Following recent events in Ferguson, Missouri, where protests and riots broke out after an 18-year-old was shot and killed by a police officer on Aug. 9, there’s been considerable talk in the United States and Canada about requiring police officers to wear cameras when attending to police matters.
New Westminster’s Chief Const. Dave Jones says body cameras are an inevitability that are likely to come down the pipe sooner rather than later.
“It is going to come issues of privacy, retention, storage, disclosure of these items,” Jones tells The Record. “I think it’s an inevitable reality and those are the questions and issues that are being fleshed out at this point in time.”
Jones says the idea is nothing new and has already been tested in police departments across Canada, but before the cameras are rolled out there needs to be a thorough consultation process where police officials can address the privacy implications of these recording devices.
“If I’m walking into your home because you’re the victim of a break-and-enter, should my camera be rolling? Should I be filming that? How’s the public going to react?” Jones asks. “When you put a camera in a police car, the police car never drives into your home, never drives into your business. The police car records, generally, what’s happening in public areas, but a camera worn on a police officer is going to go into other areas.”
The main idea behind body cameras comes from a desire to reduce excessive force complaints against police officers, however Jones says officers should behave professionally all the time, no matter if they’re on camera or not.
“There has been shown, in different places in states where putting them on has reduced the number of complaints against officers, maybe because officers know it’s on so they’re aware to be very professional in their approach,” he says. “But I think training can do that as well.”
Plus Jones doesn’t believe body cameras would drastically change the way police officers behave or do their jobs. “It will change the way things happen but at the same time I don’t think it will change how (we do our jobs),” he says.
The addition of body cameras would simply be another tool at the disposal of officers in order to secure convictions, he says. The devices would also hold officers accountable for their actions in questionable situations, but that’s all the cameras are – a tool – Jones cautions.
“This is not the single answer to this, this is but one tool. How about we just behave properly?” he says. “Police officers are empowered to do certain things that some people don’t like, which is use of force or arrest, taking away your liberties. Those are two pretty powerful tools and a lot of people don’t like when those things happen.”
Jones believes there will always be people who want to complain and body cameras won’t make them disappear.
At this point in time, however, body cameras are still in the trial phase and Jones says there are still many discussions to be had.
“There are advantages where a camera will capture something occurring or not occurring and be a valuable piece of evidence, but at the same time you try and work to prevent issues as opposed to just catching it,” he says.
Jones points to B.C. Coroner’s Service inquests where presiding judges often lament that if an officer had been wearing a camera, there would be solid evidence of guilt or not. He says the priority in these cases should be preventing a death, rather than worrying about capturing it on camera.
Jones does, however, agree that cameras can provide quality evidence that no amount of verbal description can. Footage from police cruisers is often used in cases involving impaired drivers because seeing a drunk driver swerving down the street is much more evocative than hearing police describe it during.
While body cameras are, as Jones says, an inevitable reality, when they will be introduced in New Westminster is still up in the air until all the kinks, including the added cost – not only for the technology but also the storage and documentation of the footage – are ironed out.
“There are advantages to it and I don’t think there’s a resistance by anyone to go this way. I think it’s just people being cautious both in its practicality, how it’s going to be implemented and the cost as well,” he says.
