Slashdot Mirror
Police Complaints Drop 93 Percent After Deploying Body Cameras (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader writes:A study from Cambridge University documents an immense drop in complaints against police officers when their departments began using body cameras. But even more surprising is that the data suggests everyone is on their best behavior whether the cameras are present or not. The data was collected in seven police departments, and represents over 1.4 million hours logged by 1,847 officers in 2014 and 2015; the researchers published their data last week in the journal Criminal Justice and Behavior. Officers were randomly assigned to wear or not wear cameras week by week (about half would be wearing them any given week), and had to keep them on during all encounters. The authors used complaints against police as a metric because they're easy to measure, an established practice in most police forces and give a good ballpark of the frequency of problematic behavior. In the year before the study, 1,539 complaints in total were filed against officers; at the end of the body camera experiment, the year had only yielded 113 complaints.
So you don't think that just perhaps the officers wearing cameras were behaving better knowing they were being recorded?
It seems to me that to place all of the blame on one side is rather narrow minded of you.
Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
When I saw this earlier, I wondered if it's A) the small group of inherently bad cops curbing their bad behavior now that they are being monitored; or B) fewer [perceived] opportunities for dishonestly reported complaints. I imagine it is some combination of the two.
...when everything is a crime, everyone is a criminal.
- Stupid behavior by the public
- Stupid behavior by the police force
- Stupid and frivolous complaints
- Random appearances of Big Foot
- Slowing down the implementation of police state where all activity is monitored
- Non-compliance with Privacy Laws
Police don't want to be filmed doing dumb shit.
Citizens stop acting like jackasses when they too are being filmed.
Situations don't escalate as frequently.
While I'll grant you that the data can be explained by competing theories, in this case only half the officers had cameras on. That certainly suggests that it's not limited to officer behavior.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
In fact, that would be the simplest way.
In order to believe that those not filed would have been mostly frivolous, it would mean that the would-be complainers would be very aware of the body cameras. I'd wager that the only party that is very aware of the body camera most of the time is the officer.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I think you mean "Oh, Science..."
The majority of studies show that accident rates go up, not down, when red-light cameras are put in place. Eliminating red-light cameras is the logical response.
This study shows that complaints go down, not up, when police use body cameras. The logical response would be to continue using body cameras and continue studying the results to verify that the effect isn't temporary or isolated.
Convictions and and plea deals change A LOT with body cameras. Before, you put someone in a suit and train them to say "Yes Sir/No Sir" in front of the judge. Then give the judge and everyone else the dog and pony show of how he's an A student and wants to start a business taking care of puppies. This trick doesn't work so well when there is video of a raving lunatic high on drugs taking swings at the cops.
Easy to verify: give randomly fake cameras to policemen where they know it's fake but people could not see it. If you still see the drop, then it's people stopping stupid behavior, if not then it's policemen behaving better.
Video of some good progressive thrash music
Too many folks are treating this problem as though it were binary; it's all the cops fault, or it's all the suspect's faults.
The problem is more nuanced than that. In part it's an ignorant and entitled public who think they can act like little shits and endanger others because of feelings. On the other, you have officers trained in what seem to be brutal methods but are, in fact are designed to minimize harm by controlling the situation. This works out mostly in the public's favor, although they'll never realize it.
You do have a few bad eggs, as with any profession. The untrained, the illsuited or the downright malicious. However, I'd suggest that these folks account for a small percentage of officers.
If it were just the first two factors, the problem could be relatively simply solved. The problem is that politicians get involved, folks who have a vested interest in making sure that the problem never gets solved. Thus, we end up where we are.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
We've put cameras everywhere. People now routinely carry them in their pockets. We have not photographed Bigfoot. We have no video of aliens. The existence of the Loch Ness monster is not a proven fact.
We have hours and hours of video of corrupt cops. We have video of cops shooting unarmed people. We have video of cops beating unarmed people. We have video of people being arrested and phones being smashed simply because cops believed they were being filmed.
Yes, when cops carry cameras, and their activities are recorded, and they know this, and they can not turn them off, their behavior changes. For the better.
Usually it is brutality causing a feedback of intensity. The police man stops a guy, he is tense, that makes the policeman tense, which makes the guy defensive, which make the policeman to be more aggressive, that makes the guy feeling like he will need to fight to protect himself, which causes the policeman to fight back... With this feedback loop someone will cross the line first.
Having the camera, makes the guy less defensive, as he knows if something does happen to him there will be evidence, and the same with the policeman. Which desculates the feedback loop, as it puts a gap in the emotional response, knowing whoever crosses the line first will be the one who loses.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Specifics on how exactly this is happening are unclear. Is the officer less confrontational to begin with, avoiding escalation? Or are suspects and complainants more wary of their conduct? Is it some combination of the two, or are even more factors involved? To determine these things would be a far more complex and subtle piece of research, but the study does suggest that officer behavior is probably the most affected, and that other effects flow from that.
It's a possibility. However, it goes against everything we know about how people work. Implied habitual behaviors, shared by a dept, radically changing virtually overnight is unlikely. In the extreme.
Even if you had one or two statistical outliers who did modify their behaviors in such a way, you'd have far more who get tripped up and shit would get on camera.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Red-light cameras are a tool for revenue generation with a growing body of evidence of their abuse. Police body cams however are supposed to be an impartial witness.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
The behavior already changed radically and virtually overnight. The only matter up for debate is why.
Wanna blow a conservative's mind?
Most Police are Union members.
I find it difficult to attribute a preponderance of the change onto the public. The individuals who might have normally filed a complaint would have no inclination to not file a complaint when the officer in question was not wearing a camera.
If the reduction in complaints matched the likely hood that a camera was involved, sure, I'd agree that the numbers track. I find it far more likely that the officers, knowing there's a chance that someone is recording (themselves, their partner, or another unit that shows up) are acting on their best behavior in all cases and thsi have a larger impact on the overall results.
The two factors together are likely what is influencing the outcomes.
Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
The behavior change stays when off camera for a simple reason: knowledge that data comparison can be used against you.
Officer john wears the camera one week and gets 3 complaints. Next week he doesn't wear the camera and gets 30 complaints. It's safe to infer he behaves like an asshole when off-camera, so, to counter that, he is NOT an asshole even when not wearing the camera.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Easy to verify: give randomly fake cameras to policemen where they know it's fake but people could not see it. If you still see the drop, then it's people stopping stupid behavior, if not then it's policemen behaving better.
Sounds great until you have a sensitive case where bystanders saw the cop had a camera but guess what, no footage. Conspiracy theorists will love that one, if you're wearing a camera it better be filming. If it's defective or off it's better that you phsyically remove it.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The majority of studies show that accident rates go up, not down, when red-light cameras are put in place.
Accident rates may go up (or stay the same) but death rates go down.
The increase in accidents is less dangerous relatively slow speed rear end collisions, while
side on higher speed, and so more deadly, rates go down.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/public...
While we're basking in the glow of the decrease in complaints against police, let's not lose sight of the fact that the paternalistic hand of body-cam surveillance is simply treating a symptom, not the disease that causes it. If our society's overall psychological health were such that citizens weren't routinely afraid of and/or abusive of police, and police didn't routinely brutalize minor criminals and even innocent citizens, then body cameras wouldn't be necessary. When good behaviour, respect, and mutual tolerance can only be guaranteed when "someone's watching", then we live in an immature and ailing culture. We need to address that problem; police body cameras are a dirty band-aid on a wound that ultimately requires disinfectant, stitches, antibiotics, and time to heal.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Blacks are shot by police in excess when compared to their % of population, but less than would be expected based on their % of violent criminal population.
Now is where SJWs yell that % of criminal population is a 'racist statistic'.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Citation? start here. While not being particularly effective at modifying driver behavior (see aforementioned link), they are also not impartial. While they may capture a vehicle and it's operator (maybe) in the middle of a crossing, they do not provide the context. They do not make the observation that the city rigged the yellow lights to be impractically short, they do not even make the observation that the light was in fact red prior to the driver entering the intersection.
This is in contrast to a police body cam which records the video and audio of a police encounter from start to conclusion providing full and usually easy to understand context.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
I would say it's a mix of all of the above. Not all cops are assholes and the public are angels. Each has it's share of bad apples. I've seen my fare share of videos where people antagonize police for a reaction.
Not the OP, but here is a citation.
However, I would say the jury is still out as this is a small effect and is one study. It looks like they reduce head on and head to side crashes that are caused when a car runs a red light, but they increase or do not effect rear end crashes when a lead car stops, but a following car does not stop. The head on and head to side crashes are deadlier than the rear end crashes (insert pinto, corsair and Kardashian jokes here).
You can also find studies, on the sites of red-light camera suppliers, that say red light cameras reduce accidents and that tax payers should support the red light camera industry with unlimited funding. Think of the children.
I just read that due to fear of the police, and a belief they won't help you anyhow --- calls to 911 are down drastically too.
Apparently being nice is good for business. Or being really brutal.
http://www.theatlantic.com/pol...
Want to blow a SJW's mind?
All the police departments with the BLM-related accusations and riots are run by Democrats, who also run the mayor's office, etc.. Most are also heavily black police forces, which is why it keeps being black cops being accused of racist behavior in some of these BLM "incidents".
The reason most police are union members is also related... their bosses love their union political contributors/supporters and the police are required to join in order to work in left-wing run cities.
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
Are you kidding, the escalation was planned from the day of application to the academy. Only the crafty ones get through with that agenda in mind, though - there are actually psych profiles that filter out the worst of the "gonna crack me some heads" abused children looking for payback.
Agreed. Very few people (police included) wake up and say "I want to be a jerk today, escalate lots of situations, get complaints filed against me, and be in a bad mood all day 'cos I didn't abuse someone enough."
Once they see being reasonable, and taking the professional stance, works as well or better than abusing the other person, they internalize the new behavior pretty fast. They probably go home feeling more professional and happier, camera or no camera.
I can help with that:
http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/s...
And here are links to the actual studies (11 of which are peer-reviewed).
https://www.motorists.org/issu...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Troll alert. This is apples and rotten oranges...
These body cameras are intrusive and over the top when it comes to personal privacy, but if you believe the news reports coming out of police departments, cops actually like them after having to wear them for a while. No more BS, "he said/she said" issues; And I'm sure that cops love not having to deal with paperwork over unfounded cop complaints.
OTOH, red light cameras (and speed cameras) were put in place as a "sin tax" revenue grab by government officials/councilmen/legislators that usually had personal vendettas against rude/aggressive drivers. Those naive officials were easy prey for the real bandits - companies like ATS and Redflex, whose CEO was bribing city officials to get the revenue generators installed in as many places as possible.
Body cameras: Enormous drop in police complaints, and both sides like the extra clarity they provide to litigious and/or life or death situations. Red light cameras: mixed safety results, bogged-down municipal courts, confusion, outright corruption, and even murder generation.
Of course these days, who cares about facts. Perception is reality...
Alternately: while being polite for the week with the camera on, he realized there is a better way to interact with people, and it gets better results.
I doubt many police like getting tons of complaints, so he was happier when his complaint count went down.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
If we take your approach towards the burden of proof, any defendant rejecting his guilt would have to present evidence of his innocence.
Thus your approach is incorrect. Fail.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The whole thing is a ginned up controversy created to get black people to go out and vote in the same numbers they did for Obama. The side effects are a significantly increased murder rate and rates of violent crime in urban areas...and the reduction in 911 calls that you point out.
The interesting part is that I am not sure that it is going to accomplish its intended goal. But we'll have the blowback for years to come.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
"Now is where SJWs yell that % of criminal population is a 'racist statistic'."
What about the statistic that minorities are stopped, ticketes or incarcerated at much higher rates for the same non-violent offenses?
Is that racist? Against whom?
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
I think it's a reasonable guess that the majority of serious abuse is a small number of repeat offenders simply because that's how it is everywhere else. Most criminal activity is the same way. It's not like every person steals one car or commits a burglary in his lifetime. It's a small percentage of people who do it over and over again who run up the stats.
The problem that seems to be more universal is the willingness of all of the other police to cover for the worst offenders. A cop who probably wouldn't unnecessarily beat a suspect still seems very likely to lie to protect a fellow officer who would. Weirdly, police spokesmen like to use the phrase, "A few bad apples..." to describe the problem. They don't seem to know what the rest of that saying is or how well it applies to them.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
Officer john wears the camera one week and gets 3 complaints. Next week he doesn't wear the camera and gets 30 complaints. It's safe to infer he behaves like an asshole when off-camera, so, to counter that, he is NOT an asshole even when not wearing the camera.
An alternate explanation would be that people don't make as many false complaints when there's video evidence available.
And the affirmative claim (implied) is that there is some sort of hypocracy to supporting police body cameras but opposing red light cameras.
So it is your burden to show that they are substantially similar in effect such that one should support both or neither.
I'm sure there's a fair amount of people out there who also made spurious complaints against the police, and if recorded wouldn't make that complaint as well.
I don't think the bad behaviour leading to complaints is entirely on one side - I'm fairly certain that the cameras cut down on naughty police behaviour and also on false claims by the non-police.
To be honest - there are some pretty strong arguments to wear the camera by "good" cops, in that it serves to protect them from bad people.
..........FULL STOP.
Likely, but complaints dropped even when the officer wasn't wearing a camera: "But even more surprising is that the data suggests everyone is on their best behavior whether the cameras are present or not... Officers were randomly assigned to wear or not wear cameras week by week (about half would be wearing them any given week), and had to keep them on during all encounters."
It is also possible that even though an officer was not wearing a camera, they were on their best behavior for fear that another officer who was wearing a camera might show up to assist and capture their bad behavior.
WTB [sig], PST!!!
Likely, but complaints dropped even when the officer wasn't wearing a camera: "But even more surprising is that the data suggests everyone is on their best behavior whether the cameras are present or not... Officers were randomly assigned to wear or not wear cameras week by week (about half would be wearing them any given week), and had to keep them on during all encounters."
So... how exactly does the average perp (who isn't exactly a cyberpunk hacker-type dude) actually know if there was or wasn't a camera present? Probably wouldn't.
It's also highly likely that once reaching jail, said perp would likely try to lodge a complaint, whereupon the jailer would simply say "you know they're wearing body cameras nowadays, right?" This would cause said perp to drop the complaint, knowing that if it were all recorded, his story would most likely carry little-to-no water.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Does this really matter? Isn't it good enough that using body cameras results in a 93% drop in complaints? The only people who care why are those sensitive about having their pre-conceived notions invalidated (that police officers are bad, or that certain citizens like to file false complaints).
Why should we conduct an experiment which risks more police abuse or false complaints resulting in possible unjust deaths or unjust suspensions, just so people with a political axe to grind can say "I told you so"?
Ahhh... sometimes I like to believe in the good of humanity as well.
"Now is where SJWs yell that % of criminal population is a 'racist statistic'."
What about the statistic that minorities are stopped, ticketes or incarcerated at much higher rates for the same non-violent offenses? Is that racist? Against whom?
If the city, town or state is a majority of minorities you're going to be hard pressed to find statistics that show Caucasians being stopped more than minorities. When they did the Ferguson study that said the Police department was targeting AA's they forget to include that African Americans were 70% of the town's population.
I think that is the point. The officers are in know enough know exactly when they are being recorded. And yet we do not see any statistical anomalies that show that they act differently. But all the criminals likely know is that some big body-cam roll out happened last year and everything is not being recorded. It is likely how everyone drives slower because their might be a cop around the next corner. In this situation, it is exactly because their is never any change that outcome that primary change must of been in the behavior of the criminals.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
Filtering out the psychos during application would work, except that the Stanford prison experiment showed us that even if you put psychologically healthy people in police roles, they get abusive.
You don't have to believe, you just have to draw eyes on the wall...
Wired
New Scientist
Scientific American
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
Milgram was the best, all it takes is an authority figure telling someone to be a monster and 9/10 will comply. The Blue Line is a logical extension - it's better to be a monster than to rat out your buddies, especially those in charge.
which could be solved very quickly with a simple reg that no city would have the stones to make.
In any and all cases where a camera has been issued to the officer
1 the officer shall do a functional check of said camera before each shift and shall get the camera replaced if it does not function (to include a check of any and all storage devices) before leaving the issuing area.
2 if any complaints are filed or a reportable incident occurs and the resulting recording is missing or otherwise corrupt then the courts shall find for the civilian (and all materials belonging to the civilian shall be returned intact or replaced).
Im not sure if the language is correct exactly but no vid then
A the officer loses any case
B Free GOJF card for somebody that gets arrested
I see an AC has already responded to you but let me add a comment since I've recently found some reports about New York City's stop & frisk.
Data archives for 2003 - 2015 are at http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/h...
Out of 5 MILLION stops in ~12 years, 25% were young black men but they make up NOT EVEN TWO PERCENT of NYC's population.
The percentage of stops annually where the suspect was found to be innocent was never below 75% and usually above 85%
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
I was told by a defense attorney that my state or maybe the city I was in used to have cruiser dashcams (which would have helped greatly in my case), but they were removed because statistically in court it tended to hurt the prosecution more than it did the defense. I guess someone did an analysis. Police routinely lie on the stand and any audio or video footage makes that much harder to do.
To anyone living in the real world this shouldn't be very surprising of course, but most people probably have had too little contact with real police officers to know this. There is a strong tendency for people to believe in the police image as portrayed in TV and film. But those people are actors who themselves don't really know what it is like to actually be a cop.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.