The Cellar - Body Cameras on Cops

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Current Events (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Body Cameras on Cops (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=31426)

Body Cameras on Cops

Body cameras have been cited as being turned off or just not worn by a few bad cops recently, even after direct orders from their superiors. The good cops, the majority, welcome the cameras as proof they are doing the right thing, and protection against claims of misconduct.
Here's one case where they paid off, getting this scum off the streets.

Quote:

MARKSVILLE, La. — A lawyer says body camera video shows the father of a 6-year-old autistic boy who was shot to death in his car had his hands in the air and did not pose a threat before police opened fire last week.
Mark Jeansonne is the attorney for Chris Few, who was seriously wounded when local marshals in the town of Marksville opened fire. His son, Jeremy Mardis, was killed in the backseat. Jeansonne said “this was not a threatening situation for the police.”

Jeansonne spoke with The Associated Press after a closed hearing for the two marshals, now jailed on $1 million bond. Thirty-two-year-old Derrick Stafford of Mansura and 23-year-old Derrick Greenhouse Jr., of Marksville each is charged with second-degree murder and attempted second-degree murder.
State police declined to comment on the video, citing the ongoing investigation.

Few remained hospitalized Monday, missing the family’s funeral, scheduled for that afternoon in Mississippi, said his attorney, Mark Jeansonne.
Jeansonne also said that Few’s condition is improving, but that he has not yet been told that his son was killed.

I have no words. :mad:

Source?

Augment: Nevermind. I did a quick check, and apparently, Bruce is 2 weeks late with his report. Still tragic tho.

More video, or less?
Sheriff calls for policing the police despite 'chilling effect' concerns
StarTribune - Juliet Linderman - 10/29/15

Quote:

…
By February, Baltimore will equip with a body camera every officer
who comes into regular contact with the public, a program that rolled out Monday
with a pilot effort in which 155 officers will wear body cameras for 54 days.
But only some of the officers taking part in the test volunteered for it;
the rest were selected by their supervisors.

Roberts said every officer has a different view.
"It's objective, and in many cases they will exonerate an officer
against false accusation and that's a big plus," he said.

"Downside is interpretation. Who is interpreting it?
Are they doing so in an emotional manner or an objective manner?
The bottom line is: there's no consensus."...

Such body-camera programs should establish and publicize a longer view.

When an LE officer is doing his/her job properly, there is no downside.
Objective exoneration of the officer should be the ultimate goal.

Otherwise, a jury will become the interpreter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zathris (Post 946162)

I have no words. :mad:

Source?

Augment: Nevermind. I did a quick check, and apparently, Bruce is 2 weeks late with his report. Still tragic tho.

2 weeks late? Since when am I your fucking news source?:flipbird:

I just went and re-acquainted myself with the "ignore user" procedure.

I've never used it, but, I am VERY close...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gravdigr (Post 946215)

I just went and re-acquainted myself with the "ignore user" procedure.

Why? Are you really that emotional?

After 18 months, they finally decided to drop charges against a man for videotaping arrests in Suffolk County NY.

Charges Dropped Against Student Arrested While Taping Police

Quote:

He claims the officers attempted to erase the video from his phone but mistakenly erased another video. ...

Mickey Osterreicher, general counsel of the National Press Photographers Association, has said he hears of "almost four incidents a week" in which police either harass, interfere or arrest citizens for shooting video. ... "Citizens can record police and police can record citizens when either is out on the street in a public place."

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw (Post 946269)

Are you really that emotional?

You say that like feeling emotions is bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 946164)

2 weeks late? Since when am I your fucking news source?:flipbird:

It wasn't my intention to upset you, but on almost every message board I've been a part of, it's either an expressed or common sense rule that when quoting an article to include a link to the original article, and if my memory serves, I've never posted it news articles here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gravdigr (Post 946215)

I just went and re-acquainted myself with the "ignore user" procedure.

I've never used it, but, I am VERY close...

So, you need a "feature" to ignore me? You can't do it on your own? :eek:

I usually do, but this thread isn't about announcing that story, we're not a latest news source, it's about the value of body cameras which is an ongoing discussion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zathris (Post 946273)

You can't do it on your own? :eek:

I've been doing it for a while, now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gravdigr (Post 946276)

I've been doing it for a while, now.

Then you shouldn't need to rely on external help to ignore me. Let your free will tell you not to reply to this post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 946274)

...we're not a latest news source...

See. I was not aware of that.

FTR, my question is, what happens to the good cops who refuse to wear cop cams; and how do you get bad cops to agree to wear cams? Also, what's to prevent the cop from removing, or turn off the device?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zathris (Post 946285)

Then you shouldn't need to rely on external help to ignore me. Let your free will tell you not to reply to this post.

I would happily wheel you right into traffic.

Good-bye.

The last one I heard of not following orders got fired, then his lawyer went to court and got him reinstated with back pay. I don't remember the technicality. If this happens often, the politicians will make changes in the rules so it can't be overturned. If the camera is not worn, or turned off, when an incident happens, they'll have no case.