In recent years, body worn cameras (BWC) have been heralded as a critical tool in enhancing transparency and accountability within law enforcement agencies. However, when these devices are not activated or their footage isn't turned over, this can lead to increased mistrust between the public and the police. In this blog post, we will discuss various aspects associated with the non-disclosure of BWC footage and its implications on both the police and the society at large.

The Debate around BWCs

BWCs were introduced as a response to the increasing number of police-involved incidents that have resulted in civilian deaths and injuries, particularly within communities of color. Although there are arguments both for and against the use of BWCs, there is no denying that these devices have had a significant impact on the way police officers perform their duties.

However, concerns have been raised about the effectiveness of BWCs as a means of holding law enforcement officers accountable for their actions. A major issue with BWCs is the discretion given to officers when deciding whether or not to activate their cameras. While some argue that this discretion is necessary to protect the privacy of the public and the officers themselves, others maintain that it can lead to the suppression of crucial evidence.

Instances of Non-Disclosure

Instances of BWCs not being turned on or their footage not being released have led to public outcry and skepticism about the effectiveness of these devices in promoting transparency and accountability. This lack of disclosure often raises questions about the circumstances surrounding particular incidents, such as the reasons for not activating the cameras, and whether there is any wrongdoing being concealed.

In many cases, the non-availability of BWC footage has led to protests and demands for answers. One example is the case of Andrew Brown Jr., who was fatally shot by sheriff's deputies in North Carolina in April 2021. The deputies involved were wearing BWCs, but the footage has not been fully released to the public, leading to calls for increased transparency and raising concerns about the case.

Reasons for Non-Disclosure

There could be multiple reasons for the non-disclosure of BWC footage, ranging from intentional withholding to technical glitches. Here are some common factors that could contribute to the non-release of BWC footage:

1. Discretionary Activation: Policies related to BWC activation vary across different law enforcement agencies. This means that in some instances, officers may choose not to activate their cameras due to the belief that the situation does not necessitate it, only to find out later that the incident escalated unexpectedly.

2. Technical Issues: BWCs, like any other electronic device, are not infallible. Battery issues, software glitches, and damaged hardware can all result in the camera failing to record or the footage being corrupted. This may lead to the non-availability of footage for certain incidents.

3. Privacy Concerns: In some cases, law enforcement agencies may withhold BWC footage due to privacy concerns for the individuals involved, especially when it involves the use of force or delicate situations, such as interactions with minors or victims of sexual assault.

4. Investigative Concerns: BWC footage can be withheld for investigative purposes, such as to protect the identity of informants, preserving the integrity of ongoing investigations, or maintaining the fairness of a trial.

The Impact of Non-Disclosure

When BWC footage is not provided, it can lead to significant consequences for both the police and the community they serve. These consequences can include:

1. Loss of Trust: The primary goal of BWCs is to enhance the trust between law enforcement officers and the communities they serve. When BWC footage is withheld, it can erode this trust and contribute to a climate of suspicion.

2. Mistrust of Investigations: When footage is not released, the public may begin to question the integrity of the investigation, suspecting that evidence is being suppressed or tampered with to protect officers involved in the incident.

3. Increased Tension: Non-disclosure of BWC footage can exacerbate existing tensions between law enforcement agencies and the public, contributing to incidents of unrest and protest.

4. Possible Legal Challenges: The non-release of BWC footage can lead to legal challenges, particularly in cases where footage is considered to be exculpatory evidence that could potentially clear the accused.

In light of these concerns, it is essential that law enforcement agencies find a balance between preserving their ability to maintain peace and protect public safety, while also ensuring that BWCs are used effectively to enhance transparency and accountability within their ranks. This could involve adopting clearer and more consistent policies on BWC activation, providing training to officers on the appropriate use of these devices, and being diligent about releasing footage when it is in the public interest to do so. Ultimately, finding this balance will go a long way in promoting trust and fostering positive relationships between law enforcement and the communities they serve.