Slashdot Mirror
Can Technology Prevent Cops From Forgetting To Turn On Their Body Cameras? (fastcompany.com)
tedlistens writes from a report via Fast Company: Axon, Taser's growing police camera division, has announced a new wireless sensor for gun and Taser holsters that can detect when a weapon is drawn and automatically activate all nearby cameras. The sensor, Signal Sidearm, is part of a suite of products aimed at reducing the possibility that officers will fail to switch on their cameras during encounters with the public. It happens more than it should: Last year in Chicago, for instance, an officer apparently forgot to turn on his camera before fatally shooting and killing an unarmed 18-year-old named Paul O'Neal. Taser isn't alone in trying to address this and other technical and procedural issues with cameras, but reformers emphasize that just as body cameras won't solve problems with policing, new sensors won't prevent officers from failing to record. Fast Company adds: "Automatically-activated cameras won't be completely effective at providing oversight of police encounters: As happened when Baton Rouge police shot Alton Sterling last year, cameras can fall off during physical encounters, a problem that Taser has worked to address. They can also malfunction, or videos can be deleted. And civil liberties advocates complain that cameras are only as effective as the rules that guide their use: [...] the ACLU has complained that current city policy allowing officers to switch cameras off for privacy reasons gives police too much discretion over when to record. Other issues with cameras being resolved at the local level include the heavy costs of cloud video storage, and the question of whether officers are allowed to view their footage immediately after violent encounters -- a privilege not extended to the public."
See $subject. And why is this even a question?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Just shock them if they move while the camera isn't on.
If they got nothing to hide they have nothing to worry about.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Cops are unaccountable by nature. They're specifically trained to deceive, lie, entrap, and kill. Cops are brainwashed into thinking "cops don't rat cops out" so you end up with widespread corruption and resistance to external pressure for accountability and transparency.
Even with their body cameras ON they only show THEIR angle of story. We all know how it is the perspective that makes the story.
More technical solutions means more technical solutions used as scapegoats. "Now it didn't work. It's not my fault, because it is supposed to work automatically! It's Taser's fault!"
The only way out of the prison society is to IMPRISON those who infringe upon our God-given human rights. In a free, liberal society citizens shouldn't be afraid of cops. THEY should be afraid of US.
Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.
So, I can say with confidence cops will continue to 'forget' to turn on their cameras, and 'accidentally' wipe the tapes, if they didn't 'forget' to empty them before duty, of course.
Was talking about this with my brother and he brought up the best Upton Sinclare qoute of all time:
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
You'll always have footage go missing and cams get shut off because it's part of the system. The public is complacent in the whole thing. So a higher up comes along and tells the techies to make the footage disappear and it does. Period. And we all look the other way when a black guy in a poor neighborhood gets shot and 3-5 officers have a camera malfunction instead of demanding they all get fired for not maintaining their equipment. Hell, even when they do get fired they just move to another precinct...
I'm reminded of long haul truckers. I couldn't figure out how they cheated their books with GPSes and electronic logs. The answer: They only spot check individual logs of individual drivers and they warn the driver being checked before hand. My buddy hated it because he never cheated a log so his driver manager made sure he was always the one to get checked. He eventually gave up the line of work because he couldn't find a way to do it without cheating and he's the paranoid type.
This is the same damn thing. We don't need more tech. We need to use the tech we already have.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
yes, "forget to turn on." That really is the problem. Right. Yep. Nothing to see here. Keep moving on. Stop resisting!
There'll be a shortage of cops down the track. No-one will want to do the job with all this and the media demonising them.
Depending on scenario, turning on camera(s) when gun is drawn could provide little to no context of actions leading up to shooting rendering video next to worthless in determining whether excessive force was used. Adoption of this tech by police departments would very likely encourage leaving cameras off and many recordings wouldn't provide anything of value.
Yes, there may be a privacy button - which switches the camera to recording in a different encryption key that is only available through a process with adequate safeguards. Allowing the cop the opportunity to review the video is in general a terrible idea, if done before they have given a statement.
Otherwise, their statement will always precisely match the video, with an interpretation of the events that make the cop look good, or a description of what happened off camera view. The person being recorded on the other hand will likely have to give a statement from memory, so his statement will seem to have more clear errors that are obviously not what happened (as all statements do), and be less credible.
The death penalty for not? That'll get them to turn it on, or rather, to not not turn it on.
A 256 GB micro SD card weights 0.4g, is less than 2cm in width, and costs around $40. I have 1080p movies on my computer that are about 1 hr/GB. So I'm quite sure that one of these body cam devices could record a couple weeks of continuous footage and probably much, much more. That's plenty of time for legal action to initiate and the data to be uploaded if there is any debate over what has happened during an arrest. Privacy is not an issue if the data is stored encrypted. You just require that a judge has to sign off on it before the decryption key can be accessed by anyone (including the cop).
When things get complex, multiply by the complex conjugate.
Simple: charge them with destruction of evidence. Also shooting a gun with the cam off should mean the policeman looses his/her job immediately.
Step 1: remove the off switch. Step 2: there is no step 2.
My first program:
Hell Segmentation fault
Disciplinary action can - along with a rule that if it's not on camera, and there's no corroborating evidence, the cop is assumed to be "confused and/or mistaken".
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
They do not forget to turn it on, they do "forget" to turn it on. In my experience nobody likes to get watched over and will try anything to escape such surveillance, even if the surveillance is warranted.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Movement-activated cameras that upload their video feed directly to mobile networks. If we are talking low-quality video or even stills if the connection is bad, and better quality when the situation improves or the officer gets to the car again, the battery doesn't need to be huge.
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
It can. Provided it simply turns the camera on instead of just reminding the cop.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
In any surveillance situation asymmetry means you loose. Cops will always decide if the evidence is in their favor or not and act accordingly. Would all people have their own cameras that cops do not control, the scene would be leveled.
The reality is that police lie. Whether or not they are wearing a body camera, whether or not it is turned on, you must always make your own video recording of any and all police interaction with you. Always document police behavior. It's not worth taking the risk that the police will lie about how they behaved.
"cameras can fall off during physical encounters"
Really? I wonder how often badges fall off during encounters. They're wearing a uniform. Make it a uniform standard to secure it in a field-proven way. Problem solved.
"They can also malfunction"
Make it the responsibility of the officer to check their equipment prior to going on duty, as they should do for ALL of their equipment. Any malfunction that impacts a legal case or fails to record a violent act will be thoroughly investigated by Internal Affairs and subject to 3rd party review. Cameras are evidence gathering devices, so any officer that purposely causes a "malfunction" will face charges of destruction of evidence.
"or videos can be deleted."
Cameras are the responsibility of the officer. Any reports of deleted data will be subject to investigation. If it is determined that the loss of data was not caused by malfunction, then the officer will face mandatory suspension without pay for 2 weeks. If the data loss interferes with a legal case, then the officer will also be charged with destruction of evidence.
If you're going to create a standard, then enforce the fucking thing. Otherwise, quit pissing taxpayer money away.
It's to prevent mud from dirtying the camera!
No, I forgot to remove it before starting my patrol!
You don't do it, you're fired. Problem solved.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
In New Zealand, police Taser guns are fitted with a camera that starts recording video as soon as the Taser is switched on. Footage of some incidents has led to police being criticised for their excessive and illegal use of Tasers.
Weapon of choice: Are Tasers being abused? http://www.stuff.co.nz/good-re...
Police Taser use against man ruled excessive http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/n...
lol
Can Technology Prevent Cops From "Forgetting" To Turn On Their Body Cameras?
The title is missing some air quotes around "forgetting" because it's very unlikely that they forgot to do it. Only way they will stop "forgetting" is if there are real consequences with real teeth. Like all charges get thrown out, evidence inadmissible, suspension from job without pay, etc. Otherwise you are going to continue to see a rash of camera failures with curiously convenient timing to the benefit of the officer.
Can Technology prevent cops from forgetting to put their pants on?
If a cop "forgets" to turn his camera on and shoots some one then the victim (if surviving) gets to shoot the cop, if they are dead a family member gets to do it. Or just sack them if they don't turn it on but that's never going to happen in the blue boys club.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
"forgetting"
-FTFY
Just keep it on all the time, except when if the wearer press the stop button for 5 sec, then the recording will stop for 120 sec. If during engagement, all cops shut off their cameras, then someone needs to come up with a really good explanation fast.
I realize that this is going to end up getting comments that digress, so sorry in advance.
I'm an American white person and I don't consider myself a SJW but I'm sympathetic to the concerns of African Americans regarding their dealings with the police. I can understand, as best as is possible given my background, that they are really tired of seeing police shoot and kill unarmed African Americans. The police do this to white people too. They just don't do it in big enough numbers to attract the wrath of White America, but it definitely happens to white people too. I absolutely believe that it happens disproportionately to African Americans. The point that cops kill lots of people without justification is important for my next point.
After reading about many of these cases, I've come to the conclusion that as long as the cop in question doesn't act like a complete sociopath on the witness stand, all they have to do is say "I was scared for my life". It doesn't have to be true. They just have to say it. And once they say those magic words, 90% of the time they're going to be acquitted by the jury. All the evidence in the world is not going to change the jury. We've seen trials that have proved this. I read what the cop said in the infamous Ferguson, MO trial and his account of events was not credible. I'd put it at maybe 1 in 1000 that what he said really happened. I'm positive he's lying. But the jury completely bought it. There have been other cases too where there is video evidence contradicting the cop's story but once the cop says "I was scared for my life" the jury finds the shooting to be justified. So I'm sure that some of the solutions proposed will work in terms of getting the video cameras on, but we've already seen that juries really don't care what the video shows and all they really care about is if the cop says he/she was scared at the time.
Have each camera continuously record the latest X hours of activity, like a flight recorder. After an incident occurs, management would retrieve and replace every camera that could have caught the action. This policy would ensure that major events get recorded while automatically editing out all the hours of nothing happening.
is to have the cameras always recording, but allow the cop to mark areas that should be non-public and why using the computer in the car. Still record them. Then this doesn't come up.
It must be decades ago that people were using a voice stress analyzer to detect lies, etc. They weren't perfect, might never be, but should be fairly reliable now. When a policeperson says "Hands up!", such a miniaturized detector would trigger the camera without requiring deliberate action. OTOH when the policeperson gives a happy sigh of comfort and joy while savoring a jelly doughnut or receiving a much needed massage from her partner, the camera would shut off, saving the department some embarrassment.
...omphaloskepsis often...
It's called "not installing an off switch".
While this "technology" could help in situations where good officers in the heat of the moment forget about the little piece of electronics, those are probably the not all that significant. What is a much bigger issue is the bad officers who don't WANT the devices to record. I believe there was a story not all that long ago about the LAPD that found after a review most of their dashcams/mics had been purposely disabled, those dashcams were there by the way due to a series of high profile abuses years ago. As others are noting the "fix" is simply to have the device always record on a loop and upload the entire shifts footage to a central server (preferably to a one held by a third party such as the Courts/Clerk/DA). The only input the officer should have via a button is a "force save" flag that marks the footage around the button press as something never to delete. Even the "on/off" function should be simply removing/replacing it from/to its charging base. With todays storage technology it should be trivial to store an entire departments footage for weeks, perhaps months. The only really useful thing would be an automated database system which would toss the footage of least priority (officers on lunch, driving in their car, etc) and keep footage of higher priority (public interactions good and bad).
Just pack enough battery and flash memory to record non-stop. Only special events of importance get's indexed so dumping the relevant feed back at the office becomes easier.
This is a solved solution. You just need to change the paradigm of how you want to go about this.
Life is not for the lazy.
Simply make qualified immunity available only with the presence of body cam footage. "forget" or have a records dept. "accident" or wipe the server with a cloth and it's gone.
Nor are ranks from California.
It used to be that in the US there were no such things as police sergeants, lieutenants, captains, etc. The quasi-military rank structure came into being IIRC in Los Angeles California(?).
http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/P...
1807: The Richmond Police Department officially was established as one of the first formally organized law enforcement agencies in the United States.
...
1861: Virginia seceded from the Union. The president of the newly formed Confederate States of America, Jefferson Davis, established Richmond as the capital of the CSA Officers began wearing badges and were considered members of the militia.
1863: With the city's population swollen to almost 100,000 by the Civil War, the Richmond Police Department was overwhelmed. As a result, the Department was reorganized with 13 day officers, one of whom was designated the Chief of Police. The night watch was given one captain, three lieutenants and 40 privates.
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
As the oldest police department in the country, the Boston Police Department (BPD) has a rich history and a well-established presence in the Boston community. The initiation of a formal department began in 1838, when the General Court passed a bill allowing the city of Boston to appoint police officers. The department was structured after the model developed by Sir Robert Peele for the London Police force.
...
The first police force consisted of 260 officers and a chief. Each division had a captain and two lieutenants; sergeants were not appointed until 1857. In these early days, an officer on duty carried a six-foot pole, painted blue and white to protect himself, and a "police rattle" to call for assistance.
Ranks were there back in the day when police officers were armed with RATTLES.
Ranks are NOT militarization. Police all around the world have ranks. Fire brigades have ranks.
Militarization is when regular police starts employing military weapons, tactics and equipment on daily basis.
I.e. When police thinks that it actually needs those "5,638 bayonets ($307,769) and 36 swords and scabbards", or when campus police thinks it really needs those M16s there is something terribly wrong both with their internal philosophy AND their purchasing program.
Could it possibly be that the USA has been staging these huge military operations around the globe since... oh... the Desert Storm?
And could it be that such huge military operations overseas create an increase in surplus of military equipment - while at the same time draining the budget of money that could be spent on local law enforcement, among other things?
Could it also be that unloading all those hundreds of millions of dollars of military equipment onto law enforcement agencies is hiding actual holes in the law enforcement budgets?
And is there a chance that, besides all that surplus military gear, police has also been getting
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Not buying it. Put additional cameras on guns and tasers.
If the "supposed" police officer (aka Criminal) forgets to turn on their camera, beep 3 times, if the officer hasn't turned their camera on by the time of the 3rd beep, tase their sorry ass.
If the camera cannot "see" anything (covered by black tape, paper, donut filling), tase their sorry ass.
Problem solved.
If a cop is unholstering his weapon, isn't it too late? Isn't one of the largest reasons for the camera to detect what instigated the use of the weapon? This doesn't show moments before if all you're recording is the cop shooting someone.
Step 1: Make cops wear cammera.
Step 2: Make cammeras turn on when a gun is drawn.
Step 3: Make device that turns on cammera when gun is in holster.
Step 4: ???
Step 5: Profit.
Lol, love that euphamism.
Cops should not have access to disable their cameras during working hours. Either a central server needs to have their work schedules loaded to automatically turn the cameras on, or they should have to "punch in" to turn them on when they start their shifts. This is just a sacrifice of privacy we must *make* them accept, if they want to do this extremely privileged job. We can't keep pretending like it's a normal job and entitled to the same protections as people in other fields.
The ACLU is right, as usual.
You can't compare a piece of tin with a sensitive electronic device.
Even a fully ruggedized military-grade camera is still susceptible to various forms of damage or malfunction.
FFS, a drop of paint (or blood, or ketchup, or mud...) can make it completely useless as a video recording device.
Hell, turn it ever so slightly in a wrong direction and the recording is a useless shot of the sky or of the ground. Expose its sensor to a strong light and it's equally useless.
Even mounted on the head, so it records from police officer's angle of view, it can be knocked off. Particularly when the "perp" wants to knock it off on purpose.
Just because you can strap a camera on something doesn't mean it will work in 100% of cases.
Much more likely, most of them won't work properly.
A DNAinfo Chicago review of city records revealed the extended warranty on the city's original $12.5 million contract for COBAN dashcams (a contract that guaranteed keeping the in-car video systems in working order) expired in September 2012.
It's unclear whether the expired warranty contributed to what police called a "high number" of malfunctioning cameras, including many that fail to record audio.
Public records show Mayor Rahm Emanuel signed a new $1 million deal with COBAN to fix broken in-car systems on Dec. 3, 2014.
That was more than two years after the warranty expired and about six weeks after Laquan was killed.
Regardless of the reason why the camera was malfunctioning in the first place.
In that case, even "holding people accountable" and "hitting some officers and supervisors with formal reprimands and up-to-three-day suspensions" still only increased the number of end-of-shift uploads by 70%.
Not the quality of video (and sound) or the condition the cameras were in.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
fix that for ya
Fixed that for ya
If the price they pay is high, no police officer will allow themselves to forget.