Resources about Privacy and Related Issues
Body-worn cameras (BWCs) have spread rapidly to municipal and collegiate police agencies across the country. The research and guidance on BWCs, however, has focused primarily on their implementation in municipal agencies. To date, only one study assesses their use in a collegiate setting. Though collegiate agencies are similar to municipal agencies in many ways, there are important differences between a college campus setting and a traditional town, city, or county.
In late August, a Texas jury convicted former Balch Springs police officer Roy Oliver of the murder of 15-year-old Jordan Edwards. The uncommon verdict largely rested on footage of the incident captured on Oliver’s body camera, technology the city’s police department implemented in 2015. As more law enforcement agencies nationwide use police body-worn cameras, states are developing and refining policy guidance.
Despite relatively little extant research, efforts to expand the use of body-worn cameras (BWCs) in policing are increasing. Although recent research suggests positive impacts of BWCs on reducing police use-of-force and citizen complaints, little is known about community members’ perceptions of BWCs. The current study examined perceptions of residents of two Florida counties and found a large majority of respondents supported the use of BWCs. Structural equation modeling was utilized to examine factors that influence views of BWCs.
On June 25, 2017, Cheif Ed Book of Santa Fe College and First Sergeant Robert Bleyle of Syracuse University, delivered a presentation on the implementation of body-worn cameras at the IACLEA 59th Annual Conference & Exposition in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The presentation shared the ins and outs of how to implement a BWC program, including a focus on grant application, policy, equipment, and storage. The speakers also highlighted the resources and sample documents to help ensure alignment with best federal practices.
Although body-worn cameras (BWCs) can increase police accountability, they also can encroach on victim privacy and interfere with confidential communications. BWCs record sensitive information, the public release of which could be emotionally devastating and/or dangerous to a victim. The goal of every police department is to develop BWC policies and procedures that protect a victim’s right to privacy and confidentiality, limit the number of individuals that can review the recording, and limit an officer’s ability to manipulate a recording for self-serving reasons.
To contribute to the important national debate about body cameras the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) then-President Theodore Simon established a working group in December 2014 and, in July 2015, the NACDL Board of Directors adopted a set of principles
The Greensboro, NC, Police Department recently developed a frequently asked questions card to make it easier for their officers to provide information on the department's use of body-worn cameras to community members wanting to view a BWC recording. The cards are provided to patrol officers to hand out to community members. The Greensboro police department has placed 1,000 hard copies of this card in the roll-call room at each of their four patrol substations.
To view a copy of the BWC FAQ card, click here.
Despite relatively little extant research, efforts to expand the use of body-worn cameras (BWCs) in policing are increasing. Although recent research suggests positive impacts of BWCs on reducing police use-of-force and citizen complaints, little is known about community members’ perceptions of BWCs.
The ACLU has issued an updated Police Body Camers Model Legislation. The version 2.0, is a more detailed model legislation, incorporating a number of tweaks that we have been persuaded will improve the way implementing agencies deploy body cameras. One of the more significant changes involves what kind of video is subject to public release and what kind is not.