body cameras

  • May 15, 2015

    by Caroline Cox

    Matthew Menendez considers at the blog for the Brennan Center for Justice what happens with judicial elections after the ruling in Williams-Yulee v. Florida Bar.

    At The Atlantic, Danah Boyd and Alex Rosenblat argue that the enthusiasm for police-worn body cameras is premature.

    Elias Isquith considers at Salon how the way the public discusses crime may make the problem worse.

    Suzy Khimm writes in The New Republic that child care is an economic problem that the government could help fix with subsidizes for American families.

    The New York Times Editorial Board explains how a House bill that would ban virtually all abortions 20 weeks or more after fertilization is based on bogus arguments.

  • May 13, 2015

    by Christopher Durocher

    In August 2014, Ferguson, Missouri police officer Darren Wilson killed Michael Brown. Partially as the result of conflicting accounts of what happened, a grand jury declined to indict Wilson, sparking a national debate about police brutality, particularly against people of color, and the limits of police accountability. Through numerous incidents of police abuse that have followed, culminating most recently in protests and civil unrest in Baltimore after the death of Freddie Gray, one proposed reform has gained much attention – the adoption of police body-worn cameras.

    As the nation wrestles with the possibility that police brutality may reflect structural, implicit bias against people of color, supporters of police body-worn cameras argue that they would provide an objective record of what transpired when an interaction between a police officer and a civilian leads to the civilian’s injury or death. As evidence of video’s power, they point to North Charleston, South Carolina police officer Michael Slager, who was charged with first degree murder three days after shooting Walter Scott.  Slager’s indictment was due in large part to a video recording of the shooting that contradicted his report of events. Supporters also point to the benefit of body-worn cameras in disproving false claims of abuse against police and in encouraging both police and civilians to “be on their best behavior,” since they know a camera is recording their words and actions.

    Skeptics, however, point to the death of Eric Garner in Staten Island as evidence that cameras, at least absent fundamental changes in policing, will have little impact on police behavior or accountability. Garner’s tragic death occurred when one of the five New York City police officers attempting to arrest him for a minor infraction put him in what appeared to be a banned chokehold. Despite shocking video of Garner’s arrest – in which he can be heard pleading that he is unable to breathe – prosecutors refused to indict the officer. Video failed to bring justice for Garner or his family.

    In the ACS Issue Brief “Police Body-Worn Cameras: Evidentiary Benefits and Privacy Threats” Professor Marc Jonathan Blitz of Oklahoma City University School of Law examines the costs and benefits of body-worn cameras programs and, while acknowledging that cameras will not serve as a panacea, outlines policies that police departments should adopt to ensure the maximum effectiveness of such programs.  As Blitz observes, “Even when camera evidence is flawed, it is often far better than eyewitness accounts, especially when such eyewitness accounts are given long after the events.”

  • April 8, 2015
    Guest Post

    by Nashwa Gewaily, Fellow at the ACLU of Massachusetts.

    On the evening of March 27, an apparent shootout left a police officer critically wounded and a man dead on the streets of Boston’s Roxbury neighborhood. As word of the incident spread, divergent narratives emerged and questions abounded across social media and news sites. In the aftermath, the Boston Police Department and its commissioner were widely praised in traditional media outlets for quickly sharing with select community figures an unbiased account of what had transpired: video footage from a nearby business that captured critical moments of the encounter.

    In the wake of a number of high-profile fatal police encounters, followed by community outrage and mass demonstrations, one could easily anticipate the heavy cloud of tension over Boston had nothing been produced to clear the air.  This incident is one of tragic many that reveal the benefits of capturing police encounters on video.

    Yet, it comes at a time when states are scrambling to make it much more difficult for police incident footage – specifically, police encounters recorded by body-worn cameras – to see the light of day. Citing privacy concerns, legislators in at least 15 states have introduced bills that would exempt from public records law or otherwise limit the disclosure of police-civilian encounter footage obtained from body cameras.  While there is certainly an obvious need to protect the privacy of anyone videotaped by police, the over breadth of many of the proposed rules only serve to undermine the transparency that is sorely needed to bring accountability to police departments.

  • December 12, 2014

    by Caroline Cox

    Linda Greenhouse discusses in The New York Times the Supreme Court and rights of pregnant workers.

    At the blog for the Brennan Center for Justice, Faiza Patel argues that it will take more than body cameras to restore trust in law enforcement.

    Andrew Cohen writes for The Marshall Project about the role of race in interrogation proceedings.

    Brent Kendall and Colleen Wilson report in The Wall Street Journal about the disappearance of a plaintiff whose case was accepted by the Supreme Court.

    Tom Raum of ABC News reports that the NLRB has issued a rule to speed up union organizing.

    At NPR, Sam Sanders takes a look at the recent ruling on Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk