Body Cameras Vs Police

Who does a camera protect when the police utilize a body camera for their interactions between themselves and the public? The camera may not protect an officer in the sense that a gun would, but when all is said and done the camera holds the evidence. As long as the evidence is transferred and stored properly that evidence can be retrieved at any time when the need arises. There are many benefits to the camera, but like everything, there is also a down side. While cameras could be considered a privacy violation, body cameras protect the police and the public with better behavior, less use of force, saving monetary resources and documented details that provide all involved an additional witness. When the camera is on, the behavior

If a Use of force is looked at by the public as unnecessary or gets out of hand a lawsuit is usually soon to follow. In Rialto California, during a 12-month study, Use of Force declined by 60% with the use of body cameras. Citizen complaints against the police also declined 88% in the same city during that trial (Mims, C 2014). Part of the reason that complaints declined is due to an additional source to back up complaints taking a “he said she said” situation to an “it is what it is” situation because the camera does not lie. And while the camera is busy capturing indisputable evidence many of the Use of Forces have now either been justified as actions deemed appropriate for the situation, or taken disciplinary action against misconduct. When a camera records an incident and it is used in a court of law it is compelling evidence that cannot be changed, it can not be manipulated and it tells both sides of the story. Author David Bakardjiev (2015) wrote an article on the proper use of Body worn Cameras or BWC and describes "The presence of BWCs could change the dynamic of whether a statement is admissible in court" (Bakardjiev, D 2015). Studies done as far back as 2005 in the UK have shown cameras aid in the prosecution of crimes by providing additional " and uniquely compelling" evidence. Here in the U.S., studies

While interviewing an Officer with the Coolidge Police department in Coolidge Arizona, Officer Phil Blour spoke of his point of view of the body cameras his department utilizes. At first, he was against the camera because he did not know how it would work. But after a year of his department using them, his view on them has changed. He mentioned that if he made contact with someone who would rather not speak to him while he was recording then he simply turned the camera off. He also stated that while others feared to get in trouble for any minor violations they may have committed being caught on camera and fear of disciplinary action it has actually kept the officers from doing things that were against department policy, in the same way, that psychologists have reported that behavior improves just with the mere thought of someone being watched. While Coolidge is a small town with only 35 police officers, One can only assume that it would have the same effect of keeping officers following policy in larger towns where they see more