Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:16 pm
Time: 10:16 pm
Results for police surveillance
32 results foundAuthor: Whitehead, Paul C. Title: The Eye in the Sky: Evaluation of Police Helicopter Patrols Summary: The prime objectives of the London Police Helicopter Research Project were: 1) to evaluate whether helicopter patrols have a suppression effect on the incidence of various types of crime and occurrences (residential break and enter, commercial break and enter, auto theft, theft from auto, robbery, property damage, trespass by night, suspicious person and suspicious vehicle); and 2) evaluate whether a helicopter increases the operational effectiveness and/or efficiency of the police service. The suppression (deterrent) impact of helicopter patrols on rates of crime was primarily examined using a pre-test-post-test design with matched comparison areas, where, within each pair, the experimental and comparison areas were chosen randomly. Efficiency and effectiveness were evaluated by comparing a variety of indices of outcome for occurrences where the helicopter was included with occurrences for the police service as a whole. The results and conclusions of the project were: 1) A critical review of the literature concluded that there is no data to substantiate claims that helicopter use suppresses rates of crime. 2) The quasi-experimental tests conducted in the present study led to the following conclusions: a) there is no suppression effect on rates of crime; b) there is no diversion of crime to non-patrolled areas; and c) there is no spillover effect of helicopter patrols to non-patrolled areas. 3) Analyses of occurrence reports and police logs led to the following conclusions: a) there is evidence of increased efficiency (i.e. time per call is less when a helicopter is involved; the helicopter is frequently first on the scene); b) there is evidence of increased effectiveness (i.e. apprehensions are more likely) when the helicopter is involved; c) some types of searches lend themselves exceptionally well to the unique advantages of the helicopter. 4) Surveys indicated the following: a) members of the public are somewhat supportive of police helicopter use; b) police officers are highly positive about its contribution to policing. 5) Other topics addressed included the following: the conduct of urban searches; noise and other bothersome features of police helicopters; traffic; and pursuits. Details: Ottawa: Canadian Police Research Centre, 2001. 118p. Source: Internet Resource: TR-01-2001-R: Accessed September 27, 2011 at: http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collection_2008/ps-sp/PS63-2-2001R-1E.pdf Year: 2001 Country: Canada URL: http://dsp-psd.pwgsc.gc.ca/collection_2008/ps-sp/PS63-2-2001R-1E.pdf Shelf Number: 122916 Keywords: Crime PreventionPolice Helicopters (Canada)Police Surveillance |
Author: American Civil Liberties Union Title: You Are Being Tracked: How License Plate Readers Are Being Used to Record Americans' Movements Summary: If you’ve never seen an automatic license plate reader, it’s probably because you didn’t know what to look for. The devices have been proliferating around the country at worrying speed. Mounted on patrol cars or placed on bridges or overpasses, license plate readers combine high-speed cameras that capture photographs of every passing license plate with software that analyzes those photographs to identify the plate number. License plate reader systems typically check each plate number against “hot lists” of plates that have been uploaded to the system and provide an instant alert to a law enforcement agent when a match or “hit” appears. License plate readers would pose few civil liberties risks if they only checked plates against hot lists and these hot lists were implemented soundly. But these systems are configured to store the photograph, the license plate number, and the date, time, and location where all vehicles are seen — not just the data of vehicles that generate hits. All of this information is being placed into databases, and is sometimes pooled into regional sharing systems. As a result, enormous databases of motorists’ location information are being created. All too frequently, these data are retained permanently and shared widely with few or no restrictions on how they can be used. The implementation of automatic license plate readers poses serious privacy and other civil liberties threats. More and more cameras, longer retention periods, and widespread sharing allow law enforcement agents to assemble the individual puzzle pieces of where we have been over time into a single, high-resolution image of our lives. The knowledge that one is subject to constant monitoring can chill the exercise of our cherished rights to free speech and association. Databases of license plate reader information create opportunities for institutional abuse, such as using them to identify protest attendees merely because these individuals have exercised their First Amendment-protected right to free speech. If not properly secured, license plate reader databases open the door to abusive tracking, enabling anyone with access to pry into the lives of his boss, his exwife, or his romantic, political, or workplace rivals. In July 2012, American Civil Liberties Union affiliates in 38 states and Washington, D.C., sent 587 public records act requests to local police departments and state agencies to obtain information on how these agencies use license plate readers. We also filed requests with the U.S. Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Transportation to learn how the federal government has used grants to encourage the widespread adoption of license plate readers, as well as how it is using the technology itself. We received over 26,000 pages of documents from the law enforcement agencies that responded to our requests, about their policies, procedures, and practices for using license plate readers. This report provides an overview of what we have learned about license plate readers: what their capabilities are, how they are being used, and why they raise privacy issues of critical importance. We close by offering specific recommendations designed to allow law enforcement agencies to use license plate readers for legitimate purposes without subjecting Americans to the permanent recording of their every movement. Details: New York: ACLU, 2013. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 18, 2013 at: http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/071613-aclu-alprreport-opt-v05.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/071613-aclu-alprreport-opt-v05.pdf Shelf Number: 129438 Keywords: Automatic Number Plate Recognition (U.S.)License Place Recognition SystemPolice SurveillancePrivacy |
Author: Gierlack, Keith Title: License Plate Readers for Law Enforcement: Opportunities and Obstacles Summary: Since the use of license plate reader (LPR) technology is relatively new in the United States, opportunities and obstacles in its use in law enforcement are still under exploration. As the technology spreads, however, law-enforcement agencies, particularly those considering investing in an LPR system and other organizations focused on the information technology needs of law enforcement, may find the material in this report helpful. It provides an in-depth examination of the range of ways in which license plate scanners are used; the benefits and limits of LPR systems; and emerging practices for system operation. The RAND Corporation's research approach, exploratory interviews with law-enforcement personnel, sought to gather information not just from police officers but also from the diverse people responsible for installing, maintaining, and operating the systems. This method allowed RAND to thoroughly characterize and examine license plate scanner issues to add to the knowledge base. The interviews explored salient issues concerning system implementation, funding, case uses, field procedures, technology issues, data retention policies, and privacy concerns. RAND believes these findings overall will add value to the discussion on this technology's utility. Details: Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2014. 124p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 7, 2014 at: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR467/RAND_RR467.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR467/RAND_RR467.pdf Shelf Number: 132623 Keywords: Automatic Number Plate Recognition (U.S.)License Place Recognition SystemPolice SurveillancePolice TechnologyPrivacy |
Author: Gormally, Brian Title: The Policing You Don't See: Covert Policing and the Accountability Gap: Five years on from the transfer of 'national security' primacy to MI5 Summary: Covert policing - the practices of communication interception, surveillance, the use of informants and undercover operations - was used extensively during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. Covert policing is argued to have prolonged the conflict and did lasting and immense damage to the rule of law. After the signing of the peace agreement, the Northern Ireland police service undertook large-scale reforms which were designed to prevent the recurrence of such abuses. Yet the secret Security Service - implicated in past abuses - has not yet undertaken such reformation but has been put in charge of a highly important area of mainstream policing. MI5 maintains primacy in covert 'national security' policing and gives 'strategic direction' to the PSNI in this area. Despite its large role in policing and its lack of reform, governmental oversight of MI5 is limited and ineffective. Limited additional accountably measures were promised in the St. Andrews Agreement but some of the most significant commitments, such as those to publish policy frameworks, have not been honoured. Instead, MI5 has been given control of one of the most sensitive areas of policing in Northern Ireland, operating undercover, without having been reformed, and without an accountability structure. This report develops a human rights based framework from international standards and the Patten Report and uses it to analyse past and present covert policing practice. This report reflects on evidence of the involvement of police informants in serious criminality, which led to recommendations to improve legality and accountability of covert policing. However, since primacy in 'national security' policing was given to MI5 five years ago (2007), the research finds that there is a growing "accountability gap" over a large part of policing. This report explains that the UK level oversight of MI5 is plainly inadequate and that the local mechanisms that hold the PSNI to account are evaded by the Security Service. It argues that this situation falls woefully short of international standards and has the capacity to undermine confidence in policing as a whole. Details: Belfast: University of Ulster, Transnational Justice Institute, 2013. 115p. Source: Internet Resource: Transitional Justice Institute Research Paper No. 13-07: Accessed July 29, 2015 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2362759 Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2362759 Shelf Number: 136257 Keywords: Covert PolicingPolice AccountabilityPolice LegitimacyPolice Surveillance |
Author: Blitz, Marc Jonathan Title: Police Body-Worn Cameras: Evidentiary Benefits and Privacy Threats Summary: In this Issue Brief, Professor Blitz examines the costs and benefits of body-worn cameras programs. Acknowledging that cameras will not serve as a panacea, Professor Blitz outlines policies that police departments should adopt to ensure the maximum effectiveness of such programs. As Blitz observes, even though such footage is flawed, it is better than accounts given by eyewitnesses long after the event occurred. Blitz admits that such cameras can "transform ephemeral and forgettable moments into permanent and easily shared records" of the parts of our lives we may be "least comfortable sharing with others." To address these privacy concerns, Blitz examines model rules that place greater restrictions on police use of cameras in private homes and prevent the viewing or dissemination of body camera footage except in limited circumstances. Ultimately, Professor Blitz concludes that body-worn cameras can be an important tool in efforts to combat police abuse, if used in accordance with clear guidelines proposed. Details: Washington, DC: American Constitution Society, 2015. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed December 1, 2015 at: https://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Blitz_-_On-Body_Cameras_-_Issue_Brief.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Blitz_-_On-Body_Cameras_-_Issue_Brief.pdf Shelf Number: 137375 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasLaw Enforcement Technology Police AccountabilityPolice Behavior Police SurveillancePolice Technology Police-Citizen Interactions Police-Community Relations Video Technology |
Author: New York City Department of Investigation Title: Body-Worn Cameras in NYC: An Assessment of NYPD's Pilot Program and Recommendations to Promote Accountability Summary: In September 2014, New York City Police Department (NYPD) Commissioner William Bratton announced the launch of a small-scale pilot program to test the use of body-worn cameras (BWCs) by New York City police officers (Volunteer BWC Pilot Program). In mid- December 2014, the Volunteer BWC Pilot Program began with 54 BWCs deployed to patrol officers across the City. BWCs are mobile cameras worn by police officers that can capture audio and video recordings of encounters between police and members of the public. BWC technology has drawn national attention for its potential to improve policing while promoting transparency and accountability in law enforcement. Police departments using BWCs have reported positive changes in the conduct of both citizens and officers, as well as speedier resolutions to police misconduct complaints and litigation. As a result, BWC programs continue to spread rapidly across the country, and numerous organizations and advocacy groups have published reports and issued their own model BWC policies. However, with the potential benefits of BWCs come certain costs and concerns, including risks to the privacy and safety of both officers and the public. As NYPD ventures into the new, evolving, and high-profile world of BWCs, it will need to ensure that the policies and procedures governing BWC use are fair, practical, legal, and transparent. To this end, the New York of the Inspector General for the NYPD (OIG-NYPD) has conducted a detailed review of NYPD's Volunteer BWC Pilot Program in order to assess how certain key topics are addressed and to identify areas not adequately covered by the policy. Specifically, OIG-NYPD focused on five topics at the forefront of the discussion surrounding BWCs: - Officer discretion regarding when to record - Notifications to citizens by officers when a BWC is activated - Safeguards to ensure officer compliance with BWC policy - Access to footage by officers and the public - Retention and purging of BWC footage These issues are critical components of any BWC policy and have stirred the greatest controversy among police executives, oversight agencies, officers, and the unions that represent them. In order to better understand the Volunteer BWC Pilot Program in both theory and practice, OIG-NYPD conducted several meetings with the NYPD team that created, launched, and is overseeing the Volunteer BWC Pilot Program. Separately, OIG-NYPD interviewed multiple police officers who are participating in the program and wearing BWCs on patrol. As BWCs impact various groups, OIG-NYPD also consulted with entities that deal directly with NYPD - such as the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association (PBA), Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB), representatives from each of the City's five District Attorney's Offices and community advocates. Lastly, OIG-NYPD's evaluation of the Volunteer BWC Pilot Program included a comparative examination of NYPD's Operations Order 48 "Pilot Program - Use of Body-Worn Cameras" (Op Order 48) against the BWC policies of other police departments across the country and the policy recommendations of numerous independent studies. Through this work, OIG-NYPD was able to conduct a thorough and unique assessment of Op Order 48, specifically tailored to New York City's distinct policing environment. Based on the information gathered, OIG-NYPD developed 23 recommendations for improving the use of BWCs as NYPD transitions from its current pilot program to a more expansive long-term BWC program. Several of these recommendations - based on interviews with police officials and prosecutors, as well as the experiences of police departments nationwide - involve the safety of officers and witnesses as well as the integrity of the prosecution process. Details: New York: Department of Investigation, Office of the Inspector General, 2015. 71p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 1, 2015 at: http://www.nyc.gov/html/oignypd/assets/downloads/pdf/nypd-body-camera-report.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.nyc.gov/html/oignypd/assets/downloads/pdf/nypd-body-camera-report.pdf Shelf Number: 137413 Keywords: Body-Worn Cameras Law Enforcement Technology Police Accountability Police Behavior Police Surveillance Police Technology Police-Citizen Interactions Police-Community Relations Video Technology |
Author: Lum, Cynthia Title: Existing and Ongoing Body Worn Camera Research: Knowledge Gaps and Opportunities Summary: Recent use-of-force events have led law enforcement agencies, citizens, civil rights groups, city councils, and even the President to push for the rapid adoption of body-worn camera (BWC) technology. In a period of less than a year, BWCs transformed from a technology that received little attention by many police leaders and scholars to one that has become rapidly prioritized, funded, and diffused into local policing. At the same time, this rapid adoption of BWCs is occurring within a low information environment; researchers are only beginning to develop knowledge about the effects, both intentional and unintentional, of this technology. Much more research is needed to understand the intended and unintended impacts and consequences of cameras. Details: Fairfax, VA: Center for Evidence-Based Crime policy, George Mason University, 2015. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 1, 2015 at: http://cebcp.org/wp-content/technology/BodyWornCameraResearch.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://cebcp.org/wp-content/technology/BodyWornCameraResearch.pdf Shelf Number: 137414 Keywords: Body-Worn Cameras Camera Technology CamerasLaw Enforcement Technology Police Accountability Police SurveillancePolice Use of Force |
Author: Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Title: Police Body Worn Cameras: A Policy Scorecard Summary: In the wake of high-profile incidents in Ferguson, Staten Island, North Charleston, Baltimore, and elsewhere, law enforcement agencies across the country are rapidly adopting body-worn cameras for their officers. One of the main selling points for these cameras is their potential to provide transparency into some police interactions, and to help protect civil rights, especially in heavily policed communities of color. But accountability is not automatic. Whether these cameras make police more accountable - or simply intensify police surveillance of communities - depends on how the cameras and footage are used. That's why The Leadership Conference, together with a broad coalition of civil rights, privacy, and media rights groups, developed shared Civil Rights Principles on Body Worn Cameras. Our principles emphasize that "[w]ithout carefully crafted policy safeguards in place, there is a real risk that these new devices could become instruments of injustice, rather than tools for accountability." This scorecard evaluates the body-worn camera policies currently in place in major police departments across the country. Our goal is to highlight promising approaches that some departments are taking, and to identify opportunities where departments could improve their policies. Details: Washington, DC: Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, 2016. 208p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 25, 2016 at: https://www.bwcscorecard.org/static/pdfs/LCCHR_Upturn-BWC_Scorecard-v2.03.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.bwcscorecard.org/static/pdfs/LCCHR_Upturn-BWC_Scorecard-v2.03.pdf Shelf Number: 140036 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasCamera TechnologyCamerasLaw Enforcement TechnologyPolice AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice Use of Force |
Author: Bud, Thomas Title: The Rise of Body-Worn Camera Programs in Canada and the United States: An Extension of the Surveillant Assemblage Summary: This thesis examines the extent to which body-worn cameras programs in Canada and the U.S. befit the notion of counter-law. The research is theoretically based on Ericson's (2007a) framework of counter-law and the surveillant assemblage. The results indicate that body-worn camera programs can be considered an extension of the existing surveillant assemblage. In the U.S., numerous legislative amendments exempted body-worn cameras from certain legal requirements and thus facilitated their integration into existing surveillance networks. In Canada, legal amendments were not enacted through counter-law; nevertheless, the broadness and inconsistency of existing legislation allowed body-worn camera programs to become part of the surveillant assemblage. This thesis also contributes to refinements of counter-law I and the surveillant assemblage by analyzing variations in how these concepts apply to localized contexts of uncertainty. Details: Windsor, ONT: University of Windsor, 2016. 73p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed August 26, 2016 at: http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/etd/5722/ Year: 2016 Country: International URL: http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/etd/5722/ Shelf Number: 140048 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasCamera TechnologyCamerasLaw Enforcement TechnologyPolice AccountabilityPolice Surveillance |
Author: Harris, David A. Title: Picture This: Body Worn Video Devices ('Head Cams') as Tools for Ensuring Fourth Amendment Compliance by Police Summary: A new technology has emerged with the potential to increase police compliance with the law and to increase officers' accountability for their conduct. Called "body worn video" (BWV) or "head cams," these devices are smaller, lighter versions of the video and audio recording systems mounted on the dash boards of police cars. These systems are small enough that they consist of something the size and shape of a cellular telephone earpiece, and are worn by police officers the same way. Recordings are downloaded directly from the device into a central computer system for storage and indexing, which protects them from tampering and assures a defensible chain of custody. This article explores the good that BWV can do for both the police and members of the public, particularly how these recordings might play a role in assuring that officers comply with Fourth Amendment search and seizure rules. Field tests of BWV in Britain have shown that police used the devices to keep records and record evidence, and that the devices were a uniquely effective bulwark against false complaints. Coupled with a requirement that every citizen encounter involving a search or seizure be recorded, and a presumption that without a recording the factfinder must draw inferences in favor of the defendant, BWV can help resolve disputes over search and seizure activities, and give the public a heretofore unattainable degree of assurance that police officers enforcing the law obey it as they do so. While BWV is certainly no panacea, and presents significant issues of tampering and reliability, it can help bring accountability and rule following to an aspect of police behavior that has largely proven resistant to it. Details: Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh School of Law, 2010. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2010-13 : Accessed August 26, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1596901 Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1596901 Shelf Number: 140049 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasCamera TechnologyCamerasLaw Enforcement TechnologyPolice AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice Use of Force |
Author: Guerin, Paul Title: City of Albuquerque Police Department On Body Camera System Research Summary: This research study has several goals. First, to document the use of the OBCS, second, to provide information useful for informing the development of a policy regarding the use of the OBCS and third, to provide information that will inform a method to audit the developed policy and the use of the system by APD personnel. Currently it is not known how officers actually use the OBCS in the Albuquerque Police Department (APD). According to an APD special order authorized May 4, 2012, officers were required to use their OBCS during every citizen contact that is the result of a dispatched call for service, arrest warrant, search warrant, or traffic stop. On May 6, 2012 General Order 1-39 Use of Tape/Digital Recorders was made effective replacing an earlier version. This order includes the language in the Special Order and provides a list of incidents that must also be recorded. Another version of General Order 1-39 was made effective January 22, 2013 with some additional language including noting when officers should activate their cameras. It appears to also differentiate between dispatched and non-dispatched events and situations. Via our focus groups it appears many officers have interpreted the policy to include any citizen contact. The January 2013 general order appears to be modified by an October 2014 special order dealing with video evidence tagging procedures, which directed all officers to video if logged on a call where an arrest, criminal summons or non-traffic citation was issued. These four managing documents are found in the appendices of this report. Official information sources for this study included the OBCS information system, City of Albuquerque Human Resource information, Automated Reporting System (ARS) data, APD computer aided dispatch information (CAD), and focus groups with sworn APD staff. City of Albuquerque and APD staff collaborated in providing access to the necessary official information and provided technical information in matching and merging information from the data sources. Eleven focus groups with APD patrol officers, sergeants, and lieutenants were conducted, as well as three focus groups with Investigative Bureau detectives and one focus group with a mix of Investigative Bureau sergeants and several SWAT officers. APD staff was helpful in arranging these focus groups. APD has implemented an OBCS and similar camera programs are being implemented in law enforcement agencies around the country. This is a fairly new technology for law enforcement and best practices have not been established regarding the use of cameras, video storage and download protocols, privacy concerns, use of evidence, and officer training. Literature addressing these and other issues suggests police departments have much to consider before investing in and implementing an OBCS. This study involved two primary tasks. First, a review and analysis of APD video camera data, APD CAD data, and human resource data for APD officers was completed and second, focus groups of patrol officers, detectives, sergeants, and lieutenants from the APD Field Service Bureau (FSB), the Investigative Bureau (IB), and Special Services Bureau (SSB) were conducted. This report includes this introduction, a literature review of current practices in the field of on body camera systems, a study design and methodology section, the analysis and discussion of the data listed above, and a recommendations and conclusions section. Details: Albuquerque: University of New Mexico, Institute for Social Research, 2016. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 29, 2016 at: https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents/obcs-report-draft-all-bureaus-master-final_v102022016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.cabq.gov/police/documents/obcs-report-draft-all-bureaus-master-final_v102022016.pdf Shelf Number: 140073 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasCamera Technology Law Enforcement Technology Police AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice Technology Police Use of Force |
Author: Katz, Charles M. Title: Evaluating the Impact of Officer Worn Body Cameras in the Phoenix Police Department Summary: The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), through the SMART Policing Initiative (SPI), awarded the Phoenix Police Department $500,000 to purchase, deploy and evaluate police body worn cameras. The design and implementation of the project included the purchase of 56 Body Worn Camera (BWC) systems and deploying them in the Maryvale Precinct. The implementation of the BWC;s occurred in one of the two Maryvale Precinct squad areas (aka target area). All officers assigned to the target area were issued the equipment and were provided training in its use, maintenance, and related departmental policy. This evaluation was conducted to examine the effect of implementing police worn body cameras on complaints against the police and domestic violence case processing and outcomes. Our analysis of the camera meta-data indicated that only 13.2 to 42.2 percent of incidents were recorded by and BWV camera. Domestic violence incidents were the most likely to be recorded (47.5%), followed by violent offenses (38.7), back-up (37%), status offenses (32.9%), and subject/vehicle stops (30.9%). Other offense types were recorded less often. While in general the technology was found to be comfortable and easy to use, officers were dissatisfied with long down load times, increased amount of time that it took to complete reports, and the possibility that video recordings might be used against them by the department. We also found that video submitted to the court was difficult to process because of logistical problems associated with chain of custody and the length of time that it took the prosecutors to review video files. While many of the problems were addressed by the precinct commander by assigning a police officer to serve as a court liaison officer, prosecutors still maintained that they did not have enough time to review video footage. Regardless, the officer worn body cameras were found to be beneficial to the officers and the court in a number of ways. First, officer productivity as measured through the number of arrests increased significantly. For instance, the number of arrests increased by about 17% among the target group compared to 9% in the comparison group. Second, complaints against the police declined significantly. Complaints against officers who wore the cameras declined by 23%, compared to a 10.6% increase among comparison officers and 45.1% increase among patrol officers in other precincts. Third, our data showed that those officers who wore cameras and received a complaint were significantly less likely to have the complaint sustained when compared to the comparison group and other patrol officers throughout the PPD. This suggests that even if a complaint was made against a camera wearing officer the video file was likely to provide support to the officer. Fourth, and related, the officer self-report data suggested that a significant number of complaints were not pursued because of video recordings. BWC did not appear, however, to have an impact on suspect behavior as measured through resisting arrest charges. Additionally, we examined the impact of body worn cameras on domestic violence case processing. Analysis of the data indicated that following the implementation of body cameras, cases were significantly more likely to be initiated, result in charges filed, and result in a guilty plea or guilty verdict. The analysis also determined that cases were completed faster following the implementation of body cameras, however, we believe that this finding was largely a product of the addition of a court liaison officer who facilitated case processing between the PPD and city prosecutors office. Details: Phoenix, AZ: Center for Violence Prevention & Community Safety, Arizona State University, 2014. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 15, 2016 at: https://publicservice.asu.edu/sites/default/files/ppd_spi_feb_20_2015_final.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://publicservice.asu.edu/sites/default/files/ppd_spi_feb_20_2015_final.pdf Shelf Number: 144873 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasCamera TechnologyLaw Enforcement TechnologyPolice AccountabilityPolice Surveillance |
Author: Merola, Linda Title: Body Worn Cameras and the Courts: A National Survey of State Prosecutors Summary: Recent use-of-force events involving police in Ferguson, New York City, South Carolina, and Baltimore have led law enforcement agencies, citizens, civil rights groups, city councils, and even President Obama to push for the rapid adoption of body-worn camera (BWC) technology by police. In a period of less than a year, BWCs transformed from a technology that received little attention by many police leaders and scholars to one that has become rapidly prioritized, funded, and diffused into local policing. The U.S. Department of Justice has dedicated $20 million to fund the purchase of and technical assistance for BWCs. In 2013, the Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics survey estimated that about a third of local law enforcement agencies had already adopted BWCs, and this percentage has likely greatly increased since then. At the same time, this rapid adoption of BWCs is occurring within a low information environment; researchers are only beginning to develop knowledge about the effects, both intentional and unintentional, of this technology. A recent review of the literature on the topic of BWCs conducted by White (2014) found only a handful of empirical studies of the technology completed by September 2013. These studies have focused on a narrow set of research questions about the impact of the cameras on police behavior. Further, only a small subset of these studies rigorously examined BWCs using valid scientific methods. As Lum (2015) has emphasized, rapid adoption of technologies in the absence of high-quality information about the impact of those technologies can lead to unanticipated and unintended consequences that may work against both police and citizen interests. The need for more research in this area is paramount, as the adoption of BWCs will likely have important implications for police-citizen interactions, police management and budgets, safety and security, citizen privacy, citizen reporting and cooperation with police, and practices in the courts. But what research questions and types of research should be pursued and why? How can we build a translatable knowledge base that is responsive and rigorous? In our first report to the Laura and John Arnold Foundation (see Lum, Koper, Merola, Scherer & Reioux, 2015), we reviewed the existing and ongoing body worn camera research to identify what was known about BWCs and what questions needed further research. In this report, we build on the knowledge about body worn cameras by carrying out a national survey of state prosecutors’ offices to begin to understand the impacts of BWCs on the courts. A random sample of 1,005 prosecutors’ offices was drawn from the National Census of State Prosecutors produced by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS, 2007). Mail-based surveys with an electronic option across multiple waves of data collection yielded 321 returned surveys. Lead prosecutors were asked about their use of body worn camera footage so far, as well as their opinions about key issues related to the technology and any concerns they have about the adoption of cameras by law enforcement in their jurisdictions. Key findings from this survey revealed: Most state prosecutors’ offices (almost two-thirds) are already working with BWC evidence. Of these offices, a full 42.1% have used the evidence for longer than one year. Yet, a significant number (almost one-fifth of those using BWC evidence) are still very new to working with it (one month or less). Nearly all prosecutors’ offices in jurisdictions with BWCs (92.6%) have used BWC evidence to prosecute private citizens. In comparison, 8.3% of offices located in jurisdictions with BWCs indicated that they have used BWC evidence to prosecute a police officer. It should be noted, however, that many more total citizens than police are prosecuted each year, so these percentages are not directly comparable. Generally, lead prosecutors expressed strong support for the use of BWCs. Very high numbers of respondents (79.5%) indicated that prosecutors in their offices support BWC use. Additionally, large majorities believed that BWC evidence will help the prosecution more than it will assist the defense (62.7%) and that BWCs would improve prosecutors’ overall ability to prosecute cases (65.8%). Fewer than 10% of lead prosecutors disagreed with these statements. Taken together, these results suggest that lead prosecutors view BWC evidence as a powerful prosecutorial tool. Yet, most lead prosecutors recognized that BWCs would produce both positive and negative impacts on prosecutors’ workloads. A majority (64.2%) believed that BWC evidence would aid in witness preparation. However, most lead prosecutors also felt that BWC evidence would increase prosecutors’ case preparation time (54% agreement) and make the discovery process more burdensome or difficult for them (56.2% agreement). These findings regarding increased workload make sense, as prosecutors will be working with a new stream of evidence. Lead prosecutors also emphasized a continuing need to address logistical issues related to BWC evidence. A majority 59.5% of respondents expressed concern over the redaction of BWC videos. Indeed, most lead prosecutors who are working with BWCs indicated that their offices must perform their own redactions, a process which can be costly and time consuming. 54.1% were also concerned about their office’s ability to quickly obtain videos from law enforcement for use in cases. Despite these logistical issues, however, relatively few respondents (12.7%) expressed concern over negative impacts to the police-prosecutor working relationship stemming from BWCs. When asked about resources needed to utilize BWCs effectively, the most urgent requests focused more on infrastructure and technology than on personnel. A large majority (65.4%) reported a high or moderately high need for upgrades to existing technology to view or show videos. 51.9% indicated that their offices would have high/moderately high requirements for resources to alter evidence cataloging or storage systems to effectively handle BWC evidence. Likewise, 46.3% of lead prosecutors also highlighted the need for resources to hire technical support personnel or provide technical training. In contrast, fewer respondents prioritized the need to hire either additional support personnel (36.7%) or additional prosecutors (22.4%) in response to BWCs. When asked about the impacts of BWCs on courts, lead prosecutors cited primarily positive prosecutorial outcomes. A majority believed that BWC evidence would increase both rates of conviction (58.3% agreement) and the frequency/likelihood of plea bargains (62.3% agreement). In fact, fewer than 10% of lead prosecutors disagreed that BWCs would produce either of these results. Comparatively few lead prosecutors believed that BWC evidence would increase either the numbers of appeals or case dismissals. However, larger numbers of respondents (42.5%) indicated neutrality with respect to the question about case dismissals, signaling that views on this point may not yet be well developed. However, nearly 30% of lead prosecutors believed that BWCs would lead to delays in case processing or other court delays. While not a majority, this finding is consistent with other results suggesting that logistical issues of evidence transfer, storage, and sufficient technical training are yet to be fully resolved. Details: Fairfax, VA: George Mason University, Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy, 2016. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 10, 2016 at: http://cebcp.org/wp-content/technology/BWCProsecutors.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://cebcp.org/wp-content/technology/BWCProsecutors.pdf Shelf Number: 146965 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasEvidence GatheringPolice AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice Use of ForceProsecutors |
Author: Bates, Adam Title: Stingray: A New Frontier in Police Surveillance Summary: Police agencies around the United States are using a powerful surveillance tool to mimic cell phone signals to tap into the cellular phones of unsuspecting citizens, track the physical locations of those phones, and perhaps even intercept the content of their communications. The device is known as a stingray, and it is being used in at least 23 states and the District of Columbia. Originally designed for use on the foreign battlefields of the War on Terror, "cell-site simulator" devices have found a home in the arsenals of dozens of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. In addition, police agencies have gone to incredible lengths to keep information about stingray use from defense attorneys, judges, and the public. Through the use of extensive nondisclosure agreements, the federal government prevents state and local law enforcement from disclosing even the most elementary details of stingray capability and use. That information embargo even applies to criminal trials, and allows the federal government to order evidence withheld or entire cases dropped to protect the secrecy of the surveillance device. The controversy around police stingray surveillance challenges our antiquated Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, undermines our cherished principles of federalism and separation of powers, exposes a lack of accountability and transparency among our law enforcement agencies, and raises serious questions about the security of our individual rights as the government"s technological capability rapidly advances. Details: Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2016. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Analysis No. 809: Accessed February 7, 2017: Accessed February 7, 2017 at: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa-809-revised.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa-809-revised.pdf Shelf Number: 146016 Keywords: Police AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice Technology |
Author: Feeney, Matthew Title: Surveillance Takes Wing: Privacy in the Age of Police Drones Summary: Unmanned aerial vehicles, commonly referred to as "drones," are being used in a range of industries, including conservation, journalism, archeaology, and policing. (In this paper I will use the word "drone" to apply to unmanned aerial vehicles, excluding unmanned aquatic vehicles and terrestrial robots.) Law enforcement drones have clear benefits: allowing police to more easily find missing persons, suspects, and accident victims, for example. They also allow police to investigate dangerous situations such as bomb threats and toxic spills. Yet without strict controls on their use, drones could present a very serious threat to citizens' privacy. Regrettably, while the Supreme Court has tackled privacy issues amid the emergence of new technologies, the Court's rulings on aerial surveillance are not well suited for today, now that police are using drones. Fortunately, lawmakers at the state and federal levels can implement policies that allow police to take advantage of drones while protecting privacy. These policies should not only address familiar issues associated with searches, such as warrant requirements, but also relatively new concerns involving weaponization, biometric software, and surveillance technology. Such controls and regulations will allow police to do their job and prevent drones from being used as tools for secretive and needlessly intrusive surveillance Details: Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2016. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Analysis No. 807: Accessed February 7, 2017 at: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa807_1.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa807_1.pdf Shelf Number: 146014 Keywords: Criminal InvestigationsDronesPolice SurveillancePolice TechnologyPrivacy |
Author: Muggah, Robert Title: Filling the Accountability Gap: Principles and practices for implementing body cameras for law enforcement Summary: New technologies are revolutionizing the way governments provide services, including law enforcement. Around the world, police departments are investing in predictive analytics, digital forensics, data mining systems and crime mapping platforms to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of their work. They are also experimenting with mobile technologies to strengthen communication and outreach. One such device - on-officer recording systems, or body-worn cameras (BWC) - is catching on. Police are experimenting with "cop cams" in dozens of cities across North America and Western Europe while sparking debate and some controversy in the process. There are also small-scale pilots using open source and mobile phone-operated BWCs in Latin America and South Africa. There is growing awareness of their effectiveness. The introduction of BWCs has the potential to transform policing. If implemented with appropriate checks and balances, BWCs can potentially improve oversight over police officers and strengthen their accountability to citizens. Many civil liberties groups are already advocating for cameras due to their ability to check the abuse of power by police while also helping to protect them (and citizens) against false accusations. What is more, cumulative data harvested by such devices can improve the targeting of crime prevention efforts as well as overall law enforcement performance. With safeguards in place, citizens, too, will benefit from these technologies since the use of cameras changes the nature of police-civilian interaction, most often for the better Of course, there are also risks associated with cop cams. This is particularly the case if broader policy and institutional questions related to the deployment of the technology are not adequately thought through. On the one hand, if deployed inappropriately and without proper oversight, body cameras can violate citizens' rights to privacy.4 Body cameras used without restrictions are tantamount to pervasive surveillance. They can be used invasively since police routinely enter citizens' homes and often encounter individuals in extreme situations. On the other, the use of body cameras without adequate consideration of how such tools will be implemented can lead to cost overruns (especially in relation to storing and redacting data) and, ultimately, the rejection of the tool itself. Guidance on the best practices of cop cams is urgently needed. Note too that the other end of the spectrum - complete officer discretion over when to activate a camera - has been shown to increase, not decrease, both officer use of force and assaults on police. This Strategic Note sets out some of the opportunities and challenges associated BWCs. It builds on several years of experience of the IgarapeInstitute in testing body cameras in Brazil and South Africa, as well as consultations with dozens of specialists in law enforcement and civil liberties communities. It focuses especially on key political and institutional questions regarding the management of these new tools. The first section highlights the emergence of new technologies in law enforcement and, in particular, the rise of cop cams. Section two underlines some of the controversies - both operational and ethical - associated with these technologies. The third section presents a shortlist of emerging principles for institutionalizing cop cams, as well as practices that flow from them. The note is not exhaustive; it is a first pass over a complex and rapidly-evolving public policy area. Details: Rio de Janeiro, Brasil: Igarapé Institute, 2016. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: Strategic Note 23: Accessed February 28, 2017 at: https://igarape.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/AE-24_Filling-the-accountability-gap-body-worn-cameras-14-11.pdf Year: 2016 Country: International URL: https://igarape.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/AE-24_Filling-the-accountability-gap-body-worn-cameras-14-11.pdf Shelf Number: 145580 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasPolice AccountabilityPolice CamerasPolice SurveillancePolice TechnologyPolice-Citizen Interaction |
Author: Mastrigt, Jody van Title: CCTV Beyond Surveillance: Implications Towards Police Legitimacy of the UPP in the favela Rocinha Summary: This thesis aims to show the impact of the CCTV cameras installed by the Pacification Project on the police legitimacy of the UPP in Rio de Janeiro’s favela, Rocinha. By conducting fieldwork in Rocinha and using the theoretical framework of modern police legitimacy theory, this paper examined the performances of the cameras as perceived by the residents to understand its impact on the UPP police legitimacy. This thesis argued that CCTV as a technological tool used by the police has had a negative impact on the police legitimacy in Rocinha. In addition, the thesis also examined the use of smart phones to monitor the police by the residents in Rocinha. To further interpret its impact on the favela, the analytical concept sousveillance has been used to examine the empirical data. The engagement of the residents monitoring the police has also shown to have a negative impact on the legitimacy of the police in Rocinha. Details: Utrecht, NL: Utrecht University, 2016. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed February 28, 2017 at: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/338218 Year: 2016 Country: Brazil URL: https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/338218 Shelf Number: 141230 Keywords: CCTVFavelaPolice LegitimacyPolice SurveillancePolice-Citizen InteractionsSlums |
Author: U.S. National Institute of Justice Title: Considerations and Recommendations for Implementing an Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Program Summary: In Alameda County, California, an Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) program has supported law enforcement in successfully monitoring crime scenes and capturing suspects on the run. While these devices have been beneficial in assisting law enforcement in a number of ways, they've also raised concerns within the community about the possibility of police violating privacy rights through aerial surveillance. Alameda County isn’t alone in this situation. Law Enforcement agencies around the country are having similar discussions within their communities as they look to take advantage of the benefits of unmanned aerial vehicles while also ensuring the rights of the public are protected. In a new report, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) covers a number of emerging issues and concerns on the use of unmanned aircraft systems by state, local, and tribal law enforcement. "Considerations and Recommendations for Implementing an Unmanned Aircraft Systems Program" is based on an August 2015 convening of public safety stakeholders and aviation experts. The goal of the convening was to produce a blueprint for how law enforcement agencies can use unmanned aircraft systems most effectively, fairly, and transparently. This NIJ report highlights a number of actions that agencies can take internally and with the community as they implement a policy on unmanned aircraft systems. According to Mike O’Shea, a senior law enforcement program manager with NIJ, community acceptance is critical to just about every law enforcement initiative out there. “The transparency of what you’re doing as an agency can make a difference between whether or not the community accepts what you’re doing or doesn’t accept [it],” he said. “And in the case of unmanned aerial vehicles, one of the biggest challenges for law enforcement is getting public acceptance,” O’Shea added. With regards to engaging the community, it is recommended that agencies engage the community early on as this strategy is most effective at the beginning of the process of implementing a UAS program. Additionally, agencies are recommended to create a community advisory panel on the implementation of new technologies, such as UAS. “The public acceptance of technology is crucial to the implementation of unmanned aircraft systems,” O’Shea said. Recommendations also include that all members of the agency should be briefed on the capabilities and intended use of the technology so that there will be a common message when officials interact with the public. Promoting the responsible use of unmanned aircraft systems is critical, such that agencies using this technology have sound policies in place governing the collection, use, and retention of data, and to ensure that agencies are transparent in how they are using these systems. In terms of developing privacy policies, it’s important for an agency to fully understand the complex legal environment in which unmanned aerial vehicles operate. Furthermore, some states and localities have imposed more stringent requirements than federal law on the use of this technology by law enforcement. Unmanned aircraft systems have the potential to be a useful public safety tool, but the decision of whether and how it should be adopted is one that every law enforcement agency must make for itself, and that decision should be made in coordination with community members. These community decisions should consider privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties concerns. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, only about 350 law enforcement agencies in the U.S. had aviation programs in active use. The number has remained small due to a number of factors, including the substantial cost of starting and maintaining a program, and bureaucratic hurdles needed to approve the use of such technology. But as more agencies begin to experience the benefits of unmanned aerial vehicles, O'Shea believes the use of this technology will only expand moving forward. Details: Washington, DC: NIJ, 2016. 102p. Source: Internet Resource: Accesses March 27, 2017 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/250283.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/250283.pdf Shelf Number: 144840 Keywords: Aerial SurveillanceAircraftPolice SurveillancePublic Safety |
Author: Henstock, Darren Title: Testing the Effects of Body Worn Video on Police Use of Force during Arrest: A Randomised Controlled Trial Summary: There is, at present, a worldwide uncontrolled social experiment taking place within policing. Body worn cameras have been rolled-out in many forces worldwide, aiming to improve the procedural compliance of officers and reduce the incidence of use of force. Yet rigorous evidence is virtually non-existent on this multi-billion dollar industry, on either its efficacy or cost-effectiveness. This study tested the effect of body worn cameras within a large UK force in a six month randomised-controlled-trial, whilst observing the effect within pre-specified force categories. Overall a 50% reduction in the odds of force being used was recorded when body worn cameras are present compared to control conditions, interpreted to be a result of the deterrence-effect body worn cameras have on officers, offenders, or both. However, the effect concentrates in open-hand tactics, with no discernible effect on categories of more aggressive force responses. Furthermore, 40% 'more force' was detected in treatment-conditions for handcuffing compliant suspects - contextualised as enhanced transparency and accountability, rather than a backfiring-effect. In logical conclusion to this recorded reduction in low level use of force, the study documents a 65% reduction in recorded injuries to persons arrested, but counter-intuitively a corresponding increase in reported injuries to officers. This seemingly unexpected finding is attributed to improved confidence in reporting by officers rather than the cameras creating more aggression towards them. Finally, the dissertation also considers issues surrounding the implementation of body worn camera experiments. Details: Cambridge, UK: Wolfson College, 2015. 107p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed May 4, 2017 at: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/alumni/theses/Darren%20Henstock.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/alumni/theses/Darren%20Henstock.pdf Shelf Number: 145315 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasCamera TechnologyCamerasLaw Enforcement TechnologyPolice AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice Use of Force |
Author: Bandiero, Anthony M. Title: Implementation Issues and Policy Implications of Body-Worn Cameras in Routine Police Encounters With Citizens Summary: This study investigates the impact body-worn cameras (BWCs) will have on police-citizen encounters. In an era of increasing surveillance, both private and public, what role should BWCs play? Further, what legislation and institutional safeguards must be put in place to protect privacy and prevent BWCs from becoming a tool to surveil marginalized communities? The implementation of BWCs appears a forgone conclusion in many communities where police relations are tenuous. Specifically, the presence of BWCs can help eliminate excessive force by encouraging pro-social behavior on behalf of both police officers and citizens. Additionally, BWCs can even play a role in reducing lawful uses of force because if a citizen, initially bent on non-compliance with an officer's commands, realizes that the encounter is being recorded, they are likely to change their behavior for the better. This study concludes that BWCs should be supported with the following limitations: BWC videos must not be considered a public record, and therefore susceptible to general public record's requests. BWC videos will record areas where people will have a reasonable expectation of privacy and these intrusions should not be generally available, except under certain pre-authorized circumstances. Additionally, BWCs must not transition into a mass surveillance tool for police. Therefore, this study recommends strict purge requirements for videos that are not applicable to an investigation. Details: Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2016. 82p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed September 8, 2017 at: https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/33797278 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/33797278 Shelf Number: 147161 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasPolice AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice-Citizen Interactions |
Author: Newell, Bryce Clayton Title: Transparent Lives and the Surveillance State: Policing, New Visibility, and Information Policy Summary: In this dissertation, I utilize conceptual and legal analyses to explore the tensions between personal information privacy and public access to information implicated by government surveillance and citizen-initiated inverse surveillance efforts designed to cast the gaze back at the government, and ask what implications these conclusions have for individual freedom (defined as the absence of domination). I focus on police use of body-worn cameras (BWCs) and automated license plate recognition (ALPR) technologies, on one hand, and citizen-initiated recordings of police officers and freedom of information (FOI) requests for data collected by police BWCs and ALPR systems, on the other. My analysis draws upon republican political theory, philosophical and legal theories of privacy and free speech, the concept of "policing's new visibility" (Goldsmith, 2010), and various other theories of surveillance and reciprocal/inverse surveillance within the surveillance studies literature. I conduct doctrinal and descriptive legal research into relevant privacy and disclosure laws applicable within Washington State (USA); utilize legal and philosophical theories of privacy, freedom, and free speech to conduct an analysis of the values and value tensions implicated in these situations; and apply elements of Value Sensitive Design for similar conceptual and analytic purposes. Ultimately, I develop a theory of information policy that that accounts for tensions between personal information privacy rights and government disclosure of personally-identifiable information under state FOI law in Washington State, and I propose normative recommendations for improving law, public policy, and police department surveillance and disclosure policies related to these privacy and access concerns. Details: Seattle: University of Washington, 2015. 207p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed September 16, 2017 at: https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/bitstream/handle/1773/33984/Newell_washington_0250E_14460.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/bitstream/handle/1773/33984/Newell_washington_0250E_14460.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 147362 Keywords: Automated License Plate RecognitionBody-Worn CamerasCamerasPolice SurveillancePolice TechnologyPrivacy |
Author: Braga, Anthony A. Title: The Impact of Body-Worn Cameras on Complaints Against Officers and Officer Use of Force Incident Reports: Preliminary Evaluation Findings Summary: SUMMARY - The Boston Police Department collaborated with Northeastern University to develop a randomized controlled trial of its pilot implementation of 100 body worn cameras on patrol officers in 5 police districts and plainclothes officers in the Youth Violence Strike Force. - The Northeastern research team randomly allocated 281 officers into treatment (camera wearers) and control groups from these assignments. The selected officers worked the day and first half shifts and were actively providing police services to Boston residents. - The randomization procedure generated treatment (140 officers) and control (141 officers) groups that were equivalent in terms of officer sex, race, age, years on the job, shift, assignment, prior complaints, and prior use of force reports. All treatment officers were trained on the body worn camera policy and the use of the technology. - At the commencement of the pilot program, 100 of the 140 officers trained on the use of body worn cameras were assigned to wear the cameras. Over the course of the one-year intervention period, 21 officers stopped wearing the cameras due to promotions, assignment changes, medical incapacitation, resignation, and retirement. A total of 121 of the 140 treatment officers wore cameras during the pilot program. - The preliminary findings of the randomized controlled trial suggest that the placement of body worn cameras on Boston Police officers may generate small benefits to the civility of police-citizen civilian encounters. Relative to control officers, treatment officers received fewer citizen complaints and generated fewer use of force reports. - Statistical analysis revealed that the impact of body worn cameras on complaints was small but statistically-significant at a less restrictive statistical threshold. The results suggest a reduction of one complaint per month for 140 treatment officers relative to 141 control officers. The analysis indicated body worn cameras generated a small reduction in officer use of force reports that was not statistically-significant, suggesting no meaningful difference between the treatment and control groups. - These preliminary results are not final and should be interpreted with caution. The evaluation team will continue to collect data and pursue supplemental analyses to ensure that these findings are robust to different tests and model specifications. The final report will present completed analyses of the impact of body worn cameras on citizen complaints and officer use of force reports as well as analyses of impacts on police proactivity, lawfulness of police enforcement actions, and police-community relations. Details: Boston: Northeastern University, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2018. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 31, 2018 at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5086f19ce4b0ad16ff15598d/t/5a563546ec212d4f5bf29527/1515599174343/BPD+BWC+RCT+preliminary+impact+report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5086f19ce4b0ad16ff15598d/t/5a563546ec212d4f5bf29527/1515599174343/BPD+BWC+RCT+preliminary+impact+report.pdf Shelf Number: 148946 Keywords: Body-Worn Cameras Camera Technology Cameras Law Enforcement Technology Police Accountability Police Surveillance Police Use of Force Police-Citizen InteractionsPolice-Community relations |
Author: Hickman, Kishon C., Sr. Title: From Behind the Lens: Police Officer Perceptions as Body-Worn Cameras are Introduced Into the New York City Police Department Summary: In 2014, the U.S. District Court ordered the New York City Police Department (NYPD) to test the use of body-worn cameras (BWCs) after finding that their stop, question, and frisk practices violated the rights of some minority New Yorkers. The ruling in Floyd v. City of New York (2013) mandated the recording of future interactions to determine if behavior would be influenced. A total of 54 volunteer officers wore a BWC for a 1-year period and were assigned to six precincts, all selected due to the high frequency of stop, question, and frisk reports prepared by patrol officers. This research examined patrol officer perceptions of the BWC from the lens of the NYPD's two-officer patrol car. The study revealed unique access to 54 volunteer officers and their non-camera-wearing patrol partners, as they recorded citizen interactions during this pilot period. Further, this study examined the extent officers were open to the adoption of BWCs, providing some of the first-ever evidence for or against claims of increased transparency, accountability and improvements in both officer and citizen behavior during encounters. The respondents' demographic data were analyzed to determine any relationship with particular viewpoints toward the BWC. The results suggest that patrol officers are in favor of the adoption of a BWC program, and that the BWC had little to no effect on their patrol partnerships. Results also suggest that officers felt comfortable wearing BWCs, and that regardless of their age, gender, years of police experience or years partnering, the existence of the BWC made for better police service in New York City. Details: Rochester, NY: St. John Fisher College, 2017. 163p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed February 23, 2018 at: https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1301&context=education_etd Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1301&context=education_etd Shelf Number: 149230 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasCamerasPolice AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice TechnologyPolice-Citizen InteractionsStop and Frisk |
Author: Smith, Brian T. Title: Ethics on the Fly: Toward a Drone-Specific Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Summary: This thesis examines the issue of law enforcement's use of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) from an ethical perspective. It describes ethics as rules governing individual conduct that are functionally specific, relating to the role one plays in society. The role police play in U.S. communities and the ethical frameworks they use to guide their conduct have a great impact in defining the relationship between the people and their government in the American context, colored as it is by the social contract and the idea, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, that the legitimacy of any government is derived from the consent of the governed.[1] Empowered to enforce the laws by which society has corporately agreed to be governed, police have a unique ethical relationship to the law. For an action to be ethical for police to take, it must first be legal. The law is a necessary deontological reference point for officers and agencies in defining right and wrong conduct. Unfortunately, in the current environment, legislation governing UAS use by police agencies is lacking. This circumstance creates a referential void for law enforcement executives seeking to put drone technology to use in service of the public. From a homeland security perspective, public safety stands to be greatly enhanced by the fielding of these versatile platforms. UAS will allow law enforcement agencies without manned aviation units to realize gains in situational awareness, crime scene investigation, accident investigation, search and rescue operations, warrant service, and tactical operations. At issue is how to put the technology to use in these legitimate public safety missions in a way that adequately addresses the privacy and other concerns that accompany any discussion about domestic drone use by government. It is imperative that these issues be considered if public support for law enforcement UAS deployment is to be secured.[2] Yet, at present, the discussion about the ethics of UAS employment for law enforcement purposes is nearly absent from the literature. This research seeks to help fill that void. The primary research question posed by this thesis is whether a prevailing ethical framework exists to govern the use of UAS for domestic law enforcement functions. This thesis concluded that no such consensus exists. Indeed, this research found no single set of ethical guidelines is available to which all American police agencies subscribe. Rather, state and local law enforcement in the United States is fragmented, which results in a lack of standardization regarding ethical norms. With over 18,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide,[3] law enforcement in the United States is far from a unitary project. Whether by accident or by design, this circumstance allows agencies to be responsive to local and regional concerns with regard to the ethics of policing. As a secondary research question, this thesis considers what ethical frameworks might be applied to this problem through an examination of the emerging literature. A hybrid research methodology using elements of the case study method, as well as a policy analysis section, are used in developing this thesis. Using the case study method, it examines evidence of ethical frameworks currently in use by domestic law enforcement agencies. The evidence considered is largely documentary and considered against the ethical standards society expects of law enforcement. Once described, a comparative policy analysis is performed to identify any overlapping areas of concern that appear to be held in common. This study identified seven common dimensions of ethical concern regarding UAS employment: Engagement Accountability Transparency Privacy Legality Use of Force Safety This thesis recommends that agencies currently using or preparing to use UAS for law enforcement missions address these dimensions in a drone-specific code of conduct, both to guide decision making for officers in the field and to inform the public regarding the uses and limitations of these increasingly capable public safety tools. Further, this thesis recommends the code of conduct be made available for public review and that it be considered a living document that is expected to change over time. Public opinion is not static; society's expectations are subject to refinement over time. It is in this light, possessing a capacity for change, that the code of conduct should be understood when considering drones and their place alongside other tools employed in law enforcement missions. Of the more than 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the United States,[4] only 20 agencies have a certificate of waiver authorization (COA) with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to operate drones.[5] Accordingly, very little experience exists from which to draw regarding what acceptable and unacceptable conduct looks like in law enforcement's use of drones. UAS use by police is just one facet of an ever-broadening debate in this country about the costs of security in the modern world. The debate about police use of drones is a debate about the future of policing. Law enforcement agencies are uniquely positioned at this moment to lead that conversation, demonstrating that drone technology can contribute to this nation's collective security in a way consistent with American principles and that maintains the consent of the governed. Details: Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School, 2016. 79p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed March 28, 2018 at: https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=792232 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=792232 Shelf Number: 149603 Keywords: Code of ConductDronesHomeland SecurityLaw EnforcementPolice SurveillancePolice TechnologyUnmanned Aerial System |
Author: Doob, Anthony N. Title: Understanding the Impact of Police Stops Summary: Imagine that technology existed such that the police could, electronically, identify and track everyone and every motor vehicle in the city and that this information were stored electronically and available to the police, as required, for solving crime. Even if such information was not admissible as evidence, one could easily see its possible value in solving crime. If a home were broken into, one only would have to search a data base to find out who had been in the neighbourhood. If a pedestrian were hit by a car that did not remain at the scene of the accident, one would only need to see what vehicles had been at that scene around the time of the accident to narrow down the possible suspects considerably. If a person were found to be using or in possession of drugs, one would only need to see whom that person had been in close contact with in recent times to identify a fairly small group of suspects as the source of those drugs. If a person were thought to be a member of a gang, it would be easy to find out whom that person associated with on a regular basis. We don't live in such a society. Obviously the information that the police have about the non-criminal activities of ordinary citizens is much more limited than that described in the previous paragraph. But what if it turned out we did live in the world described in the previous paragraph and people suddenly expressed the desire no longer to live in a world with constant and complete police scrutiny of their ordinary activities? One could imagine the suggestion would be made that not allowing police the kind of surveillance described in the previous paragraph would limit their ability to solve crime. We raise this hypothetical scenario for a particular reason: There is no point in arguing whether complete or highly detailed information about the day-to-day movements or meetings that Canadians have might be useful to the police in solving crime. At a more mundane level, we see on an almost daily basis that footage from 'security' cameras is now routinely used to solve crime in a manner not too different from that described above. Our second example comes closer to the issue of police stops. Imagine that there were no controls whatsoever on the power of the police to stop pedestrians and motorists and ask them to identify themselves. Even if, in law, citizens were not required to identify themselves or to answer any questions, one could argue that maintaining whatever information was obtained could be useful if a crime took place in that neighbourhood or someone associated with the person who had been stopped was suspected of some wrongdoing. That this information could potentially be useful is not the point. The question that needs to be raised in both of these examples is a much more complex one: What might be the 'costs' and 'benefits' to society of these kinds of data gathering programs? Even these two hypothetical scenarios are missing something crucial: comparison groups. The question, in most public policy areas, is not whether there are some successful outcomes from a particular procedure, but whether there are better outcomes overall than there might be under some other procedure. For example, in each of the hypothetical scenarios described above, it might be that deployment of resources in some quite different way or a decision to address some quite different problem would serve the community better than the scenarios described. Or such procedures as described earlier might help solve crime but would lessen cooperation with the police on important matters. Comparison groups or procedures typically are not employed adequately when assessing possible policy choices, but in reality the need for a 'comparison' is usually important. In a discussion about police equipment (e.g., body worn cameras), not only might one want to know whether they affect police or citizen behaviour (implying a comparison with how police or citizens behave without the device), but a serious policy analysis should include an analysis of alternative uses of the resources that would be required for the purchase and use of the devices. An example of the inappropriate use of implied comparisons is when changes in police strength or police tactics are implemented after an unusual (e.g., serious, violent) incident. When police, understandably, change their approach to policing a neighbourhood that experienced an unusual incident or high concentration of serious incidents, they sometimes infer that any subsequent return to 'normal' levels of crime is 'caused' by changes they made in their presence in the neighbourhood. Without adequate comparison areas (e.g., areas that experienced a 'spike' that did not result in changes in policing), such causal inferences simply aren't defensible. The issues become more complex when one moves closer to reality. One fact about crime that noone questions is that it is not evenly (or even randomly) distributed across people, groups of people, or neighbourhoods in our society. Young males, for example, are disproportionately more likely to be involved in a variety of different kinds of crime than other people. People who live in certain kinds of neighbourhoods are more likely to commit offences than people in other neighbourhoods. But some neighbourhoods themselves appear to have characteristics that make them more likely to be the sites for crime above and beyond the characteristics of the individuals who live in them. In this context, a policing perspective that did not consider any other concerns could justify focusing surveillance resources on certain neighbourhoods or types of people (e.g., young males). The problem is that there almost always are other concerns, and concerns that could easily have the effect of undermining the crime control goal of proactive policing activities, such as police stops. This report examines some of the more reliable research that has been carried out on issues broadly related to 'street stops' of ordinary citizens. It makes the assumption that stops can have more than one effect and that some of these effects might, broadly speaking, be favourable and others unfavourable. Hence this report is more than an attempt to answer the question of whether street stops have a short term effect on local crime. We are not claiming to provide an exhaustive review of the literature that summarizes all of the research on issues related to street stops. Were we to do so, we would spend considerable resources reviewing and discarding inadequate research papers. Instead we are relying on Criminological Highlights, a research information service, produced by the Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies of the University of Toronto. The papers summarized in this information service not only have been reviewed by reputable social science journals, but also by our editorial board (currently of about 11 people), which has read and evaluated each paper that is summarized in Criminological Highlights. The one page summaries of articles we cite are attached to this report and are an integral part of it. Most importantly, these summaries make it easy for readers to evaluate the information on which our conclusions are based. Details: Toronto: University of Toronto, Centre for Criminology and Sociolegal Studies, 2017. 90p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 6, 2018 at: http://criminology.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/DoobGartnerPoliceStopsReport-17Jan2017r.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Canada URL: http://criminology.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/DoobGartnerPoliceStopsReport-17Jan2017r.pdf Shelf Number: 149726 Keywords: Crime HotspotsPolice CrackdownsPolice Policies and PracticesPolice SurveillancePolice-Citizen InteractionsRacial Profiling in Law EnforcementStop and FriskStop and Search |
Author: Privacy International Title: Digital stop and search: how the UK police can secretly download everything from your mobile phone Summary: The 'Digital stop and search' report examines the use of 'mobile phone extraction' tools by the UK police, enabling them to download all of the content and data from people's phones. Privacy International have exposed a potentially unlawful regime operating with UK police forces, who are confused about the legal basis for the technology they are using. The police are acting without clear safeguards for the public, and no independent oversight to identify abuse and misuse of sensitive personal information. Seen in the light of ongoing issues of discrimination within the criminal justice system, this presents a serious cause for concern. Key statistics: 26 out of 47 police forces (55%) that we submitted Freedom of Information requests to admitted they are using mobile phone extraction technology. Out of the remaining 21 police forces (45%): Eight police forces (17%) have trialed or intend to trial this technology Thirteen police forces (28%) either failed to respond to our questions or stated they hold no information on the use of this technology The 'Digital Stop and Search' report includes eleven key recommendations including: There needs to be an urgent independent review into this widespread, intrusive but secretive practice; There should be a requirement for police to obtain a warrant for searching the contents of a mobile phone, issued on the basis of reasonable suspicion; The Home Office must publish guidance for the public, regarding their rights if the police want to search their mobile phone. Details: London: Privacy International, 2018. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 10, 2018 at: https://privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/2018-03/Digital%20Stop%20and%20Search%20Report.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/2018-03/Digital%20Stop%20and%20Search%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 149746 Keywords: Digital PrivacyMobile PhonesPolice SurveillancePrivacy |
Author: Langton, Lynn Title: Aviation Units in Large Law Enforcement Agencies, 2007 Summary: During 2007, about 1 in 5 large law enforcement agencies had a specialized aviation unit operating at least one fixedwing plane or helicopter. These 201 aviation units, located in departments of 100 or more sworn officers, employed about 3,400 persons, operated almost 900 aircraft in 46 states and the District of Columbia, and logged an estimated 363,000 flight hours. The units performed functions ranging from general operations, such as engaging in pursuits and responding to calls for service, to more specialized operations, such as homeland security, emergency medical services (EMS), special weapons and tactics (SWAT), and firefighting missions. This report is based on data from the 2007 Census of Law Enforcement Aviation Units (CLEAU), which collected information on the characteristics, expenditures, equipment, personnel, functions, and training and safety requirements of aviation units found in law enforcement agencies with 100 or more sworn officers. The CLEAU is the first nationwide study to examine the nature and extent of airborne law enforcement. Major findings from the 2007 Census of Law Enforcement Aviation Units include- - Aviation units from large departments provided aerial law enforcement coverage in 46 states and the District of Columbia. - A greater percentage of units had helicopters (88%) than planes (50%). In absolute numbers, units operated more than twice the number of helicopters (604) than planes (295). - Aviation units spent an estimated total of $300 million in 2007 on aircraft purchases, leasing and financing, and maintenance and fuel. - About two-thirds (68%) of aviation unit aircraft were acquired through outright purchase, and about a fourth (24%) were secured through a government surplus program. Approximately half of the aircraft in operation were at least 20 years old. - Aviation units logged a median of 1,100 flight hours per unit in 2007. State police units had the greatest median number of hours per unit (2,000). - In 2007, 92% of aviation units engaged in vehicle pursuits. Almost 90% of units performed counternarcotics missions, and about 80% conducted counterterrorism missions. Nearly 70% of units engaged in firefighting activities. Fewer units reported using aircraft for SWAT member insertions (36%), emergency medical response (26%), and prisoner transport (22%) (figure 1). - About half of aviation units required new pilot candidates to have law enforcement experience. Over 60% required that they hold prior pilot ratings. Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 2009. 24p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 18, 2018 at: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/aullea07.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/aullea07.pdf Shelf Number: 117089 Keywords: Aerial SurveillanceAviation UnitsPolice PatrolPolice Surveillance |
Author: Cox, Stacie Leigh Title: Law Enforcement Attitudes of Current Public and Departmental Surveillance Technologies: A Qualitative Case Study of the Toronto Police Service Summary: This thesis explores the perceptions of front-line police officers surrounding synoptic and panoptic surveillance and the implications of police body-worn cameras on community relations, citizen's recording devices and police practice. The study involves a qualitative approach that utilized one-on-one, semi-structured interviews, in which participants were those members of the Toronto Police Service who wore body-worn cameras during an earlier pilot study of the device conducted by the Toronto Police Service. Police as a sampling group are very exclusive and hard to gain access to, as such this study relied on a snowball sampling strategy which resulted in a sample size of 7. While sample size is a major limitation of this study, these 7 interviews provided rich data that were able to provide a valuable and humanizing dialogue of police officers. Transcriptions of interviews were collected and thematically analyzed, resulting in commonalities among participant responses. These commonalities suggest that officers involved in the piloting project that were interviewed share similar perceptions and concerns of this new technology, whether it be positive or negative. Themes that were established include: Context; Synoptic Surveillance; Accountability; Police and Community Relationship and Trust; Impact on Officer's Job, Career and Routine; Officer Repercussions & Protection from Accusations; Officer Change in Behaviour Due to Surveillance Devices; Officer Physical Safety; Citizens Behavioural Changes and Reactions Body-Worn Cameras; Social Media; Privacy Concerns; Officers Favourability toward Wearing Body-Worn Cameras; and the Overall Impact Body-Worn Cameras have on Policing. Participants reported while this surveillance tool is beneficial in theory, in practice the implications of this device are increasingly negative on police practice and community relations. Study results are framed using contemporary theories of surveillance and concepts central to police legitimacy, and for the purpose of this research the culmination of these notions has been termed the Surveillance Accountability Framework. The concerns surrounding police body-worn cameras raised by this research should be considered for further research and improvement, particularly due to the increasing amount of police services planning on adopting this new technology. Details: Kingston, ONT: Queen's University, 2017. 124p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed April 26, 2018 at: https://qspace.library.queensu.ca/bitstream/handle/1974/22788/Cox_Stacie_L_201709_MA.pdf?sequence=2 Year: 2017 Country: Canada URL: https://qspace.library.queensu.ca/bitstream/handle/1974/22788/Cox_Stacie_L_201709_MA.pdf?sequence=2 Shelf Number: 149919 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasPolice AccountabilityPolice LegitimacyPolice SurveillancePolice TechnologySurveillance |
Author: Big Brother Watch Title: Smile you're on body worn camera. Part II - Police. The use of body worn cameras by UK police forces Summary: Smile you're on Body Worn Camera Part II - Police reveals for the first time the investment police in the UK have made in equipping frontline officers with body worn cameras. Since 2010 the police, Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and politicians have enthusiastically promoted the roll out of body worn cameras. The public have been told the technology is a critical tool in reducing violence against officers, improving transparency in police/public relations, assisting the police with the number of guilty pleas they obtain and will play an essential role in speeding up justice by being used as evidence in court. Off the back of such enthusiasm we felt it necessary to investigate how many police forces had invested in the technology, how many cameras were being used by frontline staff and if the benefits lived up to the promises promulgated by the various groups. Responses to our Freedom of Information request reveals that 71% have adopted the technology, with a total spend of $22,703,235 on 47,922 body worn cameras. This is a huge increase from 2010 when the police told us in response to a Freedom of Information request that they had spent $2.2million on 2,843 cameras. 1 With such an increase in investment it would be logical to assume that the police had determined conclusively that the technology was indispensable and worthy of such substantial spending, and that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) could show the extent to which footage from body worn cameras has benefitted conviction rates. However, this is not the case. Neither the police nor CPS could provide us with data relating to the use of footage in criminal proceedings. This makes it impossible to verify the promise of improved convictions based on the use of the technology. Furthermore, publicly available findings from the police regarding the outcome of the trials of the technology reveal inconclusive proof of the benefits to frontline policing and the public, and ongoing concerns with the technology itself. Meanwhile, academic research shows that the way the cameras are deployed can impact the safety and security of the police and public alike. If the plan for future policing is to provide every frontline officer with a body worn camera, proof of purpose is vital. Our findings reveal that such proof is far from conclusive. In light of our findings we make three policy recommendations: 1. Data must be collated and published to show how often body worn camera footage is used as evidence during court proceedings and in obtaining early guilty pleas. 2. Forces must publish regular transparency reports to show how body worn cameras are being used in day to day policing. 3. Forces should ensure that all body worn cameras deployed feature a visual aid and screen showing clearly when the citizen when they are being filmed. Protection of data when at rest or in transit must be standard. Key Findings Based on responses from 45 police forces2 - 47,922 body worn cameras have been purchased by UK police forces. - 32 Forces (71%) use body worn cameras. - 4 Forces (9%) were in the process of beginning trials or were planning on rolling out body worn cameras for the first time. - 6 forces (12%) do not use body worn cameras and do not have any trials or roll outs planned. - In total $22,703,235 has been spent on body worn cameras. - Neither the CPS nor the police told us how often footage has been used in court proceedings. - 19 forces use body worn cameras made by Reveal. - Axon (formerly trading as Taser International), supply 26,935 cameras to forces, including the three largest police forces in England the Metropolitan Police, Greater Manchester Police and West Midlands Police. - 3 forces provided us with information relating to trials of body worn cameras which had been undertaken. Details: London: Big Brother Watch, 2017. 27p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 2, 2018 at: https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Smile-Youre-on-Body-Worn-Camera-Part-II-Police.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Smile-Youre-on-Body-Worn-Camera-Part-II-Police.pdf Shelf Number: 149980 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasCriminal InvestigationsPolice AccountabilityPolice InvestigationPolice SurveillancePolice Technology |
Author: Hyland, Shelley Title: Body-Worn Cameras in Law Enforcement Agencies, 2016 Summary: Presents data on body-worn camera (BWCs) use and non-use in general-purpose law enforcement agencies for 2016. Data from agencies with BWCs include number acquired, deployment, policy coverage, access to footage, and obstacles to use. For agencies without BWCs, data include alternate types of recording devices, primary reasons for not obtaining BWCs, and consideration of BWCs in the next 12 months. Highlights: - In 2016, 47 percent of general-purpose law enforcement agencies in the United States had acquired body-worn cameras (BWCs). - The main reasons (about 80 percent each) that local police and sheriffs' offices had acquired BWCs were to improve officer safety, increase evidence quality, reduce civilian complaints, and reduce agency liability. - Among agencies that had acquired BWCs, 60 percent of local police departments and 49 percent of sheriffs' offices had fully deployed their BWCs. - About 86 percent of general-purpose law enforcement agencies that had acquired BWCs had a formal BWC policy. Details: Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2018. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 9, 2018 at: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bwclea16.pdf Year: 208 Country: United States URL: https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6426 Shelf Number: 153890 Keywords: Body-Worn Camera PolicyBody-Worn CamerasCivilian ComplaintsLaw Enforcement Agency LiabilityLaw Enforcement Technology Officer SafetyPolice AccountabilityPolice Surveillance Police-Citizen InteractionsPolice-Community Relations |
Author: New York University School of Law, Policing Project Title: Report to the NYPD Summarizing Public Feedback on its Proposed Body-Worn Camera Policy Summary: In the coming months, the New York Police Department (NYPD) will launch a 1,000-camera pilot body-worn camera program, as required by the federal district court in the Floyd v. City of New York stop-and-frisk litigation. To ensure that its program responds to the interests and concerns of the communities it serves, the NYPD asked the Policing Project to assist the department in soliciting public input regarding its proposed body-worn camera policy. This report summarizes the public feedback received. Beginning on June 29, 2016, the Policing Project posted the NYPD's proposed policy online, along with a brief policy fact sheet highlighting its main points. Individuals and organizations were invited to share their feedback in one of two ways: by taking a brief questionnaire, or by submitting more detailed written comments. All of the materials - which were translated into seven languages in addition to English - were available at www.nypdbodycameras.org. The comment period ran for 40 days, concluding on August 7. The Policing Project received just over 30,000 questionnaire responses - 25,126 of which were from individuals who identified themselves as living, working, or attending school in New York. (We did not include in our analysis the nearly 5,000 responses we received from individuals who presumably were from outside of New York City.) We also received 50 sets of written comments from individuals and organizations. We describe at length below the feedback we received, but in summary: - Body-Worn Camera Program: Respondents overwhelmingly were in favor of body-worn cameras, and expressed the hope that use of the cameras would improve police-community relations, enhance officer and public safety, and improve the conduct of both officers and members of the public during police-citizen encounters. - Activation: Respondents generally were of the view that officers should be required to record a greater number of interactions than currently is called for in the NYPD's draft policy. Nearly two-thirds of respondents said that officers should be required to record all interactions with members of the public, and just over eighty percent favored recording whenever an officer approaches someone as part of the investigation of criminal activity. - Notification: A large majority of respondents said that officers should be required to notify people when cameras are recording, both in public and when entering a private residence. However, most of these respondents supported delaying that notification until officers felt it was safe to provide it. - Officer Review: More than two thirds of respondents said that officers should not be permitted to review their own body-camera footage until they have filled out a report describing the incidents - particularly when an officer is involved in a use of force. Throughout the report we use "Floyd litigation" to refer to three related cases - Floyd v. City of New York, Ligon v. City of New York, and Davis v. City of New York. The latter two cases challenged the NYPD's criminal trespass enforcement practices in New York City Public Housing as well as buildings enrolled in the Trespass Affidavit Program (TAP). - Public Access: Respondents urged the NYPD to establish a clear and streamlined process by which the subject of a body-worn camera recording could ask to see the footage. Respondents also favored releasing body-worn camera footage of high-profile incidents involving officers and members of the public either immediately, or after an internal investigation is complete. As we explain in the next section of the report, the solicitation of public comment on police department policies is in its infancy in the United States. The process described here - which occurred over a very short period of time, in the country's largest city - could not have been accomplished without substantial efforts by the NYPD, the plaintiffs' lawyers in the Floyd litigation, and numerous public officials and community groups. These efforts were entirely commendable, and resulted in substantial input from tens of thousands of New Yorkers. Details: New York: Policing Project, New York University School of Law, 2016. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 1, 2019 at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58a33e881b631bc60d4f8b31/t/59ce7edfb0786914ba448d82/1506705121578/Report+to+the+NYPD+Summarizing+Public+Feedback+on+BWC+Policy.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.policingproject.org/dispatches/2017/9/21/nypd-asks-policing-project-to-gather-public-input-on-body-cameras Shelf Number: 154767 Keywords: Body-Worn CamerasNew York Police DepartmentPolice AccountabilityPolice SurveillancePolice-Community RelationsPublic OpinionStop-and-Frisk Litigation |
Author: New York University School of Law, Policing Project Title: Report to the Los Angeles Police Commission Summarizing Public Feedback on LAPD Video Release Policies Summary: The Los Angeles Police Commission ("Commission" or "Police Commission") serves as the "board of directors" for the Los Angeles Police Department ("LAPD" or "Department"), with the authority to establish polices for the LAPD and oversee its operations. The Commission is reviewing the LAPD's policy on releasing video footage of "critical incidents," including any incident in which an officer fires his or her gun or a person dies in police custody. As part of that process, the Commission asked the Policing Project at New York University School of Law ("Policing Project") to help gather feedback on whether, when, and how, video footage of critical incidents should be made publicly available. This report summarizes the feedback received. Members of the general public and LAPD personnel were invited to provide feedback in several ways: by completing a brief questionnaire, submitting more detailed written comments, attending community forums, and participating in officer focus groups. The questionnaire, and other materials, including a video release policy FAQ, were available in English and Spanish at www.LAPDVideo.org. The questionnaire and comment period ran for 46 days, from March 23 through May 7. The questionnaire asked demographic questions including the respondents' race, age, and income, as well as whether the respondent was a member of law enforcement. There were not sharp divergences among respondents along demographic lines. The one exception-evident both in the questionnaire responses and in other sources of input - was that significant disagreement emerged in general between law enforcement and members of the general public. We note these differences where pertinent. The Policing Project ultimately received 3,199 questionnaire responses from individuals who lived, worked, or attended school in Los Angeles, including 532 responses from individuals self-identifying as law enforcement officers. The Policing Project also received 20 sets of written comments from individuals and organizations, representing the views of 27 organizations in total. Additional feedback was provided at 5 community forums and 8 officer focus groups. The ACLU of Southern California submitted a petition on the subject with the signatures of 1,773 individuals. Some key themes emerged from the process, which we elaborate upon briefly below and in great detail in the report that follows. In general, both officers and members of the public agreed that video should be released to the public, for reasons of transparency, accountability, and trust. However, the public favored releasing video within a relatively shorter release time (30-60 days), and generally preferred that release be automatic as opposed to decided on a case-by-case basis. It is not that members of the public failed to appreciate that various factors might mitigate for or against a decision to release video in a particular case. Rather, the public evinced a lack of confidence or trust in existing public institutions to make the correct decision on a case-by-case approach. (In addition, some members of the public expressed the view that many of the factors that were identified as counseling against release could be addressed by speeding up the pace of investigations or taking other ameliorative measures.) LAPD officers and officials, for their part, tended to have somewhat more faith in public institutions, and to believe that release should not occur until the LA Police Commission reaches a decision as to the propriety of the officer's conduct (often up to a year at present), or the District Attorney decides whether any criminal charges will be filed (in some instances as long as two years after the incident). Still, LAPD officers joined the public in expressing concern about "politics" affecting the decision whether to release video coverage. Details: New York: Author, 2017. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 12, 2019 at: http://assets.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/public%20feedback%20project%20lapd%20video%20release.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://assets.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/public%20feedback%20project%20lapd%20video%20release.pdf Shelf Number: 155377 Keywords: Criminal EvidencePolice AccountabilityPolice EvidencePolice LegitimacyPolice Policies and ProceduresPolice SurveillancePolice VideosPolice-Community Relations |