Cleveland City Council approves body cameras for 1000 cops

Finally, an expenditure by the Cleveland City Council that I fully support.

CLEVELAND - The Cleveland City Council approved a $1.6 million plan to buy body cameras for city officers on Monday.

The money will be used to outfit 1,000 police officers with the cameras.

With three officer-involved shootings in the last 30 days, Cleveland Councilman Zack Reed said the cameras are needed to give the public a clearer picture of what happens in those types of situations.

The cameras are scheduled to be rolled out at the beginning of 2015.

Hopefully this is the start of a much needed change to LEO uniforms.
Link

a reply to: halfpint0701

well there is a step in the right direction

$1,600,000 / 1000 = $1600 for 1 body camera???

a reply to: Bovah

The video addresses this. The cameras themselves can be just a couple hundred, but the overall price per camera gets higher depending on the various features and the servers where the videos are stored.

Good. Keeps good cops safe and weeds out the bad.

There was a study that showed a huge reduction in theft if there were just a pair of painted eyes present (or something).

This keeps everyone honest. If I was a cop I would want it.

originally posted by: halfpint0701
a reply to: Bovah

The video addresses this. The cameras themselves can be just a couple hundred, but the overall price per camera gets higher depending on the various features and the servers where the videos are stored.

Thanks, I wasn't able to watch it yet.

LMAO....so the cops can turn the camera on or off at anytime?

Why do I have a feeling if the cop is having a really bad day, the camera will mysteriously be turned "OFF".

I'm hoping for the best with this announcement but anticipating the worst, and quite frankly it's about bloody time, and far too late in being implemented (which should happen nation wide) - I don't think one single tax payer would have an issue with funds being distributed for this.

"Camera malfunction"

"Microphone malfunction"

"Footage deleted"

"blurry or unusable footage"

"inaudible conversation"

"hard-drive was full so it stopped recording"

etc....

and similar comments will become the norm when people and family pets are still being tazzzzered or shot to death by mentally unstable thugs with badges.

I will prostrate myself before all and offer my apologies once proven wrong in this assertion - let's wait and see shall we.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

I will prostrate myself before all and offer my apologies once proven wrong in this assertion - let's wait and see shall we.

i am pretty sure your manhood will be just fine....the worlds biggest gang is not going away anytime soon and when they do it will be a massive uprising like has not been seen in modern times

originally posted by: Sublimecraft

I will prostrate myself before all and offer my apologies once proven wrong in this assertion - let's wait and see shall we.

pics?

It's about damn time Ohio did something useful. Maybe sometime in the next decade I won't have to feel like a criminal for taking my medicine.

a reply to: halfpint0701

i would love to know more about the system they are implementing becuase $1.6 million for 1000 cameras??
or are those just the FIRST 1000 cameras will test and get the rest later?

you can't spend that kind of money even if you gave them all the latest go pro camera with a 128Gb sd card in it

Great! Now, let's make it muni law that if the camera is off, or obstructed for ANY reason, or if the recording is "lost" or "unavailable" during a stop of ANY sort, the police officer's qualified immunity is set aside and he or she can be sued in their propria persona. Also, if the camera is off, or fails in any way, the judge in any trial where the officer testifies will announce to the jury that the officer is assumed to be lying before each and every answer they give to questioning.

atty: "Officer Jones, what were you doing on the night of the 27th when you stopped Mr Smith?"
judge: "Point of order - the camera was intentionally switched off prior to the encounter. The jury is instructed that any answer the witness provides is assumed to be a lie"
officer: "Well, I was walking along and I saw Mr Smith looking like a criminal"
judge: "By municipal code 4.233, I am required to shout LIAR! LIAR! LIAR! in a loud clear voice after every assertion you make, officer."

CSB time:

Just before we moved out of Huntsville, we were consulted by a company who does NASCAR in-car HDTV recording, who had just installed devices in the cars and on the officers in Nashville. The system was essentially tamper-proof. You could not shut it off. You could not remove "a tape". You could not access it if you were a cop, except for top supervisory personnel and the chief. And doing so left tracks you couldn't hide. The recordings were uploaded over the net to multiple locations, including a server in the police precinct, poiice HQ, the Mayor's office, and another in the DA's office. There was guaranteed delivery of the packets. There could be NO "whoopsie it's gone" excuse. None whatever. There could be no "whoopsie it was off". No "we lost it". It just couldn't happen.

And at the intro meeting with the cops, the first questions were "How do we turn it off", and "Where is the tape...in case I need to change it", and "is the only camera on the dash...so I don't cover it with my hat by accident". When informed that it could not be altered, deleted, lost or obscured, the cops went nuts. THAT is how it should be done. If you give a cop an off switch or put the thing where it can be covered up "by accident" you will never have any evidence that they are doing something wrong.

a reply to: halfpint0701

That will be great, as long as the camera's maintain their 'function' and don't go on the fritz when in a dire situation such as Ferguson

The latest shooting controversy in St.Louis , where the parents claimed their boy was 'unarmed', the victim was found to have gun residue on him on his hands/clothes...not that it proves him guilty, but it sure doesn't make him look innocent either

Gunshot residue found on St. Louis teen

(CNN) —Lab results are back in the case of a teenager who died in a police shooting in St. Louis last week, and they show gun residue on the clothing and body of Vonderrit Myers, authorities said Tuesday.

The residue was found on Myers' shirt, jeans and hand, according to a release from St. Louis police.

Its presence on his hand could mean that he discharged a firearm, was near a firearm when it went off or that Myers touched something with gun residue on it, police said. People shot at close range could also have residue deposited on their hands.

Myers was fatally shot Wednesday by a St. Louis officer, who was off-duty but wearing his uniform while moonlighting for a security company.

Police have said the teenager fired a pistol three times at the officer. Myers' relatives have said they don't believe that account.

At least with a camera present, maybe it will stop the 'he said or did this' being the cop and 'they said or did that' crap being the parents/friends
No more conflicting stories.............hopefully!!

Cameras work. Ever seen an officer use excessive force on anyone during an episode of cops?

Even with flawless tamper proof cameras it's not going to solve the problem. Some of the craziest police brutality videos I've seen were from cameras on the cop car and in many cases they got off anyways. The legal system needs to change and the cops themselves need to change. Until we have an omniscient omnipotent ultra benevolent AI running the world humans will always find ways to be corrupt. The whole system of society across the world needs to change to be focused on the welfare of all humans not just the ones you know and like. Until the AI or fundamental society shift occurs things will get worse no matter what technology does to improve things.

originally posted by: halfpint0701
Finally, an expenditure by the Cleveland City Council that I fully support.

Although I support the initiative, I find $1.6 million for 1,000 cameras highly suspicious. That's $1,600 per camera. Are they really that expensive? Must be a damn good camera.

Edit: Looks like others have caught on too.

I still don't think servers, etc. cost that much. That's at least a $1,000 server per camera if the camera is $600.

Why not just use google cloud? It's free.

I'd think there would have to be an off switch, for when the officers had to go to the bathroom, or they're talking or gossiping with each other in the car, and during lunch or that visit to the donut shop. If everything they do or say is on record somewhere (even on the net) then that would really inhibit their personal conversations, something as un-American as misusing police powers itself.

originally posted by: Aleister
I'd think there would have to be an off switch, for when the officers had to go to the bathroom, or they're talking or gossiping with each other in the car, and during lunch or that visit to the donut shop. If everything they do or say is on record somewhere (even on the net) then that would really inhibit their personal conversations, something as un-American as misusing police powers itself.

If they've got nothing to hide, they've got nothing to fear. I think they should trust the Government not to look at the part of the recording where they're taking a dump. After all, we have to trust THEM, surely they should trust their bosses. They can converse all they like. Just understand that if part of it is "Let's go bust some head on this n----r" it will be discoverable.

eta: or "I hate civilians" or "these people are all garbage except for cops" or the like. Personally, I sort of like the idea of being able to file discovery on their personal comments. It goes to the heart of the character of the witness. If he's a 24 hour jackass, then so be it. Hoist with his own petard, so to speak.

etaa: to misquote Voltaire - with great power goes...a camera you can't shut off. Obviously, your employers, us, don't trust you anymore, thus if you want a badge and a gun, you will deploy them as we see fit, not as you do. Cross the line, and it will be there for all to see and hear, in a way you can't stop or defeat, or if you do, you should pay a steep price, there and then. Decertification would do. If not imprisonment.

originally posted by: rockintitz
Cameras work. Ever seen an officer use excessive force on anyone during an episode of cops?

I hope this is sarcastic. Yes. On Cops, it seems to set them off worse than normal.

Pretty much like ridealongs. They can be real instructive.

I think a timeless classic of police abuse was on Cops, Cops just wouldn't use the clip on their own program, but I've seen it co-opted by John Walsh with the info removed as an example of prime police work.

It's the Danny Norton clip. They remove the name and locale for AMW though.