California shooting shows slow adoption
of police body cameras
Send a link to a friend
[September 30, 2016]
By David Ingram
(Reuters) - After El Cajon, California,
police shot dead an unarmed black man said to be mentally ill, they
released a photo from a bystander's cell phone video, showing the man in
a "shooting stance" against the officers.
The image does not show clearly if 38-year-old Alfred Olango was holding
anything and officials had no police body camera video showing the
officers' view of the shooting. Police said they recovered a vape
smoking device, not a gun, from the scene.
Officials voted months ago to purchase body cameras for police in the
city of 100,000 residents 15 miles (24 km) northeast of San Diego. They
have not yet been delivered, the police department said in a statement.
After controversial police killings in several cities including
Ferguson, Missouri, Chicago and North Charleston, South Carolina,
pressure has mounted for the nearly 18,000 local, state and federal law
enforcement agencies across the United States to issue the cameras to
their officers.
Yet the rollout has been slow.
About 95 percent of U.S. law enforcement agencies had a camera program
or intended to adopt one, according to a December 2015 survey conducted
jointly by the Major Cities Chiefs Association and Major County Sheriffs
Association.
To speed things along, the U.S. Justice Department on Monday granted a
total of $20 million to 106 law enforcement agencies to help purchase
body cameras. But even that sum would cover just a sliver of what it
would take to outfit all police officers in the United States, experts
said.
SUSPICION OF CAMERAS
Some localities have resisted body cameras, citing the cost of storing
data, distrust of how video will be used or lack of research into its
usefulness.
"The technology is just not there yet, and the cameras show only a small
point of view," said Shannon Martin, a city council member in Port St.
Lucie, Florida. The city is among those that have debated cameras but
not bought them.
In Madison, Wisconsin, mistrust between residents and police is high
enough that some residents were concerned that police would manipulate
video content and use it against marginalized communities.
"I don't think it would resolve the issues we're facing. It would give
the police another tool to harm the community," said Veronica Lazo, who
co-chaired an advisory committee on the subject in Madison.
[to top of second column] |
Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) information technology bureau
officer Jim Stover displays the new body cameras to be used by the
LAPD in Los Angeles, California August 31, 2015. REUTERS/Al Seib
Many police departments support body cameras, saying videos will
vindicate officers in the vast majority of cases.
A video can be a "tremendous asset" that gives context to an
officer's actions, said Martin Mayer, a California lawyer who
specializes in defending government agencies including police
departments.
"What it does provide in many instances is not only the perspective
of the officer, but also what leads up to the use of force," Mayer
said.
Pockets of police continue to resist. Some unionized police officers
have sued cities over being required to wear cameras. Others worry
body cameras may make officers too inhibited, constantly watching
what they say.
"The industry shoved this down everybody's throat, and political
people threw up their hands and said, 'We've got a panacea here,'"
said Eugene O'Donnell, a former New York City police officer who
teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
Footage is often inconclusive or subject to interpretation,
especially for those not trained on what to look for.
In Charlotte, protesters this month demanded to see videos taken at
the scene when a police officer shot dead Keith Scott. Local police
initially resisted releasing the video, saying it would not be
conclusive. When they did, it failed to settle the question of
whether Scott had been holding a gun.
(Reporting by David Ingram in New York; Editing by Scott Malone and
David Gregorio)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |