailiff....the bailiff came out, started to handcuff me, I gave the business card for my attorney and requested they contact them immediately. After sitting in the holding cell off the court-room for about 90 minutes; the bailiff came to get me and I got to see the records and copy the info I needed.

The judge did not seek re-election, rumors were he received a phone call and internal written warning from the MOAG (Jay Nixon). I had never had to deal with him again. Since then, I have been back and the clerks have been fabulous to deal with. this was about 10 years ago.

There needs to be some safe guard as to the information on the Cop Cam that people can access. Example your wife or girlfriend is raped by sick0 Sam and before you can handle it legally or not said wife or GF is is interviewed at the scene and all is caught on copper cam. Sick0 Sams best friend Perv Petey makes a request for this video information.
No i do not think public access to ALL copper cop footage should be allowed. With that said I am not sure how this all should be handled. I am in the IT business for a living so I completely understand the hundreds of thousands of terabytes of data that will be accumulated. This is a huge problem and before the government slaps copper cams on every cop alot of thought should go into this it is not simple. Where will the data be stored? Who has access? How long will it be kept? How will it be used ( will they scan it later and find other things to charge you with? ) Are the police even capable of keeping all this data safe and secure? The list goes on and on. So before anyone rushes in to grant access to anyone or denied it someone needs to address the fundamental rules of engagement for how all this data will be handled.

Cops turn of cameras if they think the recording will show them doing what they think are illegal acts. Then, even if they are recorded doing illegal things the cop lawyer (union thug) and the prosecutor/cop shop will work diligently to justify the acts. Failing that, the recording may end up missing, corrupted, or the camera was not on, turned off, or broken.

Fox2Now.com and KMOV.com have the story of a former cop of the year for STLPD turning off a cop car camera while six cops were "detaining" a citizen. Watch the Fox2Now story the cop lawyer (union thug) is very believable.

I delete footage every day, takes a few minutes. If there is data to be retained because it is part of a investigation, then retain the data, heck hire your 16 y/o son to do the tedious work, under supervision of course. If a typical cops' day is like my little local cop shops' day hours of a cop sitting in a church parking lot waiting for a speeder is data not required to be retained. If a post production tech can blur out/bleep out faces and sounds then a cop shop can too.

What I find unsettling is that the major news outlets in the state are not screaming foul...hmm, interesting...no?

I believe the footage should be made readily available initially to the person confronted by the officers, his legal counsel, the judge, and the officer who is supposedly "enforcing" the law. and that is it until AFTER a trial in a court of law finds either party to be guilty of crimes. after that, public domain, everyone can see, end of story.

also if you call officers to your residence, and they are recording, it could be taken as because you called them you gave permission for the inside of your residence/property to be recorded and placed on public record. after they arrive I would specifically request that they stop recording to prevent any footage of your residence/property, and belongings from becoming public record. or at least request that VISUAL recording be removed.

Again none of this addresses any of the under lying problems regarding MO cops using body cams . in a giant rush to get cop cams there is many things to be sorted out before you can address the data access issue. A bill regarding access is putting the cart before the horse.

Renegadez said:

Again none of this addresses any of the under lying problems regarding MO cops using body cams . in a giant rush to get cop cams there is many things to be sorted out before you can address the data access issue. A bill regarding access is putting the cart before the horse.

Click to expand...

The foundation of "cops with cameras" is who has access to the data. The data must be available to any and all who request it. Cops can obscure private data that does not affect the situation/incident captured there in. In other words, I do not need to know your name, or face, to see you breaking the law. But I do need to know the cop's name and know his face if he is recorded breaking the law, or arresting you for you breaking the law.

OC I have much respect for you I still believe alot of issue with how why when and where these cams will be used needs addressed before we even discuss the cops having them or putting them to use. Start at the beginning then access of data and how it can be used. Ground rules are needed in place before they start even thinking of handing all these out. no grounds rules are set as far as i can tell if I am wrong please let me know.

Renegadez said:

OC I have much respect for you I still believe alot of issue with how why when and where these cams will be used needs addressed before we even discuss the cops having them or putting them to use. ...

Click to expand...

Thanks, and ditto.

We agree more than we disagree I think.

Renegadez said:

OC I have much respect for you I still believe alot of issue with how why when and where these cams will be used needs addressed before we even discuss the cops having them or putting them to use. Start at the beginning then access of data and how it can be used. Ground rules are needed in place before they start even thinking of handing all these out. no grounds rules are set as far as i can tell if I am wrong please let me know.

Click to expand...

Whether or not cop cams become "the thing" in Missouri, Missouri badly needs open records law reforms FIRST. Already many municipalities use their ability to charge for research as a way of dissuading citizens from being watchdogs.

I'm not saying Ohio's are the best, but take a look at the Sunshine Laws here for some inspiration.

Like-minded citizens and groups like MO First ought to be on the bleeding edge of such changes.

BB62 said:

Whether or not cop cams become "the thing" in Missouri, Missouri badly needs open records law reforms FIRST. Already many municipalities use their ability to charge for research as a way of dissuading citizens from being watchdogs.

I'm not saying Ohio's are the best, but take a look at the Sunshine Laws here for some inspiration.

Like-minded citizens and groups like MO First ought to be on the bleeding edge of such changes.

Click to expand...

I agree 100% with as you know I already had trouble with the SunShine Law and had to seek your guidance in getting the job done. One of my main concern with the camthing is how it comes into play against your rights as anything COP videos can and will be used against you at a date and time we see fit agenda. I just think after fergie there is a way overboard movement to jump the gun so to speak and rush rush hurry to get these cams in place without enough research and rules on how they will be used from the top down that is my main point.

Renegadez said:

I agree 100% with as you know I already had trouble with the SunShine Law and had to seek your guidance in getting the job done. One of my main concern with the camthing is how it comes into play against your rights as anything COP videos can and will be used against you at a date and time we see fit agenda. I just think after fergie there is a way overboard movement to jump the gun so to speak and rush rush hurry to get these cams in place without enough research and rules on how they will be used from the top down that is my main point.

Click to expand...

We already know that STLPD has cops who will "fiddle" with cams depending on what might be captured. Sunshine is the enemy of tyranny...even if the tyranny is miniscule in nature.