Research Paper on Police Officers' Interactions Captured with Body-Worn Cameras

Introduction

Body-worn cameras (BWC) are video and audio capturing devices that are mobile, and are mostly used by police officers in recording whatever they hear and see at any given time, anywhere (Mendoza, 2019). They can achieve various body attachments, such as on the head, glasses, helmet, on the body by the pockets, badge, and any other strategy of attachment, like, for instance, in the car and on the dash. They possess the capacity of recording an officer's interactions that could only initially be captured in the car or by the camera systems of an interrogation room in a police station (Yokum et al., 2017). The use of these cameras minimizes the occasions of unclear incidences in disputes among individuals. It is thus, the unbiased witness. The agencies of law enforcement can also achieve the recognition of potential crime video footage. It, therefore, assists the law enforcers in the encounter of criminal prosecution, and aid the promotion of professionalism and accountability in their line of work (Hedberg et al., 2017). The Body-worn cameras thus have a lot of vital functions in the field of Criminal Law.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Body-Worn Cameras in Criminal Law Policing

The Body-worn cameras, unlike other varied forms of technology in the field of Criminal Law, have the capabilities of serving both as a vital tool in the enforcement of the law, and as a determiner of the public accountability (Smyka et al., 2016). These cameras can be of great use when worn by the police. They can help document and reveal the behavior of the police while among the casual public, such as the use of excessive force on the citizens and other forms of misconduct. However, the footage retrieved from these cameras can also be helpful in the surveillance of both the individuals that the police are in interaction with, as well as the third-party individuals who might by chance not even notice that they are on record. The combination of the Body-worn cameras' application and that of other technologies, dozens of police officers wearing them could, with much ease, record the deeds, speeches, and locations of much of the population under survey, at any given time (Mendoza, 2019). Thus, raising essential concerns regarding the First and the Fourth Amendments.

These are small cameras that assume the ability to be clipped on police officer's uniform, or can be worn as headsets on switched on to capture video and record audio in the encounters of enforcing the law among the public. The recorded footages are usually saved based on stamps of dates, time, and coordinates of the GPS. Some variety of Body-worn cameras can provide real-time streaming of footage (Yokum et al., 2017). Others can establish options for triggering Bluetooth Options for recording videos automatically (Smyka et al., 2016). The police agencies can achieve the choice of selecting input that initiates an automatic turn-on of the cameras without having them activated manually. It can also involve the engagement of the on-switch of the cruisers' sirens and lights, activations of crash sensors, when the police cars attain a certain speed, or when the body and dashboard cameras that are nearby are turned on. The body cameras can also be alerted by the new sensors of wireless holsters about an abrupt encounter of a drawn gun (Hedberg et al., 2017).

Another variety of the Body-worn cameras can also establish and provide video footage whose first 30 seconds do not record any sound of the footage in the capture, but until the time when they will officially start recording the videos (Hedberg et al., 2017). These footages are then uploaded to the third-party vendors, or to the external databases that are in maintenance by the agencies of the police. When the Body-worn cameras are turned on by the police, they capture and record videos and audio footage of the public, especially those that are under police watch and surveillance. These footages often incorporate the aspects of the recordings like the date, time, and the coordinates of the GPS. These footages usually focus on capturing the faces of individuals in public, which are later analyzed potentially via the technology of face recognition at any time of investigation (Yokum et al., 2017). Some of these camera systems permit police officers to incorporate on their footages, the tags of metadata while they are in the field, by the use of tablets.

The Applications of Body-Worn Cameras in Law Enforcement

Law Enforcement Officers, such as the police, can act upon their decision, can collect video footage using these cameras whenever they stop an individual for frisking or questioning (Mendoza, 2019). They can also apply the use of these footages in the act of property search, during a car chase or stop, while interviewing a witness, on issuing of summons, execute an arrest of a criminal or suspect. Since these cameras collect video and audio footage of people, their facial images can be taken through digitization and be used for facial recognition purposes. According to the detailed scorecard that was issued on The Conference of Leadership on Civil and Human Rights in 2016, vast variations in Body-worn camera applications and practices were compared in the entire United States of America (Smyka et al., 2016). Some departments of the police incorporate the use of these cameras and the technology related to them into creating the ease of accessing their policies, but that is not the same for the others. A couple of departments limit the discretion of their officers on when to capture and record footage using these cameras, as others do not. Other departments bring into consideration the concerns of personal privacy or illegalize pre-report viewing by the police officers or regulate footage retention. Some departments prioritize protecting the footage from misuse and tampering, permit individuals to file complaints to gain the accessibility of the footage or limit the application of facial recognition and other biometric technologies (Hedberg et al., 2017).

About the conferential data, 43 police departments out of the total, which is 68 in the major cities, have the accessibility of the body-worn camera programs with their policies in place. Out of the 43 police departments that are provided with the body-worn cameras, 24 departments make their public availability easier on their websites. Las Vegas, Chicago, Colorado, Washington D.C, and Cincinnati Police Departments permit the recorded individuals to access their footages. An estimation of six police departments has their officers prohibited from the review of footages before filing the prior drafted reports of incidents for some sensitive cases like police shootings. The Boston, Parker, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Montgomery County, and Baltimore County Police Departments are limiting the use of biometric technologies that incorporate the use of camera footage (Hedberg et al., 2017).

Threats Associated With the Use of Body-Worn Cameras

When police officers make visits to the citizens' areas of residence while wearing the body-worn cameras, they may, in that encounter, capture footage related to the sexual or domestic violence assaults (Mendoza, 2019). These cameras took the video and audio footage may, by chance, capture, and record in some states the naked children or even adults. A couple of police departments relay policies that safeguard the individuals who are vulnerable from being recorded without their knowledge or permission. However, some police departments provide just but vague plans on the issues of personal privacy. Other departments do not even address the problems of privacy policies entirely (Yokum et al., 2017).

Community-Oriented Policing in Criminal Law

Community-oriented policing in the field of Criminal Law is an organizational strategy and a philosophy that permits the co-operation between the community and the police (Normore et al., 2019). The work together to eradicate crime, safety problems, and other societal disorders to boost the quality of life for every individual in the community. According to the various experiences, community security and safety significantly improve when members of a community themselves embark on executing crucial responsibilities in shaping their security and safety (Gill et al., 2016). Community-based policing, therefore, becomes a success when members of the society include themselves in the taking responsibilities that are aimed at planning, implementing, and monitoring the locally-established remedies to their security problems.

The relationship quality that exists between the civilians, groups of the community, and the local security officers, who often are the police, is ever the vital consideration that helps in determining whether a victim reports a case of violence and receives enough treatment (Gill et al., 2016). Whether the perpetrator of the crime is subjected to apprehension, investigation, and eventual prosecution. Whether effective measures are taken locally to facilitate the prevention of similar incidences of violence in the future. Deploying the force from community police officers or adoption of community policing strategies can improve the trust and workability of the police in prevention and response to whichever form of violence, including that against women. Community-based policing relies on the notion that no one body can remedy the local security challenges, which call for intervention from collaborations, partnerships, joint community-police action, and the community itself. The other bodies could be inclusive of community groups, community and traditional leaders, community-based service providers, non-governmental organizations, local media, private businesses, and other government agencies like the prosecutors, local authorities, health, and social services, among others (Normore et al., 2019).

Conclusion

Generally, the implications that the current aspects of policing are clear evidence that the spread of technology is becoming more rapid. Considering their escalating adoption, legal frameworks, and supporting policies regarding their regulation has a likelihood of struggling to keep operational. Therefore, the issue of public privacy should be regarded as sensitive while adopting the technology. On the other hand, community-oriented policing focuses on the notion that the societal and community well-being in terms of security is the responsibility of every community member, including the local police officers.

References

Gill, C., Weisburd, D., Bennett, T., Telep, C., & Vitter, Z. (2016). COMMUNITY-ORIENTED POLICING. Stress in Policing: Sources, consequences and interventions, 28. https://www.endvawnow.org/en/articles/1095-community-based-policing-.html

Hedberg, E. C., Katz, C. M., & Choate, D. E. (2017). Body-worn cameras and citizen interactions with police officers: Estimating plausible effects given varying compliance levels. Justice quarterly, 34(4), 627-651. https://www.eff.org/pages/body-worn-cameras

Mendoza, D. (2019). Privacy Concerns Over the Use of Body Worn Cameras in Scientific Research. https://www.datasociety.net/pubs/dcr/PoliceBodyWornCameras.pdf

Normore, A. H., Ellis, B., Clamp, K., & Paterson, C. (2019). Cross-cultural collaboration for community-oriented policing and restorative justice. In Police Science: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice (pp. 454-472). IGI Global. https://cops.usdoj.gov/RIC/Publications/cops-p157-pub.pdf

Smykla, J. O., Crow, M. S., Crichlow, V. J., & Snyder, J. A. (2016). Police body-worn cameras: Perceptions of law enforcement leadership. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 41(3), 424-443. https://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/472014912134715246869.pdf