Office Body Worn Camera (BWC)

I wish to replicate the methodology utilized by Ariel, Farrer, and Sutherland (2015). These researchers conducted a randomized-controlled study with the Rialto Police Department in California. The purpose of their study was to observe the effects of body-worn cameras on the frequency of use-of-force incidents as well as citizens’ complaints. In my research study, I will test only the effect of body-worn cameras on use-of-force incidents. I propose to study the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department in Indianapolis, Indiana. This research setting is a lot larger than Ariel, Farrer, and Sutherland’s study. The Rialto Police Department covered an area of approximately 28.5 square miles, and they served a population of approximately 100,000 residents. IMPD covers an area of approximately 364.3 square miles, and serves approximately 824,000 residents. Rialto has 115 sworn officers whereas IMPD has 1,080 sworn officers (IMPD n.d.).

The officers provide protection for the community, and when they are put in danger they should feel like a camera or other device has their back. The article“Body Cameras Will Stop Police Brutality” talks about studies that have been conducted to show the effects of police body cameras. The author affirms, “Studies done in localities that have implemented body-worn cameras have shown a positive impact by demonstrating a commitment to transparency and accountability and helping to de-escalate potentially tense interactions” (1). As aforementioned body cameras have been touted as an effective method to help the defender if a cop has done wrong. Now body cameras not only defend one side but both. The use of body cameras can physically protect a police officer; in this instance the perpetrator is more willing to be arrested when he or she knows they are on tape. Additionally, author Tsin Yen Koh brings up the idea that a suspect behaves better on

Body Cameras for Police Officers in Every Program In Arizona, use-of-force complaints decreased by 75 percent for officers using cameras in a pilot program. In Idaho, they dropped by 24 percent. The people of America, should not have to worry about summoning their own executioners when they call for help, but today they must consider the excruciating possibility. There has been an increase on the number of complaints on officers that use violence, but the ones that wear body cameras reduced the violence and showed less complaints.

In today’s society no one is safe from everyday peril. Situations arise daily that may present either a law enforcement official or civilian that could warrant the need for extra protection. In some cases it is a matter of he said, she said. For those faced with such situations, documentation that could be provided by body cameras worn by police officials could be of great use. Body cameras have been tested in a small group of police departments and have provided an overwhelming positive effect. Police officers wearing body cameras not only provide the officers with extra peace o mind but give civilians documentation to back up their sides of the story. Not everyone is in favor of police

The research conducted to this point of the effect of body-worn cameras on policing is lacking the connection between their use and self-initiated policing. The Mesa, Arizona study showed more self-initiated citizen contacts, but a reduction in stop-and-frisk encounters and arrests (Ready & Young, 2015). Katz et al. (2014) also determined that over a third of officers surveyed felt they would conduct less

Body cameras in policing are still new, but more and more agencies are beginning to implement this technology into their line of work. At first police officers were very hesitant to wear these body cameras because they were afraid they would infringe themselves and give away their own privacy. Later, as body cameras were beginning to see more use in the work place, officers began to realize that these very own body cameras that they once thought would only cause themselves harm would actual prove to be useful in a variety of situations. Some of these situations can be citizen complaints, to even backing up an officers use of force. Body cameras can be the one sole thing that can give

In February 2012, the Rialto California police department started supplying their officers with cameras they could clip on to their uniforms. At any given time, about half of their active duty officers wore these cameras. They found, in a twelve month period, that the department overall "had an 88 percent decline in the number of complaints filed against the officers". (Stross, R. 2013, April 6). They also had a 60 percent decline in the use of force by officers. They also found that officers wearing a camera were half as likely to use force as oppose to officers not wearing one. This is clear evidence that police wearing body cameras is a good

In the high-tech age we live in, and where the use of smart phones can capture and record live actions and moments, many of these moments are now being captured by on-duty police officers who are using body mounted cameras to record incidents as they occur. The cameras, that these officers are utilizing, are small devices that are no more than two inches long and can be easily installed onto the officer’s glasses. The recording device is then attached to the officer’s uniform and is placed in an obscured location. The use of these body cameras are still under scrutiny but are quickly becoming standard uniform equipment in law enforcement departments throughout the United States.

For the past several years the push for police to wear body cameras has greatly increased. Body cameras are small video and audio recorders that can be worn by police officers to capture all encounters the officers have with citizens. Large cities and counties across the nation have been testing body cameras among several police departments to see if they can actually improve the way police and citizens interact with one another. Over the course of the past several years evidence has shown that the tests seem to be rather successful. Evidence has proved that in many cases the body cameras have made a significant impact on how some police officers deal with certain situations and behave toward citizens. Even the citizens who know they are being recorded have either changed the way they interact with the police or will not make false accusations or false complaints toward officers. In Rialto, California in 2012, the test of body cameras showed a decrease in officers using force and complaints of police brutality (BloombergView). When officers are aware that they are on camera they tend to follow the rules more. The same can be said about citizens, when the officers tell them they are being recorded, they change their behavior and sometimes begin to act more rational. Currently, the relationship between the police and citizens is rough. Citizens have trust issues with many officers, and officers are now scared that they may become targets of police hatred. Hopefully, with the

San Diego police need to make some changes to the police force. The most important one is about 1,000 watch officers with cameras to record their day. Officers in the city of Rialto in San Bernardino County have been wearing cameras since 2012. “Rialto Police Chief William A. Farrar, working with a Cambridge University scientist, discovered two major results: Complaints against his officers declined by 88 percent as well as Warren County Sheriff's Department started utilizing the cameras as a part of May 2014, Sheriff Martin Pace said when Armstrong declared he needed the cameras for every one of his officers.”(Hurley) Recording tools aren't only the most recent tool in police innovation, but they are getting to be a normal working system. “Video from such cameras can assume a part in protests and claims, however they can likewise be useful in court. Fewer complaints and calmer policing, said Farrago, would reduce lawsuits and expensive payouts.” (Hurley) This represents that the people in the cities with all the violence have seem to notice that body cameras might actually help and “Oakland Police Department Officer Dave Burke said “Oakland propelled the project in the 2009-2010 financial year. Officers have come to regard the cameras as a basic piece of their gear, an alternate sort of protective layer yet pretty much as basic as a shot confirmation vest. The cameras turn into a fundamental device. Everyone needs a camera,”(Prather) Burke said. Officers won't go on a mission without having one on them and lets say if one breaks they just come back and instead of getting new one they actually have someone else sub for them because they broke there's. This is important because with these videos being public they are obtainable by pretty much anyone and so the complaints will be lower because they will have everything on

They have the power and responsibility to use the force, but citizens expect them to use the amount of force that is proportional, reasonable and necessary for the situation. However, the used of body cameras on police officers will reduce police misconduct like the use of offensive language, including racial slurs, or act with more force than necessary during encounters with citizens. These cameras will keep track of what the officer says or does when at the scene of the crime, keeping them liable. Police Foundation Executive Fellow, Chief Tony Farrar, wanted to test out this theory with a yearlong study. The cameras were distributed to all the patrol officers of the California Rialto Police Department. During their 12 month test period they were haphazardly assigned to experimental or control conditions to see the results and after the test period ended, the results showed very interesting results. “The findings suggest more than a 50% reduction in the total number of incidents of use-of-force compared to control-conditions, and nearly ten times more citizens’ complaints in the 12-months prior to the experiment.” says Chief Farrar (Ariel, et al). Law enforcement officers improved their behavior when using cameras by simply knowing that someone would see their behavior and their performance as officers when the supervisor or the officer in charge was reviewing the camera when your turn

Recent news headlines with vivid video evidence of police brutality have inspired debates around law enforcement’s use of excessive force particularly against those in minority communities. Historically, there has been tension between minority communities and law enforcement resulting in mutual distrust. In order to dissolve these tensions and build this trust, policy initiatives have been put in place to encourage accountability and transparency. This paper will discuss the prospects that body cameras offer to help achieve transparency, accountability, and build trust. However, policies promoting transparency and accountability are not enough.

Analysis of data collected from 88 officers found that their perceptions of the ease of use of body-worn cameras were moderately and positively correlated with their perceptions of the cameras’ usefulness and their attitudes toward the camera. The relationship between usefulness and years of service was negative, indicating that as officers’ length of service increased, their perceptions of body-worn cameras usefulness decreased. However, officers’ attitudes toward using body-worn cameras were a predictor of their reported frequency of use. Findings from the study could contribute to positive social change by providing policymakers with new tools to craft training policies to enhance police-community relations. Law enforcement officers and citizens rely on each other

The need for police officers to be equipped with body cameras while on duty is crucial in rebuilding community relations and increasing police accountability. As such, there are various benefits and consequences in the implementation of this proposed policy for all police departments. While benefits include lowering rates of police misconduct, increased accountability and transparency, improved officer training, providing effective evidence for trials and reduction of civilian complaints, there are consequences such as the upfront cost of police cameras, legal and privacy concerns and reliability of body camera footage. The adoption of police body cameras has both positive and negative merits

Much interest in the technology of the body cameras comes from a growing problem that the United States has been having a major problem with police violence. Though some might argue that the wearing of body cameras violate privacy, in fact the use of the cameras will minimize violence, show accountability, and a human side of policing. These body cameras would help serve by providing video evidence that can be referenced and use anytime allegations are made against police officers and criminals alike. The use of these body cameras are somewhat in the evaluation and study stages, but they are quickly becoming the standard in some police departments across the United States. These cameras would not only serve to provide video evidence, but it provide accountability. The ideal policy for the cams is that they stay on and continue recording throughout police officers shifts, which would help eliminate any possibility of doing something that would not be used as evidence later on and help them evade the recording of abuse committed while on duty.