Police Use Of Force Drops 60% When Officers Required To Wear Video Cameras
 

Police Use Of Force Drops 60% When Officers Required To Wear Video Cameras | Ben Swann Truth In Media

Police Use Of Force Drops 60% When Officers Required To Wear Video Cameras
PoliticsUSBy: Jay Syrmopoulos Mar 10, 2014

Rialto, CA- The Rialto Police Department, over the past year, has been experimenting with equipping body cameras to the 70 officers on its force. The initial results show a promising solution to the excessive use of force by officers.

The police chief in Rialto, Tony Farrar, is on record as stating, “ I think we’ve opened some eyes in the law enforcement world. We’ve shown the potential.”

This potential he speaks of is due to the scientific data that this experiment has yielded over the course of the last year. The body cameras were introduced on officers in February 2012, over the next twelve months total complaints filed against them dropped by a staggering 88%, with use of force by officers dropping by 60%.

With the cameras there has been an improvement in officer’s demeanor and tone towards those they serve. As Chief Farrar noted, “With a camera they are more conscious of how they speak and how they treat people.”

When those in a position of authority are watched they are less likely to abuse that authority. Chief Farrar says, “That’s just human nature. As an officer you act a bit more professional, follow the rules a bit better.” In addition it also helps protect officers from false accusations of excessive use of force.

Chief Farrar is providing a new paradigm for policing, taking a proactive approach rather than making excuses for his officers and toeing the line. To his credit he has a master’s degree from the Cambridge Institute of Criminology, from which stemmed the idea to utilize cameras.

Im not surprised but those are astonishing results... too bad the institutionalized terror that police officers bring is trained and commanded from the top down so I highly doubt our leaders would let this be implemented through out the Americas.

We need camera's on these crooks to get 80% turnarounds.

^ Hey look who showed up, the village fucking idiot.

There's another way to look at it. Perhaps all the idiots out there who know they are being videotaped aren't able to file complaints against the officers as there's a record of what happened.

It goes both ways, but of course people will jump to conclusions and assume that police are the ONLY ones acting differently due to the knowledge of being recorded.

We need this everywhere.

Bonus, they can sell crazy footage to the show COPS, in the action style

Agreed 100%


Cops are generally good people but fuck when a bad one is having a bad day and doesn't like you, watch out!!!

Anyone shocked at the results? If my employer filmed me (and I knew about it) they would probably see production increase and generally speaking me doing a better job.

good idea. i think it also helps keep those they interact with a little accountable too. if they do something to cause an officer to take action they cannot cry brutality or something.

I like this idea because it not only protects the public, it also protects the officers who are sometimes falsely accused and reprimanded by bystanders that don't fully understand what is going on.

yeah that's why the number of force used and number of reduced complaints are different.

Obviously the force was reduced by 60% which is good, but the complaints are reduced by 88%, not 60%.

Bystanders/people can't exaggerate the stories how cops are beating people up for nothing, also cops can't randomly threat people with power and jail time.
It really works out great for both parties. In event of lawsuit, it won't be push and shove with your word vs cop's word.
The judge can just look at the video, which usually worth more than your/witness/officers words. I think cameras are necessary ESPECIALLY for a profession like police.

On the flip side, I wonder how many officers could get injured or how many suspects could get away because an officer is worried about overusing force and therefore uses too little force? The very nature of their job and the clowns they deal with means that they WILL need to use force at times - and rightly so.

Agreed, I wonder how many complaints don't get filed once some dumbass realizes they were taped being a dumbass.

Police: "Before you file that complaint sir, would you like to review the video footage?"
Dumbass: "The what?"
Police: "The video recording of the incident, from the officers video camera."
Dumbass: "Err, y'know what, just forget about that complaint..."

But you still can't deny the fact that the complaints decreased by 88% which is quite substantial.

I have never been a victim of police brutality, however there are bunch of videos on Youtube that are quite disturbing.

Officers would tazer a 18 year old girl who is already handcuffed and on the ground just so that she would shut up.
They would kick you in the rib 5 times even though you're handcuffed and not resisting.

Police brutality is a serious problem, however if you look on youtube, citizens tend to get officers back when the "victim" ran away, resist, act like an idiot, etc. You'll see so many comments "This is far from police brutality, this bitch deserved it" or "Hahaha that guy was acting like an idiot"
So my point is, a lot of people tend to get officers' back if it was fair.

It probably has more to do with the change in demeanor of the "clients" after they are aware they are being filmed.

Just put camera's on every street corner or just force everyone to wear google glass.

thats the only way to find persons of interest

ftfy

i'm neither for or against this, but for the sake of discussion...

sure, it's great to have them act nicer and be more professional... but what i'm wondering is if it would make officers second guess themselves in crucial moments that require judgment calls and immediate actions. In video, we can slow things down, we can take our time to evaluate everything in the video and break it down to analyze, but an officer may have to make split second decisions. If a suspect had a weapon and did not obey repeated orders to drop it, and your weapon is drawn, protocol would have you shoot the guy. Will having a camera make an officer second guess himself in that moment, knowing he would be scrutinized for his actions (shooting and possibly killing someone on video)?

When those types of situations go down, I think instinct just kicks in and adrenaline starts pumping. I don't know how much the officer/s are going to pay attention to their video camera vs. trying not to get injured.

All police cars have video camera's on them. I don't think that affects their ability to handle a situation with the proper protocol.

Montreal Police is considering it.
Vancouver Police Department and other BC police force should consider this.

Should Montreal police officers wear video cameras? | CTV Montreal News

This.. not sure why anyone is surprised, as it's the Hawthorne effect in action. People - cops, construction workers, even 9-5 peasants - will all behave differently (generally more positively or with greater productivity) when they know they are being recorded. That being said, I think this is a great idea and should be implemented in Vancouver as well.

I've had multiple different cops tell me that I "shouldn't be afraid of being searched/watched if you're not doing anything wrong"... so what's the difference when we reverse the observer/observed status quo? $0.02.

The police chiefs should also be monitored in the office as to what reports and high profile cases they over see... its not enough to just resign when shit hits the fan as our own police chief did when video of Paul Boyds murder surfaced five years after the fact. Despite the many witnesses, the force colluded to make it look like Boyd was swinging a bike chain when in reality he was crawling on his hands and knees when shot.