Jared Brower Mrs. Kirk 11(1) Composition 11 December 2015 Police Body Cameras Required? Guiding Question: Should police officers be required to wear body cameras while on duty? Thesis: ​
While on duty, police officers should be required to wear body cameras because it will benefit the overall atmosphere and actions of officers and citizens in everyday life. I.
In what ways will body cameras benefit or harm police officers in their jobs? Body cameras will protect officers from dangerous people or situations but also expose false accusations. A. Body camera video will provide a true visual of a possible false report towards police. 1. “The critics’ main objection to the policy is that it will promote dishonest reporting” (Simon). 2. “When the footage reveals unambiguous misconduct, officers would be foolish to file dishonest reports” (Simon). 3. “And when the footage reveals proper behavior, officers would feel emboldened to present their actions honestly and confidently” (Simon). B. Reliable body camera footage will harm the officers if it shows wrongdoing. 1. The ACLU favors body cameras because it would be used as a check against police abusing their power (Stanley). 2. Distrust can cause violations in an organization’s standards and practices. (Simon) 3. Video footage that doesn’t match an officer’s story creates a lot of distrust from the people but also the police department (Simon). C. The body camera will harm an officer if the camera is not used as it is supposed to be used. 1. Police will have to not be able to control the cameras because they could delete bad footage (Stanley). 2. If the camera gets dislodged during an altercation, many will question if the officer did that on purpose to hide wrong behavior (“Video: Police”). 3. Body cameras are supposed to protect the rights of people the police are investigating (“Video: Police”). II. In what ways will body cameras create privacy issues? Body camera videos will break some privacy laws if not handled correctly. A. The videos cannot be released into the public if it is not approved. 1. Video should be deleted quickly once it is not needed anymore (Stanley). 2. The mayor of Washington called for videos to be exempt from public record requests (Madhani). 3. “Florida’s legislature passed a bill last month that would exempt from public record law police videos shot in a house, health care facility, or any place a person would like privacy (Madhani). B. The police have to be aware of what they are recording and what is done with the recordings. 1. Body cameras create law issues like how long the police are allowed to keep the video’s from the victims viewing (“Video: Police Body Cameras”). 2. When officers enter a home, the cameras will need to be clearly visible to the owner of the house (Stanley). 3. People recorded by cop cams should have access to those recordings as long as the government keeps them (Stanley). C. Body cameras will violate certain privacy laws. 1. “Under current state law, police cannot record audio inside a person’s home, unless they get approval from the person” (“Video: Police Body Cameras”). 2. Continuous recordings would not work because certain areas can't record audio without invading privacy rights (Stanley). 3. Releasing videos of police confrontation that ends in a death doesn't allow approval from the victim (Madhani). III. How will body cameras make suspects act differently? Body cameras will result in fewer aggressive actions being taken towards police because they would be recorded. A. Body cameras lower the amount of officer civilian confrontations. 1. Many officers said cameras reduced the confrontations with citizens (Wing). 2. In the study, use­of­force incidents dropped 53 percent among officers with cameras (Wing). 3. The study also showed fewer civilian and officer injures along with less force having to be used (Wing). B. The use of video evidence showing exact events lowered civilian complaints of police officers. 1. “Civilian complaints against those officers also saw a 65 percent decline” (Wing). 2. If civilians that are looking for complaints about police see a camera attached to an officer, most likely, they would be less likely to file a complaint that a video can show didn’t happen. 3. University of South Florida did a study for one year where they compared 46 officers wearing body cameras to 43 who do not (Wing). IV. Will body cameras provide better evidence in police court cases? Having solid video evidence in a court case will definitely provide true evidence from an event. A. Video evidence in court will cause more truth in the courtroom because of the idea of solid evidence. 1. “The United Kingdom, where officers have been using body cameras since 2005, court officials have seen an increase in guilty pleas” (Alexander). 2. D.C. police started wearing body cameras and lawyers start to see improvement in evidence support (Alexander). 3. Most people will tell the truth in court if they know that there is already evidence that will end their case right away. B. Body camera video will expose false statements in court. 1. The first court case that used body camera video in Washington, involved a common assault allegation (Alexander). 2. Michael Fouse, the victim from that Washington case, accused Allen Wells of beating him in the head “about 25 to 30 times” (Alexander). 3. The video however, showed Fouse not mentioning any of the details he added later (Alexander). 4. “Such video can help bolster or contradict a testimony from officers, victims or witnesses” (Alexander). Solid set up! see my notes