Body Cameras

Justice Department Will Let Local Cops Wear Body Cameras in Task Force Raids

It's an improvement over the status quo. But time will tell how frequently the feds try to suppress important footage.

|

The Justice Department today announced an important change in policy: Local police will be able to use their body-worn cameras when they're involved in a task force with federal officers.

Over the past decade we've seen a huge and somewhat successful push to have police wear cameras. The aim is to better document their behavior, to hold them accountable when they engage in misconduct, and to clear them when they're innocent.

Under President Barack Obama, the Department of Justice encouraged local police departments to buy body cameras, offering millions of dollars in grants to help fund the purchases. At the same time, strangely, federal law enforcement agencies did not start wearing body cameras. Furthermore, the Justice Department barred local cops from wearing these cameras during multiagency task forces involving federal officers. If, say, local deputies teamed up with the Drug Enforcement Administration for a raid, no cameras were permitted.

This conflicted approach was highlighted in September, when U.S. Marshals teamed up with three other local law enforcement agencies to arrest antifa activist Michael Reinoehl outside Olympia, Washington. (Reinoehl was wanted for second-degree murder in the death of Aaron Danielson, a member of the right-wing group Patriot Prayer killed during a protest in Portland, Oregon.) The attempt to arrest Reinoehl went bad, and Reinoehl was shot and killed by police on the scene under suspicious circumstances. Eyewitnesses say the police never identified themselves before shooting him. The police say Reinoehl was trying to pull a gun on them, a gun that was reportedly found in his right pocket. Maybe Reinoehl's death was an illegal execution; maybe it was self-defense. We'll never see any body camera footage providing the evidence either way.

Now that policy is changing. The Department of Justice, determining that a previous pilot program had been successful, today announced that it will permit local law enforcement officers to keep wearing their body cameras and to record some police encounters: "The department's policy will permit federally deputized officers to activate a body-worn camera while serving arrest warrants, or during other planned arrest operations, and during the execution of search warrants."

That's a huge improvement, but it doesn't change the fact that federal agents themselves do not wear body cameras during these arrests and raids. (And it's not like the department doesn't have the money to pay for the cameras.) The rules are also full of exceptions, forbidding body cameras when the feds are "using specialized or sensitive investigative techniques, operating in a sensitive area, or working in an undercover or covert status on behalf of the federal task force or federal agency as determined by the federal agency sponsoring the task force." The federal agency organizing the task force can veto camera recording for "highly specialized or sensitive operations."

Furthermore, all the recordings will be deemed federal records, even though they're recorded by local cops. Federal guidelines, not local public records laws, will determine the release of any footage collected. It can take years for the Department of Justice to comply with public records requests, and the guidelines establish a presumption that the recordings are sensitive information: "Nothing in this policy shall be deemed to provide a right of public access to…recordings." When a body camera ends up recording footage of a serious injury or death of another person during one of these task forces, the federal government will decide the timeline for the footage to be released.

It's an improvement over the status quo. But we'll have to see how frequently the feds try to stop the release of important footage.

NEXT: Survey: Parents Are Vastly More Satisfied With In-Person Education Than Distance Learning

Body Cameras Department of Justice Transparency Police

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.

Please to post comments

21 responses to “Justice Department Will Let Local Cops Wear Body Cameras in Task Force Raids

  1. “But time will tell how frequently the feds try to suppress important footage.”

    Uh, every time it would be embarrassing?

    1. I would expect the amount of footage of “I’m exercising my 1A right to interfere in an arrest.” footage to go up as well.

    2. Start earning today from $600 to $754 easily by working online from home. Last month i have generated and received $19663 from this job by giving this only maximum 2 hours a day of my life. Easiest job in the world and earning from this job are just awesome. Everybody can now get this job and start earning cash online right now by just follow instructions click on this link and vist tabs( Home, Media, Tech ) for more details thanks……Click here 

  2. guess it’ll be awhile before Body Cam comes back.

    1. I make up to $90 an hour on-line from my home. My story is that I give up operating at walmart to paintings on-line and with a bit strive I with out qas problem supply in spherical $40h to $86h someone turned into top to me by way of manner of sharing this hyperlink with me, so now i m hoping i ought to help a person else accessible through sharing this hyperlink…

      ===============►Hone Work Profit

  3. That’s a huge improvement, but it doesn’t change the fact that federal agents themselves do not wear body cameras during these arrests and raids.

    Given that the only actual Federal Agent involved in Reinoehl’s apprehension/shooting didn’t fire a shot, I don’t see how it’s a huge improvement. Unless local PD is going to suddenly start keeping extra bodycams on hand for those times when they deputize local corrections officers to serve Federal arrest warrants.

    Otherwise, (not so) hard cases = bad law.

    1. I make up to $90 an hour on-line from my home. My story is that I give up operating at walmart to paintings on-line and with a bit strive I with out qwm problem supply in spherical $40h to $86h… someone turned into top to me by way of manner of sharing this hyperlink with me, so now i m hoping i ought to help a person else accessible through sharing this hyperlink…

      ================►HOME WORK PROFFIT

  4. Maybe reason can stop defending left wing assholes who murder people, loot, burn, riot, and cause horrible property and livelihood destruction.

    1. I get it, Sometimes Bad. The guy is a Bad Guy and deserves what he gets because the government says he’s a Bad Guy.

      But how does that justify no cameras when the guy gets what he deserves?

      1. If someone avenged Danielson’s death moments later, on camera, would you be OK with it?

      2. “But how does that justify no cameras when the guy gets what he deserves?”

        +1, they need to be wearing cameras.

  5. I quit working at shop rite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier So i try use.
    Here’s what I do…….Click here

  6. “Let”

    1. Yes “let”. The state doesn’t have authority over federal agents (and vice versa) unless granted, moreover, neither the state nor the federal government can necessarily grant a privilege that the local PD can neither legally nor fiscally afford.

      If it is OK for the local PD to record the arrest of private citizens, the FedGov won’t prevent them, otherwise, the FedGov won’t violate a citizen’s right to privacy on behalf of the local PD. Ergo, “let”.

  7. The dispute between local police departments and federal law enforcement agencies over body-worn cameras — local police officers wear such cameras, federal agents don’t — moved slightly in the direction of transparency Monday. The Justice Department announced a pilot program to allow police officers serving on federal task forces to wear their body cameras in select cities, though specifics over who would do the testing and who would control the camera footage were not immediately available.
    Source: washingtonpost
    World Most Intelligent 1st Animals

  8. This is enoug for me to Earn money at home on laptop ,Just work on laptop 4 to 6 hour par day and Make 50 Dollar Easily This is very nyc for me and my family…..Check It Here…. Here is More information

  9. Start bringing up to 65O$ to 7OO$ a month. I’ve started this job and earn handsome income and now i am exchange it with you, so you can do it too. You can check it out here…..USA PART TIME JOB.

  10. I’d like to see everyone that carries a gun to be required to wear active body cameras.

    The footage isn’t protected by “national security”. For government officials, it isn’t private. It belongs to the public who bought the cameras and pays their wages.

  11. I get paid more than $120 to $130 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this i have earned easily $15k from this without having online working skills. This is what I do..Usa Online Jobs

  12. Make $6,000-$8,000 A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. Be Your Own Boss And for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot .by follow detailsHere═❥❥  Click Here  

  13. I get paid more than $120 to $130 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this i have earned easily $15k from this without having online working skills. This is what I do………..Visit here to earn thousands of dollars

Comments are closed.