Body Cam Increases Police Performance and Decreases Volience and Complaints in the Community

The innovation of cameras being smaller and more effective, police officers uses these cameras to help them in their daily patrol. For an example, in The University of South Florida did a study on the Orlando Police department and found police officer equipped with body cameras effectively improved their behavior and interaction with the public.

It is a longitudinal study of police behavior for 12 months in which 46 officers wear body cameras while the other 43 officers did not wear one. What they found is that citizen response to resistance dropped 53 percent and civilian complaints against the officer declined 65 percent as well. What officers reported on the study that the camera changed a citizen behavior and begin to settle the confrontation.

Police use of force has always been a controversial topic and concern with the community. With more police department requiring police officers to use body cameras, there has been an improvement in police performance with the community. The fact policing exercising their power to maintain peace, justified or unjustified, could potentially ruin their reputation and trust in the public. A solution to address this issue is requiring police officers to use body cameras as they are able to review the video to correctly determine if the action is proportionate to the situation.


Body Cameras Recording Functionality and Procedures of Using the Device

There are many different versions of cameras that police officers can use but they all have the same functions. The body cameras are a tiny, portable, and durable device (dimension is approximately 2.5 in x 2 in x 1) that can be clipped on officer's sunglasses, hats, shoulders, or chest. The device battery life can last up to 12.5 hours.

Camera can start recording when one press the button on the device or activate it through a wireless button. The device can record in a 170 degree angle with a built in infrared illumination that can help them see in the dark. It has a storage capacity of 8gb - 32gb micro SD card that can record (depending on some devices), up to 18 hours of video content. The video itself has an option of showing the date and time stamp and show audio of the recorded video.

Despite police department having different policies for body cameras, most department follow similar procedures on using body cameras. Police officers are trained to use proper operation and care of the body cameras to ensure they are effectively used. As police are responsible for the cameras, they must regularly inspect and maintain the device throughout their patrol.

The body cameras will be operated based on the manufacturers guideline and police department preference to ensure the device will not be damage and used for long periods. Police officer will immediately report the body camera has a malfunction or not working at all. Lastly, depending on the police department, police officers will put their cameras on top of their shirt pocket to effectively record.

The potential of supervisor to review recorded footage, Police officer use of force has been reduced and approach scenarios with more professionalism 

In the report "The Impact of ON-officer Video Cameras on Police Citizen Contacts: Findings from a Controlled Experiment in Mesa, AZ," the study indicated that officers who were wearing body cameras displayed more caution and alert in their patrol than those who were not wearing body cameras. Some key findings of the experiment were officers not wearing cameras conducted 9.8% more stop and frisk and 6.9 more arrests. However, police officers wearing cameras issued 23.1% more citations for Misdemeanor offense and engage 13.5% more with citizens in the community that those not wearing cameras.

The authors of the study explained that the potential of videos being examined and reviewed by the police supervisor or the general public resulted in police officers acting more careful and professional in criminal policy and procedures. It is evident with the officers who issued more citations because they are concerned they would be reprimanded by their superiors if the video shows the officers not correcting citizen misconduct.

Depending on the department, if the public wishes to see the video recordings, the footage will generally remain out of view for the public with the exception to court. Many problem rises with this decision as privacy plays a factor in this decision.

Many citizens believe that they should be able to see the recording just as much as officer does since they review the footage. Arguments why camera is not available to the public, is in South California the reason why the videos are private is the police department goal to protect the privacy of people recorded by the police. It is still in debate of how video should be distributed and will be investigated to see the best method to handle video evidence.

Source

Though there is limited understanding
of the correlation between camera and police use of force; a police body camera study in Rialto, California randomly assigned 54 officers with cameras and compared their department use of force, and complaints, to prior arrest rates in their department. Examining the results of the 988 shifts, it was found that officers used 23% of force and received only 2% of complaints out of the 988 shifts.

In previous years, without the implementation of cameras, the use of force stayed relatively similar, only a 5% difference, for three years while the complaints generally decline. However, with the implementation of cameras on police, the use of force has significantly declined from 67% to 23% (2011-2012) while the complaints dropped from 22% to 2%. Based on the data graph, cameras recording can promote better interaction among citizens and officers and deters police misconduct as video evidence can confirm or deny any actions.

Video Evidence Protect Officer Credibility and Safety from Slander/Libel by Citizens

Apd union president states that police false allegations are becoming more common and that citizens should be held accountable for their actions. Video recording from body cameras can not be tamper by police officer as the video itself is sent to the police department. An Albuquerque officer, APD Officer Jared Fraize, was being accused of sexual harassment by Deanna Griego. Before the accusation, Officer Fraize suspected Griego of being under the influence of alcohol while driving and performed a sobriety test.

After failing the sobriety test, she was taken to the police station to find her blood alcohol content, .13 blood alcohol, is above the legal drinking limit. When Griego was asked to use the bathroom, officer Fraize caught her talking to her friend saying "How can I get this officer in trouble?" When Griego leave the bathroom, she accused him "[you were] inappropriately touching me while I was waiting in the car." However Officer Fraize was cleared of charge with video evidence denying Griego statement.

What is important to note is that the video footage belongs to the police department and not the officer who is using the camera. The reason for this is that the video recording goes to the police department servers and the department can review the videos to see if there has been any misconduct.

Police Body Cameras Improves Documentation Credibility in Accuracy and Correcting Common Errors

Police engaging in stressful behavior have trouble documenting the crime scene due to tunnel vision from stress. What researchers found in the initial written reports was 27 errors from minor to serious. Some errors involving committing the use of force, failure to use verbal warning, or not reporting the use of force. These errors, regardless of severity, is very important to aid other officer to determine the resources that officer needs to fix the problems. Officers in the study with body cameras, found that body worn cameras improves the accuracy of reports. With the ability to see the videos, officers is able to recite some memory that could not recall and shed lights in unclear areas that reduce use of force and compliant from citizens.

Camera costing a minimum $200 dollar raises safety concerns and privacy issues that deters police department issuing them

With camera's expensive cost, a Police Executive survey showed that only 25% of the 254 agencies use body cameras. Some companies, such as VieVU, charges the camera as $200, with an additional $55 per month for data storage. Supported by the Police Executive Research Forum, 39% of police department claims the cost of the camera is the main concern for accepting body cameras.

With police department purchasing the advance camera, that can be up to $800-1200$ individually, for each officer in the department it prevents funding and support for other resources, police cruiser and equipment, for the police department to use. With data storage and price becoming a burden to departments it brings new policy that officers need to follow to prevent any misconduct.

With new policy that officer needs to consider with getting effective footage, it raises safety issues for police officers. For an example, there are levels of citizen resistance that officer may face and have technique to follow proportionate to that level (Dr. L. Brook. Policing Class CCJS340). If citizens are using non-verbal cues to resist, like not talking, or clenching your fist, officer can use a technique, called the "interview stance", that the officer stand 4-6 feet away with their gun-side to allow more reaction time and distance.

However, with the camera, officer may feel they need to adjust their camera to get a good angle footage which results in a safety violation for the officer. With lack of clear guideline to assist officer, it can potentially be a threat to officers.

As mobile technology becomes more innovative, cameras are more accessible to the public through smart phones and other devices to record events in the public. Police officers are adapting to new uses of devices in their patrol and the introduction of body cameras benefits them in many ways. With the cameras being able to record and review 12 hours footage, it reduces police use of force and complaints among citizens.

 With supervisor potentially reviewing police officer patrol footage, police officer must maintain professionalism that represent the police department well in the community. Furthermore with video evidence, citizens who attempts slander and libel will review the video footage to determine the credibility of that answer to see if it is correct. Despite cameras being costly on police department funding, President Obama has proposed a three year, $263 million investment that will give opportunities for police department to use more body cameras and training.