“Camera off.” Words that would go down in infamy. The 2017 incident involving the tragic end of 15-year-old Jordan Edwards. A story that still reverberates around the social, legal and technological corners of our society to date. Across America, conversations surrounding law enforcement protocols, their implementation, accountability measures, and technological aids like body-cameras have been renewed and deepened through cases like Edwards's, often times leaving us with more questions than answers.

The evening of April 29, 2017, in balch springs, Dallas, was supposed to be a joyful one for the group of teenagers, one of whom was Jordan Edwards. They were leaving a house party, a scene that unfortunately escalated due to a noise complaint, and ended with Jordan being fatally shot by Police Officer Roy Oliver. The body camera Oliver wore was central to the unfolding and interpretation of the real-time events of that evening.

The body cameras, or 'body-worn video' (BWV) as they are officially known, first made their appearance in law enforcement agencies around 2005. Initially used by the British Police, they were adopted by American law enforcement agencies around 2013, soon gaining popularity for their plausible benefits, their new-age approach and prevention of conflicts in community police interactions.

The real incident happened in the complete blink of an eye, at the spur of the moment. But the murkiness and biased interpretations are what prolong and complicate these proceedings. The central role of body cameras, like in the case of Jordan Edwards, becomes crucial in bringing objective facts to sometimes very subjective matters, thus making it mandatory to analyze if technology like this is indeed the way forward.

In the case of Jordan Edwards, the footage recorded by Oliver's Body Camera became the single most important piece of evidence against him. However, because the order of the day is often 'Camera off,' important evidence can often be minimal or even non-existent. So here we question not just the presence of this technology, but also the guidelines surrounding its usage. If body cameras can serve as an unbiased eye amidst chaotic, fast-moving situations, it's pertinent that they be allowed to record always, to prevent conflicts, enforce accountability, and ensure justice, as we have seen with Jordan's case.

We know the impact body cameras have had in law enforcement, given that the Officer's statements were outrightly rejected based on the BWV evidence. However, it is crucial to remember that surveillance is not foolproof. The device's field of vision, device malfunctions or even the unfortunate 'camera off' command can act as major hurdles in the path to justice. The absence of BWV recordings, like in many other cases similar to Jordan Edwards's, could have resulted in a different outcome, which is a scary thought for most.

There is always a new side that comes to light, a new perception that brings a change and sets precedence. The Jordan Edwards case was one such incident that re-established faith in the criminal justice system for some and further eroded it for others. It drove home the point that officers' control of the narrative could be challenged and overturned with the help of technology. Body Cameras, with all their pros and cons, complexities and shortcomings, are at the forefront of this narrative, shaping the future of law enforcement, one incident at a time.

The Jordan Edwards case brings to focus the continuous evolution of society, justice, and the role of technology in mediating the two. While body cameras are far from being a perfect solution, their impact can't be underestimated either. In an age where technology upgrades faster than the blink of an eye, we should concentrate on utilizing it optimally and not buckling under its pitfalls.

As discussions shine a spotlight on these murky cases and open them up to extensive dissections in the court of law and in the court of public opinion, they inevitably lead to the question of the balance between law enforcement and public rights. Although this balance is delicate and forever shifting, one thing remains clear:we are living in the age of the body camera, and it's reshaping the dynamics of the entire justice system as we know it. The road to change is long and winding, but perhaps it will become a bit straighter with technology on our side.