Police

St. Louis Police Officers Association No Fan of Dash Cams

|

all eyes on you

The St. Louis Police Department's vehicles are being equipped with dash cams and some police officers are not pleased. From the St. Louis Post Dispatch:

Jeff Roorda, business manager of the Police Officers Association, complained about inconsistent use of the recordings. "Officers should know what the cameras are going to be used for, when the cameras are activated and how they will be reviewed and what the discipline will be if you have a violation that results from the cameras," he said. "Right now, all that is in constant flux."

Knowing what they're going to be used for, when they'll be activated and how they'll be reviewed would be nice for all the surveillance cameras on public streets, too, but don't hold your breath. To his credit, the St. Louis police chief is resisting union demands for a policy on what kind of discipline might result from dash-cam video: "I'm not going to draft a policy for those who violate our policy," said Dan Isom, the police chief.

The complaints largely stem from two probationary officers who were accused by a suspect of planting drugs and guns. Dash cam video showed the claim wasn't true, but also revealed one of the officers struck the suspect after he was handcuffed, so both were fired. The union's argument, apparently, is that the dash-cam video was viewed to corroborate or dismiss the claim of planted evidence; since that's what police investigators were looking for on the video, they shouldn't use evidence they found of excessive force on the video against the officers. Doesn't quite sound like the same standard police use on people does it?  When police suspect someone of one crime, it doesn't mean evidence of other crimes is dismissed during the investigation.

NEXT: Farewell to Eugene Polley, Inventor of the Wireless Remote

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Hey cops, if you have nothing to hide…

    1. could say the same about domestic drones

  2. Reason #999958 why there should be no public sector unions.

    1. Hey, cut them a break, will ya? They have to unionize to get basic protections, like generous pensions that kick in at age 45 or so, lavish health benefits for which they contribute next to nothing and, of course, to fight all efforts to make a record of cops abusing their power. I mean, without that, police working conditions would be basically the same as some Chinese coal mine or sweatshop.

      1. You forgot the right to never ever be fired for anything once they get past probation.

  3. The union’s argument, apparently, is that the dash-cam video was viewed to corroborate or dismiss the claim of planted evidence; since that’s what police investigators were looking for on the video, they shouldn’t use evidence they found of excessive force on the video against the officers.

    What?

    1. I’m sure they would support the same policy for civilians.

      1. I bet if the video showed them planting evidence, but also the suspect using force on the police officers they would have the same policy.

      2. Cops are not military personnel. They are civilians.

    2. But remember, they’re here to protect and serve. Unless they feel like beating the shit out of you. Then, they should get away with that.

  4. “You caught us doing something bad when looking for something else! No fair!”

  5. Christ, it’s like they expect it to be like NFL instant replay or something. Amazingly in real life there shouldn’t be a rule against throwing the flag if you see an unexpected penalty.

    And it’s amazing to me how much these guys argue for something approaching due process when it’s their own guys up against the wall and not the common jamoke.

    OK, not amazing. Nauseating.

  6. what the discipline will be if you have a violation that results from the cameras,”

    So these cameras are out “violating things”? What a great piece of passive voice newspeak that is.

    Let me rephrase in rational English.

    The police would like to know what is going to happen to them when the cameras record and reveal their misconduct.

    1. SUV left the road.
      Shots were fired.
      Suspect was killed.

      Cops didn’t do a thing. It all just… happened.

    2. Shouldn’t that already be known, regardless of whether or not dash cam footage was involved? I’m beginning to suspect St. Louis police officers were accustomed to no action being taken when there was non-video evidence of their misconduct.

      1. As we all know, everything in a police department is done according to policy. Things like common sense or the law don’t matter, so long as policy is satisfied. Therefore, if there is no policy on how dash cam footage affects violations of policy, dash cam footage can’t affect violations.

        1. When you follow policy you are not responsible.
          That is why there must be policy in place for everything.

          “My hands were tied. I had to follow policy guidelines.”

          Government is supposed to simply function. No thought. No judgement.
          Just look up what to do in the policy handbook, and do it.

          No brain required.

          1. My job description actually contains the phrase ‘uses independent judgement’. I guess that’s why cops make more than me, huh?

  7. …since that’s what police investigators were looking for on the video, they shouldn’t use evidence they found of excessive force on the video against the officers.

    Easy fix: Set policy of civilian review of all dash cam footage. Therefore, no surprises.

  8. Disrespect the law, and you disrespect me.

  9. Where is that Fuckstick Dunphy lately? This seems like a perfect time for him to come on and tell us how those poor officer’s shouldn’t be punished because of “policy” etc. Gods below I hope he has finally died in a fire with his progeny.

  10. Where is that Fuckstick Dunphy lately? This seems like a perfect time for him to come on and tell us how those poor officer’s shouldn’t be punished because of “policy” etc. Gods below I hope he has finally died in a fire with his progeny.

    1. Fuckin’ squirrels.

    2. Probably soaking up overtime. Being a cop isn’t a job, it’s a lifestyle.

  11. http://www.local10.com/news/Po…..index.html

    To be fair, here is one case of a police union doing some good. The union for the Miami Beach PD has pushed back against a dictate that there be 2000 arrests over the coming holiday weekend.

    1. Don’t confuse “good” with “lazy”.

      1. Doing the right thing for the wrong reason is still doing the right thing.

    2. I guess that all depends on what the over/under for assholes doing stupid and illegal shit in Miami over Memorial Day weekend is.

      1. I will take the over. But setting a quota is bad form.

  12. Typical left-winger:

    1) Do you see how those thug cops avoid accountability (especially where minorities are invovled)?

    2) OMG, those fascist Republicans in Wisconsin are curbing the public-sector unions!

    1. u chased that ball right outta the strike zone…swing n a miss

      1. At least I *have* a ball.

        1. foul ball – strike 2!

    2. Left wingers almost always defer to the cops. They are authority worshipers, remember?

      1. Not when Mumia killed one.

        1. Sorry, I mean when they rushed to judgment against Mumia just because he was holding a smoking gun near the cop’s dead body.

          1. That was a special case that involved a good-looking, charismatic, black activist with a big smile vs a white cop.

            1. A White cop with a pedo-stache.

              Jus’ sayin’

              1. The pedo-stache was the custom at the time, HM. You wouldn’t excoriate the poor cop for wearing an onion on his belt, would you?

  13. “When police suspect someone of one crime, it doesn’t mean evidence of other crimes is dismissed during the investigation.”

    No, as a matter of fact, every police investigation I’ve been involved in has used that as an excuse to look for as many other crimes as they can get away with.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.