I'm Not a Cop but...

Ματθιας;142216626 said:
"if you're not doing anything wrong, what have you got to hide?" Right? Right?

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on your definition of wrong. I guarantee you that my definition of wrong is not the same as the miscreants that will be analyzing every second of recording that they can get their grubby little hands on.
 
I'd wear one any day of the week. We started using cameras in the late '80s, and our officers benefited 99 times out of 100 with convictions, video evidence that they did not use excessive force, didn't force 'consent to search,' confessions, nor did they act rudely or unprofessionally toward the public. The few cases that were not helpful to the officers were helpful to the public and/or police management.

Interviews and interrogations have been routinely videoed for over 40 years.
 
I believe this all started when the New Jersey State Police was accused of biased policing. NJSP installed dash cameras and the truth came out... many people that are caught redhanded committing a crime will file a false complaint against the LEO to make him/her pay for having the audacity to arrest them.

In the vast majority of cases the LEO has simply done their job in a professional manner so now the public complains about having their privacy violated by body cams.

It’s too late, body cams are a fact of life. When I was a supervisor (before body cams) dash cams really made that part of my job a lot easier. Even though it was department policy to let the public vent, the complainant would usually leave my office within five minutes yelling at me. I never could abide people lying about my men.
 
I had no problem wearing the body camera or running the dash camera when that was all we had.

I even carried a belt recorder that I would activate on my car stops, suspicious people, knock and talks, etc...

That tape recorder saved me a few times and I really can't think of a time it hurt me.

The biggest issue I have with this comprehensive of a policy is not so much with dealing with citizens complaints. Most of the time this saves the officer.

The issue I had was the ability to monitor everything an officer does. There are so many rules and regulations it would be hard to go a day without violating something. I am not talking major things but little things that have little to do with complaints or law suits.

This comprehensive of a policy allows for targeting an employee who maybe isn't well liked.

Our policy was that video could not be reviewed randomly unless there was a complaint or issue that arose. This provided some protection to the officer from being targeted.
 
As a layman I view body cams as both boon and bane.

I have seen great multitudes of videos where the cops are vindicated and justified in their actions following cries from the uninformed, emotion driven great unwashed.

I have also seen videos where bad and reckless acting cops have been weeded out of their respective departments.

I am all for body cams.
 
Except interestingly, not by the FBI.

Speaking of cameras I once knew a police sergeant whose department installed cameras in each of their four prisoner sells. They arrested a guy for whatever and placed him in his cell. In due course he was arraigned and released.

One day his lawyer showed up with a briefcase full of pictures of his client with lots of bruises and cuts on his face. Said lawyer claimed that the police beat his client up.

The sergeant popped a VHS tape into their VCR and showed the video of the suspect smashing his face against the wall, the police removing him, EMTs placing him on the stretcher and wheeling him out of camera view.

That was the end of that complaint.

I'd wear one any day of the week. We started using cameras in the late '80s, and our officers benefited 99 times out of 100 with convictions, video evidence that they did not use excessive force, didn't force 'consent to search,' confessions, nor did they act rudely or unprofessionally toward the public. The few cases that were not helpful to the officers were helpful to the public and/or police management.

Interviews and interrogations have been routinely videoed for over 40 years.
 
I have a friend who does public filming. He has a pretty big social media presence. He goes into public, government, buildings in just the publicly accessible areas and films. It's 100% legal to do.

Government workers don't like to be filmed or held accountable. More often than not, they call LE. Depending on what happens when LE arrives, well then it gets interesting. He files public records requests and gets body cams and if public workers are filming or taking pictures, even if it's their personal phone, they create a public record, too - he gets those as well. He'll also get the email and texts during and after the times he's there. He can even get security cams, too. He's been known to sue especially if he gets arrested or trespassed. He does this for a living and he travels the country.

He has said that, here, in New Mexico, LE no longer bothers him once he reminds them that they no longer have qualified immunity.

It's really interesting to watch how government officials react when a civilian with a camera, a camera they can't control or edit, films them. Then, when the body cams come out when you hear the folks conspiring, trying to figure out what they can charge him with.

Then, when, the content gets released or especially if it's live-streamed, and it goes viral, then the fun begins for everyone involved.

There are tons if these videos on YouTube. I find them highly entertaining!
 
Ματθιας;142216846 said:
I have a friend who does public filming. He has a pretty big social media presence. He goes into public, government, buildings in just the publicly accessible areas and films. It's 100% legal to do.

Government workers don't like to be filmed or held accountable. More often than not, they call LE. Depending on what happens when LE arrives, well then it gets interesting. He files public records requests and gets body cams and if public workers are filming or taking pictures, even if it's their personal phone, they create a public record, too - he gets those as well. He'll also get the email and texts during and after the times he's there. He can even get security cams, too. He's been known to sue especially if he gets arrested or trespassed. He does this for a living and he travels the country.

He has said that, here, in New Mexico, LE no longer bothers him once he reminds them that they no longer have qualified immunity.

It's really interesting to watch how government officials react when a civilian with a camera, a camera they can't control or edit, films them. Then, when the body cams come out when you hear the folks conspiring, trying to figure out what they can charge him with.

Then, when, the content gets released or especially if it's live-streamed, and it goes viral, then the fun begins for everyone involved.

There are tons if these videos on YouTube. I find them highly entertaining!

Sounds like your friend would be right at home with this bunch of morons. My daughter did one and only one shift in this city when they were (and still are) overrun with feral humans and called in the State Police for help. She was filmed by these idiots her entire shift. They defunded their police and deserve all the crime that they have.

BTV CopWatch – We film the cops for community self-defense in Burlington, Vermont. In partnership with Black Lives Matter of Greater Burlington and Food Not Bombs Burlington. Dedicated to police abolition.
 
Ματθιας;142216846 said:
I have a friend who does public filming. He has a pretty big social media presence. He goes into public, government, buildings in just the publicly accessible areas and films. It's 100% legal to do.

Government workers don't like to be filmed or held accountable. More often than not, they call LE. Depending on what happens when LE arrives, well then it gets interesting. He files public records requests and gets body cams and if public workers are filming or taking pictures, even if it's their personal phone, they create a public record, too - he gets those as well. He'll also get the email and texts during and after the times he's there. He can even get security cams, too. He's been known to sue especially if he gets arrested or trespassed. He does this for a living and he travels the country.

He has said that, here, in New Mexico, LE no longer bothers him once he reminds them that they no longer have qualified immunity.

It's really interesting to watch how government officials react when a civilian with a camera, a camera they can't control or edit, films them. Then, when the body cams come out when you hear the folks conspiring, trying to figure out what they can charge him with.

Then, when, the content gets released or especially if it's live-streamed, and it goes viral, then the fun begins for everyone involved.

There are tons if these videos on YouTube. I find them highly entertaining!

Your friend is an ***. The idiots who do this stuff are deliberately creating conflict for personal gain, forcing cops and other government workers to deal with their BS both on the front end through confrontation and the backend through FOIA requests and lawsuits. Those are taxpayer funded resources that would be better spent doing their job without being distracted by some narscissitic attention idiot.

It may not be 'illegal', but it is certainly not something to be celebrated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am not sure about the GPS stuff with the BWC. More often than not the video we get from the officer's body BWC is great. Protects them more than it jams them up. Biggest problem initially is that the officer would go into the bathroom with the camera still on. Always good stuff.
 
Your friend is an ***. The idiots who do this stuff are deliberately creating conflict for personal gain, forcing cops and other government workers to deal with their BS both on the front end through confrontation and the backend through FOIA requests and lawsuits. Those are taxpayer funded resources that would be better spent doing their job without being distracted by some narscissitic attention idiot.

It may not be 'illegal', but it is certainly not something to be celebrated.

It's about choices.

Nobody forced public servants to act the way they act.
Nobody forced them to deny service because he has a camera
Nobody forced them to call LE over a guy with camera - because they are "uncomfortable" or the guy is "creepy" of if he doesn't answer their questions.
Nobody forced them to lie to dispatch - which comes out in the 911 calls
Nobody forced the cops to act the way they act.
Then when multiple cops show up over a guy with a camera, nobody forced them all to stay when there's no crime.
Nobody forced them to solicit trespass
Nobody forced them to violate rights by arresting for a lawful activity.
They made those choices
It all comes out w/the release of the body cams with the conspiracies to get him arrested.

If they leave him alone, he has no content to post, no lawsuits to file. They, without fail, give him everything

Then, when all charges are dropped - that's when he goes after them.

Tell me, again who is wasting public resources - the guy with a camera or the folks who made the initial call.

But, see, there IS a choice on how LE/public servants act when they can no longer hide behind qualified immunity. They seem to be VERY nice and accommodating. Strange, isn't it.

I'm all for flexing rights through lawful activity.

The true test for freedom is the right to test it.
 
Hornets are often despised due to their wrongfully perceived aggressive nature and painful stings. Hornets control mosquitoes quite well. Hornets won’t bother people unless their home or family is threatened.

The above mentioned “videographer” is purposely stirring a hornets nest for his own amusement and monetary gain.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top