Careful implementation urged as Worcester police consider body - TopicsExpress

Careful implementation urged as Worcester police consider body cameras! WORCESTER — Not everyone sees eye-to-eye when it comes to police body cameras recording life as it unfolds during an officers shift. As the national discussion about the use of body cameras increases after the fatal shooting of a Missouri teenager by a police officer, authorities here see the advantages — and potential hurdles — in the technologys implementation. Policies, cost, when to use the camera, retention of videos and maneuvering around state laws are among the myriad issues that area and state police face when discussing use of body cameras. I understand that it is a hot issue, but you have to proceed in an orderly way and develop a process, because if you go with body cameras there needs to be a successful program in place, Worcester Police Chief Gary J. Gemme said. There are a lot of issues out there that need to be addressed. Worcester, the second largest city in New England, is reviewing the use of body cameras — something Chief Gemme said he is not against. Even with studies showing positive results, it is a massive undertaking to put body cameras out on the streets, police say. Worcester has two deputy police chiefs exploring the idea and reviewing the technology. Worcester police have asked the citys Law Department a number of legal questions. The Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association has given its support to body cameras in departments that want them. But Executive Director A. Wayne Sampson sees the state wiretapping law as a reason that body cameras are difficult to implement here. The organization has gone as far as asking the state Legislature for an exemption from the law. Mr. Sampson, a retired chief, said the wiretapping law prohibits police from recording conversations unless they are in the framework of organized crime or approved by the court. But there are conflicting legal opinions on the issue, he said. There is a real issue that if an officer is wearing a body camera and chasing someone, do they have to yell, You are being recorded, Mr. Sampson said. The evidence could get thrown out or the case thrown out and, in the worst-case scenario, the police officer and municipality sued. Laura Rótolo, staff counsel for the ACLU of Massachusetts, said there is no requirement that every party consents to videotaping. It is good practice, however, that the officer and the civilian are aware an encounter is videotaped, she said. The wiretapping law prohibits secret audio recordings, she said. Mr. Sampson pointed out recent laws protecting victims of domestic violence as another legal hurdle in using body cameras. Law enforcement officials wonder if interactions with confidential informants would be hindered by not allowing officers the discretion of turning off a camera. In fact, as some urban police departments have stated, in some interactions where confidential information is being provided, body cameras might actually be a hindrance, state police said in a statement to the Telegram & Gazette. If an officer is allowed discretion, there might be situations people believe should have been taped but it was difficult for the officer to turn on the camera, Chief Gemme said. Departments would have to have a policy in place to explain and support decisions in those scenarios. The ACLU supports the body cameras but, like police, the group believes the proper policies and regulations need to be in place. Ms. Rótolo said the ACLU believes body cameras should remain on for the duration of an officers shift, which is a concern for some in law enforcement. Many ask if an officer using the bathroom, eating lunch or chatting with another officer about a family vacation needs to be recorded and whether that tape could become part of a public records request. Ms. Rótolo said those types of interactions could be addressed through good policies. In general, we think the cameras need to be on the entire time when the officer is on shift, she said. Body cameras are not going to replace good community policing, but (they) create a level of accountability and transparency. Having a good video of an encounter can show an abuse of power or protect police against false claims. Both state police and Chief Gemme questioned how footage would be stored and for how long. The cost of storing the footage is something that law enforcement is addressing. There are very legitimate times during the course of a shift that the recordings should not be on for the privacy of the officers, the public and the protection of certain members of the public, Mr. Sampson said. In a statement, state police spokesman David Procopio said the last time state police reviewed dashboard cameras, the technology and storage systems were cost-prohibitive and unwieldy, respectively. Times have changed, but some of those questions remain. State police are obtaining about six to 10 cameras for a pilot program, but it has not been decided if the cameras will be body cameras or dash-mounted. State police Superintendent Col. Timothy P. Alben believes camera use is inevitable and ultimately beneficial in the long run, according to the statement. With any change, departments would have to negotiate with unions before body cameras are used, officials point out. Some studies involving police departments with body cameras show use of unnecessary force is reduced by 50 percent and false claims dropped by 80 percent, Mr. Sampson said. Worcester City Manager Edward M. Augustus Jr., who is open to the idea of body cameras, saw the reduction in false claims as a benefit. I think it is one of the potential benefits, he said. It is very easy for one to make a claim and to get into these he said, she said situations. The White House is asking for $263 million in funding for police body cameras and for training after the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. The program, which needs approval from Congress, would allocate $75 million over three years, with states matching half the cost, for the purchase of more than 50,000 body cameras. Mr. Sampson said that would only cover one of every nine officers nationwide, but he stressed the real cost is in the data storage. State police said even with the federal money available, the storage, administrative duties for the program and response to an anticipated increase in public requests would add to the cost. Even with grant dollars you dont know what the conditions will be, Chief Gemme said. The grants could come with conditions that law enforcement here might struggle to adhere to based on Massachusetts law, he added. We are very supportive of the technology but we want to make sure before we implement body cameras that we understand the technology, have a comprehensive policy, have conversations with the unions and field test the devices to work out the kinks, Chief Gemme said. We dont want to chase grant dollars without a solid foundation. Material from the Associated Press was used in this report. Contact Scott J. Croteau at scott.croteau@telegram. Follow him on Twitter @ScottCroteauTG