4 ms·

I don't see anything concerning about the videos. But, I do think they should be shared with the public by default. Maybe after a short delay to allow redacti

I don't see anything concerning about the videos. But, I do think they should be shared with the public by default. Maybe after a short delay to allow redaction of sensitive scenes (which would in turn need to be acknowledged and explained and subject to future FOIA-style requests). Same for body-cams worn by beat officers. And in both cases, missing video (including purposefully obscured by car hood, etc) should be grounds for discipline.

mike_d 4y ago
They are shared with the public by default. The video downlinks are not encrypted and with the appropriate equipment and knowledge you can watch them in real time. In a lot of places TV stations get the direct video feed under an agreement that they delay it by a few minutes to avoid helping suspects. In terms of body cam footage, missing video or intentional obstruction are relatively rare occurrences - but it gets heavy media play. For the most part public defenders hate body cams because they dramatically increase work load [1] and make the defense of observable charges (DUI, resisting arrest, etc) very difficult. 1. https://www.pilotonline.com/government/local/vp-nw-body-camera-footage-attorneys-workload-20190908-jqpd7sr4qffz3jgtjhjoqn3vyy-story.html https://www.pilotonline.com/government/local/vp-nw-body-came...
- chaps 4y ago
  Where are you getting your info that missing body camera is a rare occurrence? I've done a non-trivial amount of analysis on body camera metadata against arrest timings in Chicago and this is... just plain wrong. It's an extremely common occurrence. And no, this sort of video isn't shared with the public by default. Maybe for some, but it's NOT common.
  - mike_d 4y ago
    I was referring to the air unit footage being public by default. Sorry for the confusion. I applaud your efforts to dig into body cam footage for police accountability. But there is probably selection bias in that you're looking around already noteworthy incidents where there might be suspicious behavior. On the whole a staggeringly massive amount of camera footage is being generated to the point that storage is becoming a budget concern for some departments: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/some-us-police-departments-dump-body-camera-programs-amid-high-costs/2019/01/21/991f0e66-03ad-11e9-b6a9-0aa5c2fcc9e4_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/some-us-police-depar...
    - thaumasiotes 4y ago
      > I applaud your efforts to dig into body cam footage for police accountability. But there is probably selection bias in that you're looking around already noteworthy incidents where there might be suspicious behavior. "Footage only goes missing if that would help the police" is not really a compelling defense of the integrity of the system, even if that happens in less than 1% of cases. "We're here for you, except when you need us" makes an awful slogan.
    - chaps 4y ago
      You're absolutely making ugly assumptions from out of nothing by thinking I was looking at notable incidents. I was not. My only criteria was about whether there was an arrest, and whether there was body camera footage around that arrest. Granted, the reporting I did on it was for the early days of the George Floyd protests, but it's a pattern that persists. Hell, there's a god damned policy that says whenever a cop moves from one unit to another, that they don't bring their BWC with them. Chicago has entire units that aren't required to have body camera despite the fact that they do arrests in areas of reported high crime, and yes, those units have shot people without even wearing any BWC. And of course BWC usage is an expensive undertaking. But how, in any way, does that even remotely come close to speaking to its actual, complete usage or whether it gets disabled or turned on prior to an arrest? That's a silly and naive statement, and I think you know it. Here's the work I did on BWC: https://thetriibe.com/2020/12/hundreds-of-chicago-police-made-arrests-without-body-cameras-during-2020-uprisings/ https://thetriibe.com/2020/12/hundreds-of-chicago-police-mad... New data released by the Chicago Police Department (CPD) from the first weekend of the Black Summer 2020 uprisings shows that 64% of all arrests between May 30 and June 1 occurred without body camera footage.
      - mike_d 4y ago
        I can't read the page you linked because it is terribly broken with overlays, but from what I gather you are conflating "missing footage by policy" (specific units don't have cameras allocated to them) with "missing by malice" (officers intentionally subverting the system). There is a bit of dogmatism in your argument. If you are convinced the police are evil to begin with, that is the only conclusion you are going to draw from the data you have.
- runlevel1 4y ago
  > For the most part public defenders hate body cams That's too strong of an assertion. The PDs I've heard from actually like body cameras because it keeps police honest. The problem, as that article describes, is that PDs are overworked, underpaid, and offices of the public defender are usually understaffed. Reviewing bodycam footage for every arrest has substantially increased their already heavy workload.
chaps 4y ago
A lot of the footage is definitely FOIA'able, but it's not a default and they will readily deny you for arbitrary reasons. Most common is because of "undue burden", for the time it takes to review/redact. Last time I requested/received surveillance video of a protest, it took about 3-4 months to get through FOIA and they didn't even redact it.

mike_d 4y ago

They are shared with the public by default. The video downlinks are not encrypted and with the appropriate equipment and knowledge you can watch them in real time. In a lot of places TV stations get the direct video feed under an agreement that they delay it by a few minutes to avoid helping suspects. In terms of body cam footage, missing video or intentional obstruction are relatively rare occurrences - but it gets heavy media play. For the most part public defenders hate body cams because they dramatically increase work load [1] and make the defense of observable charges (DUI, resisting arrest, etc) very difficult. 1. https://www.pilotonline.com/government/local/vp-nw-body-camera-footage-attorneys-workload-20190908-jqpd7sr4qffz3jgtjhjoqn3vyy-story.html https://www.pilotonline.com/government/local/vp-nw-body-came...

chaps 4y ago
Where are you getting your info that missing body camera is a rare occurrence? I've done a non-trivial amount of analysis on body camera metadata against arrest timings in Chicago and this is... just plain wrong. It's an extremely common occurrence. And no, this sort of video isn't shared with the public by default. Maybe for some, but it's NOT common.
- mike_d 4y ago
  I was referring to the air unit footage being public by default. Sorry for the confusion. I applaud your efforts to dig into body cam footage for police accountability. But there is probably selection bias in that you're looking around already noteworthy incidents where there might be suspicious behavior. On the whole a staggeringly massive amount of camera footage is being generated to the point that storage is becoming a budget concern for some departments: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/some-us-police-departments-dump-body-camera-programs-amid-high-costs/2019/01/21/991f0e66-03ad-11e9-b6a9-0aa5c2fcc9e4_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/some-us-police-depar...
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    > I applaud your efforts to dig into body cam footage for police accountability. But there is probably selection bias in that you're looking around already noteworthy incidents where there might be suspicious behavior. "Footage only goes missing if that would help the police" is not really a compelling defense of the integrity of the system, even if that happens in less than 1% of cases. "We're here for you, except when you need us" makes an awful slogan.
  - chaps 4y ago
    You're absolutely making ugly assumptions from out of nothing by thinking I was looking at notable incidents. I was not. My only criteria was about whether there was an arrest, and whether there was body camera footage around that arrest. Granted, the reporting I did on it was for the early days of the George Floyd protests, but it's a pattern that persists. Hell, there's a god damned policy that says whenever a cop moves from one unit to another, that they don't bring their BWC with them. Chicago has entire units that aren't required to have body camera despite the fact that they do arrests in areas of reported high crime, and yes, those units have shot people without even wearing any BWC. And of course BWC usage is an expensive undertaking. But how, in any way, does that even remotely come close to speaking to its actual, complete usage or whether it gets disabled or turned on prior to an arrest? That's a silly and naive statement, and I think you know it. Here's the work I did on BWC: https://thetriibe.com/2020/12/hundreds-of-chicago-police-made-arrests-without-body-cameras-during-2020-uprisings/ https://thetriibe.com/2020/12/hundreds-of-chicago-police-mad... New data released by the Chicago Police Department (CPD) from the first weekend of the Black Summer 2020 uprisings shows that 64% of all arrests between May 30 and June 1 occurred without body camera footage.
    - mike_d 4y ago
      I can't read the page you linked because it is terribly broken with overlays, but from what I gather you are conflating "missing footage by policy" (specific units don't have cameras allocated to them) with "missing by malice" (officers intentionally subverting the system). There is a bit of dogmatism in your argument. If you are convinced the police are evil to begin with, that is the only conclusion you are going to draw from the data you have.
runlevel1 4y ago
> For the most part public defenders hate body cams That's too strong of an assertion. The PDs I've heard from actually like body cameras because it keeps police honest. The problem, as that article describes, is that PDs are overworked, underpaid, and offices of the public defender are usually understaffed. Reviewing bodycam footage for every arrest has substantially increased their already heavy workload.

chaps 4y ago

A lot of the footage is definitely FOIA'able, but it's not a default and they will readily deny you for arbitrary reasons. Most common is because of "undue burden", for the time it takes to review/redact. Last time I requested/received surveillance video of a protest, it took about 3-4 months to get through FOIA and they didn't even redact it.