LAPD to Get Body Cameras. Will They Tamper with Those, Too?


The big news coming out of Los Angeles (besides the rain) is that the city is going to buy 7,000 body cameras to outfit all its police officers. From the Los Angeles Times:
Advocates say the cameras will be a valuable tool for the department. The ability to record audio and video of police encounters with the public, they say, could help guard against officer misconduct and clear cops falsely accused of wrongdoing.
Steve Soboroff, president of the Police Commission, has spent months raising private money to outfit officers with on-body cameras. He said the mayor's plan would supplement the contract the LAPD was already negotiating with the camera vendor, eventually bringing more cameras to officers on the streets.
More than $1 million raised through private donations will help pay for the cameras, thus avoiding City Hall budget constraints.
I'm a bit fascinated by the idea that they raised money for the cameras from private donations, but I'm reluctant to try to guess what it may mean without knowing who the donors were.
LA Weekly notes that one of the police unions is supporting the cameras, on the condition that officers will be able to review the video before writing up reports, which has got the American Civil Liberties Union saying, "Um, no":
"That would be a ridiculous policy," argues Peter Bibring, an ACLU attorney.
Bibring argues that allowing officers to review the videos beforehand could taint their recollections, or make it easier to lie.
"They're less likely to lie if they don't know what the video caught and what it didn't," Bibring says. "This is enormously important. It's the difference between this being a tool to promote accountability and this being a tool to assist in cover-ups."
Then there's the matter of whether officers will tamper with the cameras. Earlier in the year, the Los Angeles Police Department discovered that officers were tampering with their dash cameras to keep from being recorded. Again from the Los Angeles Times in April:
An inspection by Los Angeles Police Department investigators found about half of the estimated 80 cars in one South L.A. patrol division were missing antennas, which help capture what officers say in the field. The antennas in at least 10 more cars in nearby divisions had also been removed.
LAPD Chief Charlie Beck and other top officials learned of the problem last summer but chose not to investigate which officers were responsible. Rather, the officials issued warnings against continued meddling and put checks in place to account for antennas at the start and end of each patrol shift.
So I'll end in a reminder that body cameras themselves aren't a solution, but rather an extremely useful tool to increase transparency and lead to more accountability. But they won't work if police find ways to avoid the transparency, nor if they are shielded from accountability in situations where they are caught engaging in misconduct.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The cameras will have a filter on them that makes two tiny Asian ladies look like one giant black man.
+ several empty mags
Those dumb fuck pigs were posted up in my in-laws neighborhood. My Father-in-law and brother-in-law are large black men. I kept texting them, urging them to stay in their house until Dorner was captured.
LAPD Chief Charlie Beck and other top officials learned of the problem last summer but chose not to investigate which officers were responsible.
These are the same people who put lives at risk with no-knock raids so that they can stop suspects from potentially destroying evidence.
Why bother? They just won't care, it's already been proven that they can do anything they want without punishment. They'll probably use the tapes as entertainment and sit around and laugh while watching their buddies beat up pregnant women and shoot puppies.
They'll probably use the tapes as entertainment and sit around and laugh while watching their buddies beat up pregnant women and shoot puppies.
Yep.
Third-party cameras are the only ones that can be trusted.
OT:
We're going to shut down those pot smoking Santas, for the children, right before we ban Santa from public!
No Pot Smoking Santas!
That wasn't supposed to be a reply. Squirrels!
SQUIRRELZ ON GANJA!!!!!!
These are your squirrels on ganja. Any questions?
There was a ganja?
Equipment malfunctions. Equipment malfunctions everywhere.
The hard drive crashed and all the film is gone.
the sound is glitchy. the lighting is bad. The suspect impaired the view of the camera with his blood.
All kinds of potential solutions.
We'll need to spend a few more billion of the tax payer dollar to get higher quality cameras from our favored crony supplier.
And those will fail, too. The technology just isn't there yet.
It always comes back around to whether or not the people in charge are willing to hold bad actors responsible, and ultimately whether the electorate is willing to hold the people in charge responsible.
Except for the cheap, reliable, and easily available technology that everyone but cops use.
Third-party cameras are a step in the right direction. The next step would be to pass legislation that discourages tampering. For example you could make it so that if there was evidence of a recording "malfunction" or tampering then all evidence collected during that time frame is inadmissible. Also, any seizures made during that time must be promptly returned to the owner. Finally, the officer responsible for the camera would have to undergo additional training with repeat offenses quickly resulting in termination. (I know, I know, when pigs fly)
(I know, I know, when pigs fly)
Not just when pigs fly, but you've taken a technical solution and glommed some laws and procedure on to it to produce the same-old law-burdened state solution.
Require/budget for cameras, rescind immunity/privatize pensions, and let the people use the courts to demand a higher standard from officers who would otherwise retire comfortably with impugnity.
How is your solution any less of a "law burdened state solution"? "Require" cameras is exactly my solution. The only way to require them is to put the requirement into law and spell out the consequences of breaking that law.
I think that is like totalyl stupid.
http://www.AnonBay.tk
I agree that Pauline `s storry is shocking... last week I bought a gorgeous Ford Focus after I been earnin $6233 this past month and over 10/k this past-munth . this is definitely the nicest-job Ive had . I actually started 3 months ago and pretty much immediately startad making minimum $71 p/h .
Am join this way but you can join now------------- http://www.jobsfish.com
jobsfish, this is anon's turf. You best be steppin'.