Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Does anyone think this will really happen?

  1. #1
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    Does anyone think this will really happen?

    http://www.mynorthwest.com/category/...-body-cameras/

    Seattle police officers could one day be wearing tiny video cameras on their lapel or on their ear.

    It's one of the ideas Seattle Police Chief John Diaz is exploring as a way to make his department more transparent, following recent incidents that have raised concerns about officers use of excessive force.
    Notice in the article how the Union claims this will have to be negotiated in the contract. So who really does run our PD's, the Chief and the City, or the Union?


    BTW, a body cam isn't a bad idea for those who Openly Carry, especially if part of a group and there are multiple cameras capturing any "contact" with police. Even better than just audio.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  2. #2
    Regular Member Gilead_Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    mid-world (somewhere between tacoma and seattle)
    Posts
    80
    when it comes to govt / city/ state employees the unions always run things... part of the reason why we have such lovely deficits.....
    I aim with my eye... I shoot with my mind... I kill with my heart....
    - The Gunslinger's Litany (paraphrased)

    It has been brought to my attention that the stick figure decals on
    the back windows of vehicles are NOT pedestrian 'kill' scores, but are
    actually meant to represent family members. I'll be removing mine
    ASAP to avoid any further confusion.........

    First comes smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire.

  3. #3
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    I think its inevitable, but not necessarily imminent. The real question is not IF it will happen, its when, and who will be accountable for maintaining and archiving the footage for FOIA requests. Unless you have an independent body in charge of that portion, "ops we lost it/cant find it" will still be an answer when the recording is less than flattering for the officer(s) actions.

  4. #4
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by FMCDH View Post
    I think its inevitable, but not necessarily imminent. The real question is not IF it will happen, its when, and who will be accountable for maintaining and archiving the footage for FOIA requests. Unless you have an independent body in charge of that portion, "ops we lost it/cant find it" will still be an answer when the recording is less than flattering for the officer(s) actions.
    Would be nice if the technology develops to the point where these cameras transmit all their info in real time to a central server as well as maintain the info in local memory. This would make it more difficult to tamper with it. 911 recordings seem to be pretty free of tampering, at least so far.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  5. #5
    Regular Member Squeak's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Port Orchard,
    Posts
    827
    Quote Originally Posted by FMCDH View Post
    I think its inevitable, but not necessarily imminent. The real question is not IF it will happen, its when, and who will be accountable for maintaining and archiving the footage for FOIA requests. Unless you have an independent body in charge of that portion, "ops we lost it/cant find it" will still be an answer when the recording is less than flattering for the officer(s) actions.
    They don't even say 'OOPS!' anymore.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran Lurkus Maximus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stanwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Would be nice if the technology develops to the point where these cameras transmit all their info in real time to a central server as well as maintain the info in local memory. This would make it more difficult to tamper with it. 911 recordings seem to be pretty free of tampering, at least so far.
    Here's one made by Taser with some evidence control:

    http://www.taser.com/products/law/Pages/TASERAXON.aspx

    Excerpt:
    SYNAPSE ETM - Evidence Transfer Manager

    The SYNAPSE ETM™ Evidence Transfer Manager is a docking station that simultaneously recharges the AXON Tactical Computer (ATC) and uploads all data captured from the officer’s point-of-view during his/her shift to EVIDENCE.COM. SYNAPSE ETM™ ensures that evidence handling is completely secured and untainted.
    -----------------------------
    "Get a shot off fast. This upsets him long enough to let you make your second shot perfect." Lazarus Long

  7. #7
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by FMCDH View Post
    I think its inevitable, but not necessarily imminent. The real question is not IF it will happen, its when, and who will be accountable for maintaining and archiving the footage for FOIA requests. Unless you have an independent body in charge of that portion, "ops we lost it/cant find it" will still be an answer when the recording is less than flattering for the officer(s) actions.
    'The video recording device was rendered inoperative due to the violent assault on this officer that took place'

  8. #8
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705
    Some Seattle PD officers were wearing cameras made by http://www.vievu.com/ a while back, testing them out.

    It is still doubtful that the union will take LEO accountability lying down, though.

    One of the "selling points" some are using is the "dual use" ability of these cameras as dash cam and body cam, but you KNOW that if things are getting hairy they will forget the camera on the dash, and we'll have no better than what we have now.

    Even if they wear a cam their full shift - how many times do you think we would hear "I forgot to turn the camera on?"
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    • • • Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Faciémus!• • •

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    923
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Would be nice if the technology develops to the point where these cameras transmit all their info in real time to a central server as well as maintain the info in local memory. This would make it more difficult to tamper with it. 911 recordings seem to be pretty free of tampering, at least so far.


    Also once uploaded to the server it should instantly be made available to everyone via public website. You click on a date and it will have a list of all officers that were working that day, you click an officers name and the videos are all there for the whole shift broken up to one hour segments.
    A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.- Thomas Jefferson March 4 1801

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    13
    if the upload is real time, how long would it take for some programmer to tap that information and update a realtime map of there locations? bad idea.

  11. #11
    Regular Member FMCDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by tbrenke View Post
    if the upload is real time, how long would it take for some programmer to tap that information and update a realtime map of there locations? bad idea.
    Real time transmission only for the purpose of archiving isn't really fees-able anyway due to the various environmental and situational circumstances that would degrade the signal beyond usability in a court of law. Local storage on a sealed system that the individual officer cannot access would be the way to go to keep the usability high.

    For these types of units, transmitting would only be used for real time incident updating to a command center or 911 dispatch, much as they are used by some of our troops.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    We should require police to record everything. It should get to the point where any police testimony not supported by audio/video because the recorder was conveniently "not turned on" is considered tantamount to hearsay.

    My fantasy courtroom encounter:

    Judge: "Officer, do you really expect anyone in this courtroom to believe one word you have to say, in light of the fact that you are unable to provide corroborating video evidence as is standard for and expected of someone in your line of employ?"

    Cop: "Yes."

    Judge: "Well, tough. Case dismissed."
    Last edited by marshaul; 02-06-2011 at 03:12 PM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by tbrenke View Post
    if the upload is real time, how long would it take for some programmer to tap that information and update a realtime map of there locations? bad idea.
    Not really when they can stick GPS units on your car without permission. Why not track them?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  14. #14
    Regular Member killchain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    788
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    We should require police to record everything. It should get to the point where any police testimony not supported by audio/video because the recorder was conveniently "not turned on" is considered tantamount to hearsay.

    My fantasy courtroom encounter:

    Judge: "Officer, do you really expect anyone in this courtroom to believe one word you have to say, in light of the fact that you are unable to provide corroborating video evidence as is standard for and expected of someone in your line of employ?"

    Cop: "Yes."

    Judge: "Well, tough. Case dismissed."
    What about civilians?

    Let's throw their testimonies out in court because it wasn't recorded.

    That idea is silly.
    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by killchain View Post
    What about civilians?

    Let's throw their testimonies out in court because it wasn't recorded.

    That idea is silly.
    It is silly to expect officers to bring recording devices into encounters they have plenty of training and equipment to prepare for, on the job, and then to hold them accountable when those recordings conveniently disappear and are unable to corroborate oral testimony which directly contradicts the defendants'?

    Comparing cops to citizens in this context is silly.

    Think about it like this:

    Is it reasonable to expect police to carry recorders, the same as we expect them to carry identification? I don't see why not.

    Assuming police are, then, expected to carry and use recorders, should the convenient absence, in cases of contested testimony, of those recordings not be viewed as suspicious? Of course it is suspicious.

    I'm not talking exclusionary rule status, I'm just saying, it is suspicious to the point that I would consider it prima facie evidence that a cop is lying, if a recording which was made (or should have been made) is conveniently absent to corroborate his testimony.
    Last edited by marshaul; 02-07-2011 at 02:22 AM.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    SNIP I'm not talking exclusionary rule status, I'm just saying, it is suspicious to the point that I would consider it prima facie evidence that a cop is lying, if a recording which was made (or should have been made) is conveniently absent to corroborate his testimony.
    An appellate court justice in the South (Alabama? Mississippi?) took notice of the phenomena of conveniently missing recordings in his dissent last year. Conveniently missing recordings or "technical problems" are becoming so common even judges are noticing.

  17. #17
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    An appellate court justice in the South (Alabama? Mississippi?) took notice of the phenomena of conveniently missing recordings in his dissent last year. Conveniently missing recordings or "technical problems" are becoming so common even judges are noticing.
    Also included in the "tech problems" fold should be the instances where the patrol car is conveniently parked in such a manner that the video only records highway traffic or roadside foliage while the officer keeps hollering into his body mic "Stop Resisting". All along he's beating the crap out of the motorist.

    FWIW, the shooting of John T. Williams in Seattle took place completely out of camera view. Maybe it's time to have multiple cameras in order to record activity on all four sides of a patrol car.

    For those police officers that might complain, remember, it could also vindicate their actions as well if there's conflicting testamony. That is unless they really ARE looking for an area out of the camera view to conduct their "interview".
    Last edited by amlevin; 02-07-2011 at 09:26 AM.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  18. #18
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Also included in the "tech problems" fold should be the instances where the patrol car is conveniently parked in such a manner that the video only records highway traffic or roadside foliage while the officer keeps hollering into his body mic "Stop Resisting". All along he's beating the crap out of the motorist.

    FWIW, the shooting of John T. Williams in Seattle took place completely out of camera view. Maybe it's time to have multiple cameras in order to record activity on all four sides of a patrol car.

    For those police officers that might complain, remember, it could also vindicate their actions as well if there's conflicting testamony. That is unless they really ARE looking for an area out of the camera view to conduct their "interview".
    +1.

    As someone who spends most of their day constantly monitored by several cameras, personally I welcome them. I'm not generally in the habit of blatantly doing things at work I know I ought not do, so I realize there's a much better chance after an incident that those cameras will be my friends and not my enemies. And so far that's been correct. I would *think* good, honest cops out to do their best would have a similar attitude.

    As a citizen, I'd have no problem with more cameras on police cars either. They'd (generally) only be recording outdoors, which is a public area. The comment was made above about body cams being an invasion of privacy for the citizen, since the inside of your home, etc, would potentially be on display, ESPECIALLY with any kind of "public access" centralized storage. That would also be a very easy way for nefarious types to "case the joint" and looks for juicy targets to rob, especially if they know the resident just got hauled off to jail.
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  19. #19
    Regular Member John Hardin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Snohomish, Washington, USA
    Posts
    684
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    As someone who spends most of their day constantly monitored by several cameras, personally I welcome them. I'm not generally in the habit of blatantly doing things at work I know I ought not do,
    ...like picking your nose.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Metalhead47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Whidbey, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Quote Originally Posted by John Hardin View Post
    ...like picking your nose.
    ... nothing in the SOP against that....
    It is very wise to not take a watermelon lightly.

  21. #21
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Metalhead47 View Post
    +1.

    As someone who spends most of their day constantly monitored by several cameras, personally I welcome them. I'm not generally in the habit of blatantly doing things at work I know I ought not do,

    Like "adjusting yourself" no matter how uncomfortable you are?
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  22. #22
    Regular Member Stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Pasco, WA, ,
    Posts
    489
    Well, if they're going to put license plate scanning cameras on cruisers, why not put cameras on the cars that provide 360 degrees of recordable viewing. And remote cameras on the officers???
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	4ce405c7070c4.preview-300.gif 
Views:	78 
Size:	38.9 KB 
ID:	5155  

  23. #23
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    Like "adjusting yourself" no matter how uncomfortable you are?
    The older I get the less discreet I am. Heheh
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •