The cameras worked by constantly recording even before the “record” button was pressed, periodically deleting any footage that hadn’t been intentionally recorded. Once the “record” button was pressed by the officer, it would capture the 30 seconds before the button had been pressed, thanks to this method of constantly being on standby.
But it was a hard concept for cops to understand. They weren’t being properly trained on the fact that their own cameras didn’t start recording once they pressed record. Hitting that button saved the 30 seconds prior as well, a neat feature that really bit them in the ass.
Maybe bodycams should randomly record even when the RECORD button isn’t pressed by an officer; and the pre-record time should be random from say 2 minutes to 30 seconds before. And the recording should stop a random 30-60 seconds AFTER they hit ‘STOP’. So they never know when they’re being recorded. If they’re not pulling illegal shit, they shouldn’t have any problem with that, right?
In fact, with storage capabilities nowadays, bodycams should ALWAYS be recording, period. Gotta go to the bathroom? Too damn bad. You’re a public servant. Trust the auditors to redact that if it comes to a court subpoena. You signed up for it. Extraordinary powers come with extraordinary sacrifices.
Jeebus Chripes. No wonder so many people say ACAB.
I think we just need to revise the laws to say that a cop’s testimony doesn’t have any more weight than anyone else’s testimony unless it’s backed up by their bodycam.
Taking cops at their word made sense when we didn’t have this technology. It doesn’t make sense anymore.
I would even go a step further and say that cops’ testimony should not even be accepted if they don’t have bodycam footage to back it up. When you have a camera that’s able to verify anything you need it to, the absence of that verification should be viewed through the lens that you specifically did not want whatever was happening during that time to be recorded.
Can you say: “conflict of interest”? We’re at trial, the cop(s) who performed the arrest made a judgement call in the field - of course they’re going to double down. What would it do for the career of a cop on the stand to say “you know, I think we made a mistake that day…”? The fact that the case has gone to trial basically makes the cop’s testimony redundant, what they’re going to say is basically a foregone conclusion, why waste time making them say it again?
They absolutely should always be recording - and frequently backing up data to a server outside their control. Although it probably needs to have judicial oversight for access to days files?
But yeah, what’s the damn point if it’s controlled by the very people the technology is intended to provide oversight for?
For what memory chips cost these days, they should record continuously anytime the camera (accelerometer in the camera) detects motion within the previous 10 minutes. If they’re on-body, or in a moving car, they should be recording.
The “save” button could work the same: mark 30 seconds before until “save” is deactivated to be “do not delete this for rotation” - but otherwise, save everything anyway, only rotate out after 2TB of memory card is full, and download at the end of every shift.
Better still, download continuously to the car and 5G it to a cloud server where the department can’t delete it.
Make the record button a pause button. Let it stop for five minutes if you’re not moving. Once you walk away, it automatically resumes, independent of time. If you pressed pause while not in front of the shitter, you’re investigated.
Body cams film people being shot. Body cams film people being dragged out of their beds in their underwear and detained. And we’re clutching our pearls at some farts and groans that no one is going to watch? If you can’t handle someone possibly hearing you fart you shouldn’t be a cop.
But fine, allow cops to mute the audio. Problem solved.
If they mute the audio anytime they are not in the bathroom it is assumed they are trying to hide something and the missing audio is assumed to be damaging to the cops testimony.
The company that sells the cameras and the police buying them don’t want that. The guy who owns the company that makes most body cams advertises that the cameras don’t record more accurately than the human eye. This enables cops to show a blurry 16fps 720p video and go “it looked like he was pulling out a gun”.
That might indeed be the result sometimes :). Doesn’t matter. Since the US seems OK with Amazon making their drivers pee in a bottle and docking them points for gazing away while driving, why not make police submit to full recording like this?
Maybe bodycams should randomly record even when the RECORD button isn’t pressed by an officer; and the pre-record time should be random from say 2 minutes to 30 seconds before. And the recording should stop a random 30-60 seconds AFTER they hit ‘STOP’. So they never know when they’re being recorded. If they’re not pulling illegal shit, they shouldn’t have any problem with that, right?
In fact, with storage capabilities nowadays, bodycams should ALWAYS be recording, period. Gotta go to the bathroom? Too damn bad. You’re a public servant. Trust the auditors to redact that if it comes to a court subpoena. You signed up for it. Extraordinary powers come with extraordinary sacrifices.
Jeebus Chripes. No wonder so many people say ACAB.
This would be nice but it ignores the fact cops (like we have today) shouldn’t exist at all. Cops are not the only way to do law enforcement.
When we fly we are forced to let some stranger see our junk with the full body scanner
Gotta make sure no one is smuggling a full sized tube of tooth paste up their ass
Seems reasonable given that
Hobesrly with the angles of the body cams I doubt anything would be visible. 100% be audible though.
I assure you
When you step into a full body scanner SOMEBODY gets a look at your shrinky-dink!
I was talking about the body cams, I know what the scanners can see xD
Pretty sure they’re talking about the body cams, not the scanner.
I think we just need to revise the laws to say that a cop’s testimony doesn’t have any more weight than anyone else’s testimony unless it’s backed up by their bodycam.
Taking cops at their word made sense when we didn’t have this technology. It doesn’t make sense anymore.
I keep getting left off jury duty by honestly answering the question about whether I would give less weight to a cops testimony because they’re a cop.
I suppose if there’s ever a civil jury trial that doesn’t involve a police testimony, I might serve in a jury.
A bit of a shame because I don’t mind being on a jury. I’m not trying to get out of it. I’m just being honest.
I would even go a step further and say that cops’ testimony should not even be accepted if they don’t have bodycam footage to back it up. When you have a camera that’s able to verify anything you need it to, the absence of that verification should be viewed through the lens that you specifically did not want whatever was happening during that time to be recorded.
Can you say: “conflict of interest”? We’re at trial, the cop(s) who performed the arrest made a judgement call in the field - of course they’re going to double down. What would it do for the career of a cop on the stand to say “you know, I think we made a mistake that day…”? The fact that the case has gone to trial basically makes the cop’s testimony redundant, what they’re going to say is basically a foregone conclusion, why waste time making them say it again?
People say ACAB because police are class traitors. They violently protect and serve the interest of capital.
¿Por que no los dos?
They absolutely should always be recording - and frequently backing up data to a server outside their control. Although it probably needs to have judicial oversight for access to days files?
But yeah, what’s the damn point if it’s controlled by the very people the technology is intended to provide oversight for?
you lost me here, this is an insane statement. a camera always on even when youre in the bathroom?
if i was in a public restroom with a police officer, I now have to worry about being on camera in the one place where cameras are illegal? come on…
If a cop walks into the bathroom now, how do you know the body cam isn’t on?
For what memory chips cost these days, they should record continuously anytime the camera (accelerometer in the camera) detects motion within the previous 10 minutes. If they’re on-body, or in a moving car, they should be recording.
The “save” button could work the same: mark 30 seconds before until “save” is deactivated to be “do not delete this for rotation” - but otherwise, save everything anyway, only rotate out after 2TB of memory card is full, and download at the end of every shift.
Better still, download continuously to the car and 5G it to a cloud server where the department can’t delete it.
Make the record button a pause button. Let it stop for five minutes if you’re not moving. Once you walk away, it automatically resumes, independent of time. If you pressed pause while not in front of the shitter, you’re investigated.
Unless you’re going to the bathroom in front of a mirror why does it need to be paused at all?
I don’t want to fart and shit and groan in front of a camera or a microphone.
Body cams film people being shot. Body cams film people being dragged out of their beds in their underwear and detained. And we’re clutching our pearls at some farts and groans that no one is going to watch? If you can’t handle someone possibly hearing you fart you shouldn’t be a cop.
But fine, allow cops to mute the audio. Problem solved.
If they mute the audio anytime they are not in the bathroom it is assumed they are trying to hide something and the missing audio is assumed to be damaging to the cops testimony.
Yes, I’m not willing to become as bad as them.
Mute is fine for me.
The company that sells the cameras and the police buying them don’t want that. The guy who owns the company that makes most body cams advertises that the cameras don’t record more accurately than the human eye. This enables cops to show a blurry 16fps 720p video and go “it looked like he was pulling out a gun”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZd88mdVs0U
That might indeed be the result sometimes :). Doesn’t matter. Since the US seems OK with Amazon making their drivers pee in a bottle and docking them points for gazing away while driving, why not make police submit to full recording like this?
Because the police aren’t the slaves, they’re the overseers.