Content uploaded by Christopher Bush
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Christopher Bush on May 20, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Public Perceptions of Delays in the Release of Police Body-Worn Camera Footage
Abstract and Figures
Delays in the release of police body-worn camera (BWC) video footage have amplified public concerns about police misconduct. Law enforcement transparency is questioned
when video from BWCs is not shared in a timely manner with the community. The
purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore community and victims’ family’s
beliefs related to delays in the release of police BWC footage. Rogers’s diffusion
innovation theory and Mettler and Sorelle’s policy feedback theory were used for the
study’s conceptual framework. The research questions focused on understanding the
perceptions of community relationships with law enforcement around transparency,
communication, and information sharing.
Figures - uploaded by Christopher Bush
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Christopher Bush
Content may be subject to copyright.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to assess perceptions of body-worn cameras (BWCs) among citizens who had BWC-recorded police encounters, and to explore the potential for a civilizing effect on citizen behavior.
Design/methodology/approach
From June to November 2015, the authors conducted telephone interviews with 249 citizens in Spokane (WA) who had a recent BWC-recorded police encounter.
Findings
Respondents were satisfied with how they were treated during the police encounter and, overall, had positive attitudes about BWCs. However, only 28 percent of respondents were actually aware of the BWC during their own encounter. The authors also found little evidence of a civilizing effect but did document a significant, positive connection between awareness of the BWC and enhanced perceptions of procedural justice.
Research limitations/implications
Authors only interviewed citizens who had encounters with officers wearing BWCs. However, variation in BWC awareness among citizens allowed the authors to construct a proxy “non-BWC condition” for comparison.
Practical implications
The pre-conditions necessary to produce a civilizing effect among citizens are complex and difficult to achieve. The intriguing relationship between BWC awareness and procedural justice suggests the technology may have the potential to improve police legitimacy.
Originality/value
The study is among the first to explore attitudes about BWCs among those who have their police encounters recorded, and results demonstrate high levels of support among this population. Findings bode well for continued adoption of BWCs in policing.
Body Worn Cameras are spreading worldwide, under the assumption that police performance, conduct, accountability, and legitimacy, in the eyes of the public, are enhanced as a result of using these devices. In addition, suspects’ demeanor during police-public engagements is hypothesized to change as a result of the video-recording of the encounter. For both parties-officers and suspects-the theoretical mechanism that underpins these behavioral changes is deterrence theory, self-awareness theory, or both. Yet evidence on the efficacy of Body Worn Cameras remains largely anecdotal, with only one rigorous study, from a small force in Rialto, California, validating the hypotheses. How Body Worn Cameras affect police-public interactions in large police departments remains unknown, as does their effect on other outcomes, such as arrests. With one Denver police district serving as the treatment area and five other districts within a large metropolitan area serving as comparisons, we offer mixed findings as in the Rialto Experiment, not least in terms of effect magnitudes. Adjusted odds-ratios suggest a significant 35% lower odds for citizens’ complaints against the police use of force, but 14% greater odds for a complaint against misconduct, when Body Worn Cameras are used. No discernable effect was detected on the odds of use of force at the aggregate, compared to control conditions (OR=0.928; p>0.1). Finally, arrest rates dropped significantly, with the odds of an arrest when Body Worn Cameras not present is 18% higher than the odds under treatment conditions. The outcomes are contextualized within the framework of reactive emergency calls for service rather than proactive policing. We further discuss officers’ decisions and the degree of the necessity of arrest in policing more broadly, because the burden of proof for tangible evidence necessary for making a legal arrest can be challenged with the evidence produced by Body Worn Cameras: officers become "cautious" about arresting suspects when Body Worn Cameras are present. Limitations associated with the lack of randomly assigned comparison units are discussed, as well, with practical recommendations for future research on Body Worn Cameras.
As more police departments adopt body cameras (BCs), there is a hope that the devices will help usher in a new era of police accountability. Turning to the first online archive of BC footage, this article examines the emergent possibilities and problems that arise when human actors interact with technical designs in applied contexts. Communication affordance theory is used as a framework to situate the archive within discussions about police use of social media, visibility, transparency, and police–community relations. A web application using YouTube’s public API was used to analyze the usage and interaction statistics of the archive. Then, a focus group was conducted to discuss the usability of the archive and its benefits and drawbacks for police–community relations. Findings show that despite the visibility of social media, the videos have low view counts, little interaction, are not easily searchable, and raise more questions about police–community relations than they answer.
The growing use of body-worn cameras (BWCs) in law enforcement poses ethical and privacy
threats to be considered by policy makers. Law enforcement adoption of surveillance
technology often outpaces the laws and regulations that would ensure their appropriate use,
and the negative consequences are rarely anticipated, particularly as they relate to privacy
concerns. To date, the BWC policy narrative in the United States frames the technology as a
method to increase transparency in police–community interactions and build legitimacy.
However, irrespective of how noble the original intent, technologies tend to morph from
beneficence to overt control in the absence of countervailing friction. This article critiques the
increased transparency brought about by BWCs to broadly explore the impact of increased
exposure on victims, and concludes by proposing ethical policy principles to limit the harms the
new technology could pose to vulnerable victims of domestic and sexual violence.
Body-mounted cameras are being used by law enforcement with increasing frequency throughout the United States, with calls from government leaders and advocacy groups to further increase their integration with routine police practices. As the technology becomes more common in availability and use, however, concerns grow as to how more-frequent and more personal video recording affects privacy interests, as well as how policies can both protect privacy and fulfill the promise of increased official oversight. This Note advocates for a privacy-centric approach to body camera policy-making, positing that such a framework will best serve the public's multifaceted privacy interests without compromising the ability of body cameras to monitor law-enforcement misconduct. Part I surveys the existing technology and commonplace views of privacy and accountability. Part II examines the unique privacy risks imposed by the technology as well as the countervailing potential for privacy enhancement, demonstrating the value of an approach oriented around privacy interests. Part III assesses how the failure to adopt this approach has resulted in storage policies for body camera footage that inhibit the technology's ability to best serve the public and suggests that a privacy-centric perspective can lead to better policy making. Finally, Part IV examines the flaws of prevailing views with respect to policies for accessing footage and discusses how a revised privacy centric perspective could lead to better policies.
This Note analyzes the potential privacy implications of the use of bodymounted cameras by police. Specifically, this Note considers how policy concerns and legal limitations should shape when and where cameras may record and what may be done with the footage once it has been collected. Currently, there are few clearly established legal limits on the use of body-mounted cameras, although the Fourth and First Amendments, as well as state wiretapping statutes, provide some boundaries. Some groups have already released recommendations, but there is not a consensus in practice or in theory. This Note recommends a policy that would require police officers to tape all interactions, but would allow some exceptions, when requested by members of the public. This will likely capture almost all incidences of police misconduct. Likewise, a policy that requires police departments to use footage primarily as a means of identifying and disciplining officers who behave inappropriately instead of a tool for evidence collection will better reduce tensions between law enforcement and the community. Finally, a policy that allows the public to initiate the release of records but redacts personally identifiable information protects the privacy of individuals captured in the footage, but allows for transparency and accountability.
At a time when police agencies across the western world are struggling to maintain an effective service and also support and retain legitimacy within communities, important questions have been asked as to how this is to be achieved. The changes imposed upon police agencies in the UK, for example, mean that there could be a reduction in the number of front-line uniform officers and a lack of ‘engagement’ with ordinary members of the community which ultimately may have an impact upon the legitimacy of the police with the communities they service. This in turn may actually affect the very nature of the democratic policing model alleged to exist in England and Wales. This article explores one way in which it is envisaged this legitimacy may be upheld, by use of the expert citizen. This concept is critically explored within the framework of police legitimacy and the democratic policing model, which manifests itself in England and Wales through the idea of community policing and neighbourhood policing teams.