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.

35 of 332 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Of course by ThomasBHardy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  2. Correlation? by dunnomattic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Correlation? by dunnomattic · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I also wonder if this helps to improve overall morale, which I believe has been generally abysmal for the last three years. I suspect conscientious officers not only bear the mental burdens of their own actions, but of their fellow officers as well. Knowing that any officer in their department making a visibly questionable arrest or using excessive/deadly force can bring a town to its knees and undo any good the collective department has done to that point has got to be discouraging. A boost in morale can only do good things, both for the officers and the communities they police.

      --
      ...when everything is a crime, everyone is a criminal.
    2. Re:Correlation? by Baloroth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, both of them make sense together, given what you said. Citizens (particularly those likely to misbehave or file complaints) may have heard that officers in their district are wearing cameras, but don't know which cops are wearing them, so they behave as if all cops they encounter are. The cops, OTOH, always know when they are wearing a camera, so such a great drop in complaints makes less sense from their side. Most likely, of course, it's a combination of factors.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    3. Re:Correlation? by rlp · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Spoke to a local police chief. When someone wants to file a complaint, he offers to review the patrol car / body cam video with them. If its a legit complaint, he wants to see the video. If not, the offer to review the video usually causes the complaint to be withdrawn.

      --
      [Insert pithy quote here]
  3. It goes both ways... by mythosaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:It goes both ways... by apoc.famine · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wonder if this doesn't drive a secondary effect as well. It's not uncommon for a limited number of individuals to be the source of many police interactions. If a lot of those interactions are hostile, on the part of one or the other party, (or both) it creates a toxic relationship. If these interactions have a damper, such as a camera and some better behavior some percentage of the time, I wonder if that doesn't have a calming effect.
       
      Whether or not it's my fault, if I'm getting harassed by the cops all the time, I'm likely going to be an asshole when I see them. But if half the time they are friendly and respectful, just doing their job, it dampens the hate. If half of the time I see that I'm on camera and I bite my tongue and say, "Yeah, sure officer. No problems here." those officers are less fired up and cautious the next time we meet. I could easily see this being a positive behavior feedback loop, where before we had a negative behavior feedback loop.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
  4. Re:Of course by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!
  5. Re:Oh, Democracy... by GrumpySteen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  6. Not just complaints by ebonum · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  7. Re:If you didn't RTFA... by lorinc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  8. Stop treating this like it were binary by grasshoppa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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!
    1. Re:Stop treating this like it were binary by ausekilis · · Score: 3, Funny

      In part it's an ignorant and entitled public who think they can act like little shits and endanger others because of feelings.

      I'm not entitled... it's just that my feelings are more important than yours. ;-)

    2. Re:Stop treating this like it were binary by Bugler412 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "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." the "good" officers know who these people are, and they are made less good by allowing them to continue to operate in their midst lowering the trust level of their entire organization.

  9. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  10. Re:Of course by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  11. Re:Oh, Democracy... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 5, Informative

    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 ... with negative results.
  12. Re:Of course by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The behavior already changed radically and virtually overnight. The only matter up for debate is why.

  13. Re:Funny thing is by Kaenneth · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wanna blow a conservative's mind?

    Most Police are Union members.

  14. Re:Of course by ThomasBHardy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  15. Re:Of course by war4peace · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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)
  16. Re:If you didn't RTFA... by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  17. Re:Oh, Democracy... by starless · · Score: 5, Informative

    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...

  18. Treating the symptom by jenningsthecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  19. Re: Of course by HornWumpus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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'
  20. Re:Oh, Democracy... by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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 ... with negative results.
  21. Re:Oh, Democracy... by bjdevil66 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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...

  22. Re:Of course by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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."
  23. Re:Of course by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  24. Goes both ways by spineboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  25. Re:Of course by tattood · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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!!!
  26. Re:Of course by Penguinisto · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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?
  27. Re:If you didn't RTFA... by Solandri · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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"?

  28. Re:Of course by Dread_ed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.
  29. Re: Of course by haruchai · · Score: 4, Informative

    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