Body Cam Study Shows No Effect on Police Use of Force or Citizen Complaints

[SummerMadness]

Body Cam Study Shows No Effect on Police Use of Force or Citizen Complaints

Having police officers wear little cameras seems to have no discernible impact on citizen complaints or officers' use of force, at least in the nation's capital.

That's the conclusion of a study performed as Washington, D.C., rolled out its huge camera program. The city has one of the largest forces in the country, with some 2,600 officers now wearing cameras on their collars or shirts.

Not surprising, when you have a corrupt system that does not hold officers accountable for wrongdoing, you can't expect being on camera is somehow going to magically make the issue disappear. When you take into account that a large percentage of officers that are fired easily find employment elsewhere or get their job back, how is a camera going to stop that tainted culture?

 

[majj27]

Body Cam Study Shows No Effect on Police Use of Force or Citizen Complaints


Not surprising, when you have a corrupt system that does not hold officers accountable for wrongdoing, you can't expect being on camera is somehow going to magically make the issue disappear. When you take into account that a large percentage of officers that are fired easily find employment elsewhere or get their job back, how is a camera going to stop that tainted culture?

Very good point. Documentation can only be effective when combined with justly applied oversight and a culture of accountability.

 

[FireDragon76]

No camera is going to stop the Prison-Industrial Complex.

 

[Dave-W]

More info:

Body Cams are not changing police behavior

 

[Dave-W]

Very good point. Documentation can only be effective when combined with justly applied oversight and a culture of accountability.

Many DC locals are now saying to forget about the cams and spend the $$ on training.

IMO the cams are still useful, if for nothing else than to show what specifically needs to be addressed in the training.

 

[rturner76]

Many DC locals are now saying to forget about the cams and spend the $$ on training.

IMO the cams are still useful, if for nothing else than to show what specifically needs to be addressed in the training.

This seems to be the most effective strategy. De-escalation training made a huge difference in Salt Lake City and the results made other cities' police departments get n line for the training.

After the training Salt Lake seems to be fatality free in the shooting department though they were not a high shooting fatalaty city, they certainly had a yearly tally before 2015 now none, and they credit the training.

Cops In This City Haven't Killed Anyone Since 2015. Here's One Reason Why.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Body Cam Study Shows No Effect on Police Use of Force or Citizen Complaints


Not surprising, when you have a corrupt system that does not hold officers accountable for wrongdoing, you can't expect being on camera is somehow going to magically make the issue disappear. When you take into account that a large percentage of officers that are fired easily find employment elsewhere or get their job back, how is a camera going to stop that tainted culture?

That's a rather odd conclusion to draw. Why would a body camera have an effect on use of force...if that use of force is applied correctly the vast majority of the time? Hint...it wouldn't.

Likewise, I wouldn't expect it to reduce civilian complaints...as people tend to not view themselves as criminals. The real question is how many of these complaints were immediately dismissed as meritless once body camera footage was made available?

 

[dgiharris]

This OP post surprised me, because most studies I've seen show that Body Cameras REDUCE violence and use of force complaints by 40%+ percent!!!!

Do body cameras change how police interact with the public? - Journalist's Resource
Report: SDPD body cameras reducing misconduct, aggressive use of force
Study Shows Less Violence, Fewer Complaints When Cops Wear Body Cameras
California police use of body cameras cuts violence and complaints

That's a rather odd conclusion to draw. Why would a body camera have an effect on use of force...if that use of force is applied correctly the vast majority of the time? Hint...it wouldn't.

Likewise, I wouldn't expect it to reduce civilian complaints...as people tend to not view themselves as criminals. The real question is how many of these complaints were immediately dismissed as meritless once body camera footage was made available?

The above is logical however it does have a condition. "If" police conduct was above board and lawful then the addition of body cams would have very little impact to the stats. However, "if" said department didn't care about video evidence when wrongdoing was shown and just ignored said cameras, then there would be very little impact to the stats as well.

This one confrontation comes to mind, the whole thing was caught on camera but NOTHING happened to the officer

nothing happened to the above officer, he escalates the situation and assaults a lawfully abiding citizen because said cop was "annoyed" by the citizen's "attitude". So yeah, I don't expect body cams in that precinct to have much impact when said precinct doesn't do anything when an officer clearly violates the law. Oh, and the sound the guy is making is because the cop has his knee on his diaphragm and the guy can't breath.

On the whole though, I would partially agree with Ana the 1st. If you add body cameras and if the stats really don't change then that will generally mean that police procedures were being followed by those particular police.

This would then generate a second argument about the actual procedures. I mean, if police procedures say, "Hey, do whatever you want whenever you want" then cameras really aren't going to impact anything. Same thing with a failure to prosecute cops for violating policies and procedures. So the stats are only half the picture, but for the most part, studies do show that cams DECREASE use-of-force and compliants

 

[dgiharris]

This seems to be the most effective strategy. De-escalation training made a huge difference in Salt Lake City and the results made other cities' police departments get n line for the training..

To me, it is CRAZY how often police will escalate a situation, and this goes double for when they feel you aren't giving them the proper respect. It's like dealing with an angry gang member. If you've ever been around gang members then you know how quickly a situation can get out of control if one person feels "disrespected".

Except I feel it is actually "worse" with "bully" police (which I feel are about 15% of police). "Bully" police can't back down once they get their blood up and then they just start "hunting for charges".

One of their favorites is to "purposefully" get in your face. The natural human reaction when someone steps an inch away from your face is to put your hands up and push on their chest as you take a step back in an attempt to create space. That is a natural human reaction and these sorta cops use that natural reaction to say, "Aha, you touched me, that is assault" and then BOOM, the violence. I've seen that one in person several times. It's an oldie but a goodie, works almost every time.

The whole thing reminds me of the Spiderman "With great power comes great responsibility". Cops have a lot of power and it is easy for that power to go to one's head. That is why I constantly insist that cops need to be the best of us. They need CONSTANT training in dealing with people. I think many cops get jaded, they don't remember what it is like to be in fear.

When people are afraid they will panic, they will make mistakes, and they will say stupid things. Cops need to account for that and I feel that many just don't.

 

[SummerMadness]

This OP post surprised me, because most studies I've seen show that Body Cameras REDUCE violence and use of force complaints by 40%+ percent!!!!

Do body cameras change how police interact with the public? - Journalist's Resource
Report: SDPD body cameras reducing misconduct, aggressive use of force
Study Shows Less Violence, Fewer Complaints When Cops Wear Body Cameras
California police use of body cameras cuts violence and complaints

Yeah, some previous studies have shown reductions in use of force and complaints, but it may have to do with the particular precinct and whether they simply don't care.

Analysts: Whether planting evidence or 're-creating' a find, Baltimore body camera footage shows police misconduct
As we saw in Baltimore, some officers plant evidence even with their body camera. And when the police commissioner tries to justify and downlplay the seriousness of such misconduct, it shouldn't be a surprise that officers do not change their behavior.

 

[rturner76]

To me, it is CRAZY how often police will escalate a situation, and this goes double for when they feel you aren't giving them the proper respect. It's like dealing with an angry gang member. If you've ever been around gang members then you know how quickly a situation can get out of control if one person feels "disrespected".

Except I feel it is actually "worse" with "bully" police (which I feel are about 15% of police). "Bully" police can't back down once they get their blood up and then they just start "hunting for charges".

One of their favorites is to "purposefully" get in your face. The natural human reaction when someone steps an inch away from your face is to put your hands up and push on their chest as you take a step back in an attempt to create space. That is a natural human reaction and these sorta cops use that natural reaction to say, "Aha, you touched me, that is assault" and then BOOM, the violence. I've seen that one in person several times. It's an oldie but a goodie, works almost every time.

The whole thing reminds me of the Spiderman "With great power comes great responsibility". Cops have a lot of power and it is easy for that power to go to one's head. That is why I constantly insist that cops need to be the best of us. They need CONSTANT training in dealing with people. I think many cops get jaded, they don't remember what it is like to be in fear.

When people are afraid they will panic, they will make mistakes, and they will say stupid things. Cops need to account for that and I feel that many just don't.

Yeah, I learned a long time ago to just swallow my pride if I want to stay safe. I'm a huge guy and so when I deal with cops I vocalize every movement I make before I make it. "I am reaching n my pocket, I am turning around," When they tell me to go to the back of the car I ask, "where do you want my hands, above my head, behind my head, one the car?" I got traumatized as a teenager when a cop said with his gun out "you are too big for me to wrestle with, I will just shoot you," All this before I was even told what I had been stopped for or given any instructions besides "get out of the car." Full disclosure I actually do have mental illness and while I am med compliant and on a very well planned and practiced treatment plan, there is always a possibility that there is some kind of break down in my thinking either about consequences or I enter a state of mind where self harm looks like it's not an impossibility. To face your mortality in such a way when you are not prepared can have a fatal outcome for someone without the coping skills to handle a Glock between the eyes when you were just cruising along listening to your tunes. Reality check somehow doesn't seem an adequate term.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

So is it safe to assume you've partially altered your stance on body cameras then?

I remember probably about 2 years ago you and I were at odds on this subject to a degree...

You were a strong advocate of them and thought they'd have a major impact on the problem...for quite a while you would have posts like:

*********************************
The reason why cameras need to be on police officers
And before people whine about cost, there are things you should spend money on out of necessity. Accountability of government is a necessity.
*********************************

...and I would reply back with posts like this:
*********************************
There are over 1.1 million police officers in the USA.
Agencies that have tested them out have reported paying $400-800 a piece. The cost of data storage was also cited as a concern. If you figure, an officer works a 8 hour shift, to record all of their activity and store it isn't going to be cheap...consider what the size of an 8 hour, medium quality video file, would be if you were to download one to your computer.

In terms of the real world application, the officers piloting this know that they, specifically, are being watched more than the other officers so they're not going to try any of the funny business while it's being piloted. However, if everyone was wearing one, it's likely that more and more instances of "Oops, mine fell off and broke right before the traffic stop" or "oops, that video file must have been accidentally deleted" will start happening and it becomes more and more difficult to enforce once you're dealing with 1.1 million people as opposed to a contained pilot test group.

I agree that there are some instances of police brutality that there certainly needs to be accountability for (not all of the instances reported are legit, but that aside), however, I'm not sure that a multi-billion dollar national technology initiative is the thing that's going to fix it.
*********************************

I always find it to be an interesting exercise to go back and see how thoughts on certain things change over a period of a couple years...(and btw, I'm not trying to pick on you here...I do this exercise for my own thoughts and posts as well). If you review a lot of your posts/threads on this subject from back in 2015/2016 (and there are several), you seemed to think that body cams would be the thing that would be a difference maker in terms of keeping police accountable.


I think it's safe to say that my thoughts/predictions from late 2015/early 2016 weren't too far off the mark ...it still is, largely, an overpriced attempted a technical solution for a non-technical problem.

 

[SummerMadness]

So is it safe to assume you've partially altered your stance on body cameras then?

I remember probably about 2 years ago you and I were at odds on this subject to a degree...

You were a strong advocate of them and thought they'd have a major impact on the problem...for quite a while you would have posts like:

*********************************
The reason why cameras need to be on police officers
And before people whine about cost, there are things you should spend money on out of necessity. Accountability of government is a necessity.
*********************************

...and I would reply back with posts like this:
*********************************
There are over 1.1 million police officers in the USA.
Agencies that have tested them out have reported paying $400-800 a piece. The cost of data storage was also cited as a concern. If you figure, an officer works a 8 hour shift, to record all of their activity and store it isn't going to be cheap...consider what the size of an 8 hour, medium quality video file, would be if you were to download one to your computer.

In terms of the real world application, the officers piloting this know that they, specifically, are being watched more than the other officers so they're not going to try any of the funny business while it's being piloted. However, if everyone was wearing one, it's likely that more and more instances of "Oops, mine fell off and broke right before the traffic stop" or "oops, that video file must have been accidentally deleted" will start happening and it becomes more and more difficult to enforce once you're dealing with 1.1 million people as opposed to a contained pilot test group.

I agree that there are some instances of police brutality that there certainly needs to be accountability for (not all of the instances reported are legit, but that aside), however, I'm not sure that a multi-billion dollar national technology initiative is the thing that's going to fix it.
*********************************

I always find it to be an interesting exercise to go back and see how thoughts on certain things change over a period of a couple years...(and btw, I'm not trying to pick on you here...I do this exercise for my own thoughts and posts as well). If you review a lot of your posts/threads on this subject from back in 2015/2016 (and there are several), you seemed to think that body cams would be the thing that would be a difference maker in terms of keeping police accountable.


I think it's safe to say that my thoughts/predictions from late 2015/early 2016 weren't too far off the mark ...it still is, largely, an overpriced attempted a technical solution for a non-technical problem.

Yeah, I was really gung-ho about it, partly because I was optimistic. I thought cameras would actually mean people would get punished because the refrain I often heard was, "We don't have any evidence that the police did anything wrong," so I thought documentation would help. Little did I realize it didn't matter, these people would simply argue that the video proves the officer acted properly, regardless (we have a thread on here about two NYPD officers accused raping a girl they arrested and the argument is, "people lie about rape all the time").

I don't quite know when my view altered (it's still not completely changed), but after seeing Slager, Tensing, Shelby, and others simply walking away or because juries not being able to determine if a black person was murdered, I began to recognize the futility. I had fallen for the respectability politics game where people would argue the issue was the lack of evidence to show the wrongdoing, not recognizing like in that famous Mos Def (Yasiin Bey) track, "you start keeping pace, they start changing up the tempo."

I'm still a proponent of cameras because when you do have a community that holds officers accountable, it helps tremendously. For instance, where I live, the police chief was canned after hiding video of officers using pepper spray and beating up a teenager, so it can still be useful. But it seems the biggest obstacle is still the rank apologism for any wrongdoing.

 

[bhsmte]

Tons of variables in a study like this and almost impossible to control for all of them.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Yeah, I was really gung-ho about it, partly because I was optimistic. I thought cameras would actually mean people would get punished because the refrain I often heard was, "We don't have any evidence that the police did anything wrong," so I thought documentation would help. Little did I realize it didn't matter, these people would simply argue that the video proves the officer acted properly, regardless (we have a thread on here about two NYPD officers accused raping a girl they arrested and the argument is, "people lie about rape all the time").

I don't quite know when my view altered (it's still not completely changed), but after seeing Slager, Tensing, Shelby, and others simply walking away or because juries not being able to determine if a black person was murdered, I began to recognize the futility. I had fallen for the respectability politics game where people would argue the issue was the lack of evidence to show the wrongdoing, not recognizing like in that famous Mos Def (Yasiin Bey) track, "you start keeping pace, they start changing up the tempo."

I'm still a proponent of cameras because when you do have a community that holds officers accountable, it helps tremendously. For instance, where I live, the police chief was canned after hiding video of officers using pepper spray and beating up a teenager, so it can still be useful. But it seems the biggest obstacle is still the rank apologism for any wrongdoing.

Cameras recently caught some officers here in Baltimore planting (or "recreating") evidence.

Either way, I think they have the potential serve as an insurance policy for both sides in the event something goes really sideways, even if they don't change much in the way of day-to-day interactions.

 

[dgiharris]

...
I don't quite know when my view altered (it's still not completely changed), but after seeing Slager, Tensing, Shelby, and others simply walking away or because juries not being able to determine if a black person was murdered, I began to recognize the futility..

the one thing body cameras have done for me is given me an awareness for how far human delusion can go in support of ideals we hold sacred.

I watch a video of a citizen being murdered by police, and yet another citizen watches that same video and figures out a way to support that police action.

Then they employ every logical fallacy in existence to justify the police murder of said citizen, arguments mind you that they would NEVER employ in any other situation. There is no reciprocity, no transitive property, no logical consistency whatsoever in their arguments of support.

As they argue they refuse to admit ANY wrong doing by the police while conversely they will blame the opposition/victim for any wrong without any regard to proportionality.

It is a very similar phenomena to the Defense of Trump's actions. Trump says or does something indefensible and yet his supporters "find a way" to defend him.

In any event, it was shocking for me to realize the above. I grew up with the old Black southern mantra "the truth shall set ye free" and I discovered that is not always the case. Sometimes, people will go to extraordinary lengths to refuse to see the truth...

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I'm still a proponent of cameras because when you do have a community that holds officers accountable, it helps tremendously. For instance, where I live, the police chief was canned after hiding video of officers using pepper spray and beating up a teenager, so it can still be useful. But it seems the biggest obstacle is still the rank apologism for any wrongdoing.

I would agree that it still can't hurt to have cameras being used in some ways... However, before it could be truly effective, the "good ol' boys club" within the profession itself would need to be broken up and the monitoring of the feeds themselves would need to be done by law enforcement outsiders.

 

[dgiharris]

I would agree that it still can't hurt to have cameras being used in some ways... However, before it could be truly effective, the "good ol' boys club" within the profession itself would need to be broken up and the monitoring of the feeds themselves would need to be done by law enforcement outsiders.

One of the things that needs to happen in law enforcement is more "outside" involvement by parties that have "teeth". And by teeth, I mean outside agencies that have the legal authority to compel evidence and testimony and administer punishment to including firing police.

There is this belief that "only" police can regulate themselves because only they understand what it is like to be a police officer. however, the problem with this view is that police culture for the most part regards the Constitution as an impediment to them being able to do their jobs.

When police misconduct happens, I just have zero confidence that the Police will handle it fairly and in a manner consistent with the Constitution.

It's as if there is a pathological inability by the Police to admit wrongdoing. I could post clip after clip after clip of an obvious wrong action by police being deemed "acceptable" by the powers that be...

 

[ThatRobGuy]

One of the things that needs to happen in law enforcement is more "outside" involvement by parties that have "teeth". And by teeth, I mean outside agencies that have the legal authority to compel evidence and testimony and administer punishment to including firing police.

Even entities within the force who have the ability to bust other cops are treated as persona non grata.

I have a friend who did serve in the regular rank & file for nearly 8 years before applying for a position in Internal Affairs...longtime friends on the force literally stopped talking to him and stopped going to lunch with him, and when he flat out asked a few of them why he was getting the cold shoulder from them, they said they were told by the older officers on the force that "you don't associate with cops who bust other cops".

It's almost like a mafia vibe where literally anyone in a capacity to be challenge their ability to do whatever they want with impunity is "the enemy" and "when they ask you questions, you just keep your mouth shut and let the lawyer do all the talking".

 

[rturner76]

and when he flat out asked a few of them why he was getting the cold shoulder from them, they said they were told by the older officers on the force that "you don't associate with cops who bust other cops".

What is also telling is that the Police have the same rules as the crooks.......No snitching! Snitches get stitches or whatever. So if you are a law abiding citizen, why would you live by the same code as the gangsters when it comes to cooperating with law enforcement?