If you live in Hillsborough or Pinellas County, we urge you to sign our petition and engage your local representatives.
Why Body Cameras?
Restorative Justice Coalition gathered data from Campaign Zero and Body Worn Cameras Scorecard to develop a sensible plan on body camera usage. The fact is body cameras alone are not a solution. Recklessly enacted body camera policy can actually be more dangerous, as they can be a tool of surveillance, rather than accountability, which defeats the purpose.
The City of Tampa already has a body camera program; while we recognize this, it is extremely faulty, which we will explain as we go along. We are urging City of Tampa to update their body camera policies. City of St. Petersburg and City of Plant City lack body cameras entirely.
The Logic
"Locks are not meant to keep thieves out but rather to keep the honest, honest."
Accountability makes sense. A USF Study suggests that police officers who actively wear body cameras decreased the amount of blunt force they use on civilians when compared to those who do not wear any at all. The amount of force reduced is marginal but is a step in the correct direction. Further, body cameras, when regulated properly, can allow for increased accountability when reviewing cases of police misconduct, especially if the case makes it to prosecution.
In July 2017, Plant City Police killed Jesus Cervantes and there is nothing to show for it except for the accounts of the police officers involved. Since there is no footage, there is nothing to indicate to the public or investigators that their stories are correct. While the police chief explains that they are not worth the expense, it should be noted that the City of Plant City Police operates on a budget of nearly $6 million dollars annually but only employs 70 police officers. In addition, the City had no problem approving a $300,000 armored tactical vehicle despite their misgivings earlier in the year.
How Body Cameras Help
Aside from what is cited above, Rialto, a small police force, experimented in 2012 and found:
"The results were surprising — because they were so clear. When officers were wearing cameras on shifts, police use of force against suspects was 50 percent lower. Similarly, complaints against the police fell to almost zero in the 12 months after the cameras were introduced.
Police use of force and the complaints it engenders are expensive for police departments. They cost the trust and cooperation of communities. And a single complaint against a police force can cost upward of a million dollars in compensation. For a small force like Rialto, that’s a big blow to the budget."
Further, they the usage of body cameras famously caught police misconduct when law enforcement decided to plant drugs on a civilian in Baltimore.Plant City and City of Saint Petersburg
With the complete absence of body cameras, we are unable to evaluate the conduct of police officers with their behavior and interactions with the public. We encourage you to urge your local representatives to support body cameras that are well regulated.
City of Tampa
We need our City to improve their body camera regulation to meet acceptable standards of regulation, as defined by Body Worn Camera Scorecards, which has been signed and approved by many organizations across the country, representing marginalized members of our society.
As of October 2017, BWC Scorecard ranked City of Tampa as follows:
 | Makes the Department Policy Publicly and Readily Available |
 | Limits Officer Discretion on When to Record |
| Addresses Personal Privacy Concerns |
 | Prohibits Officer Pre-Report Viewing |
| Limits Retention of Footage |
| Protects Footage Against Tampering and Misuse |
| Makes Footage Available to Individuals Filing Complaints |
| Limits Biometric Searching of Footage |
Biometric Searching of Footage should never be permitted. Biometric footage could result in the building of a database and can be used as surveillance. Facial recognition tools should be forbidden from any body camera functionalities. Prohibit Officer Prereport Viewing would prevent officers from being able to collaborate a story based on the camera view--their authentic memory of the incident should be documented first before they can view the camera and "match it up". Protect Footage Against Tampering can be done by requiring the footage to be handled off-site, to a third-party agency whom only releases footage when it complies with a complaint or public request. Officer Discretion to Record must be clearly, finely defined and this will help prevent officers from picking and choosing which incidents they chose to record, including providing disciplinary action for failure to adhere to the guidelines. Limit Footage Retention policies are important; unless footage is being used in response to a public complaint or a prosecutor investigation, the footage should be eliminated after six months to secure the data of the public. For full details of Restorative Justice Coalition's policy points on body cameras, and the related research, you can view our full guide. (Bit.ly/RJCGuide)
We are suggesting this law, as written by the ACLU (although slightly amended) to be entered into state and local law.
We believe that by implementing that law as local ordinance will improve the City of Tampa's transparency, accountability and prevent unnecessary surveillance.
You can sign our petition now: www.controlthepatrol.com
In addition, you can share this blog post and continue the conversation. While body cameras, and the other functions we are fighting for, will only make a dent on changing the state of policing locally, it is imperative that changes are made to protect the most vulnerable of us all.
No comments:
Post a Comment