South Portland police to wear body cameras, but policy on use is kept secret

The South Portland Police Department will begin equipping its on-duty officers with body cameras in a matter of weeks, becoming the first department in Greater Portland to adopt the technology. But even as the city moves toward adopting a measure that advocates say offers greater transparency, the police department says it will not permit city residents to read the policies that govern when the police force will be recording them. Chief Edward Googins has declined to provide specifics about when they must be turned on or off, and when officers have the power to decide that a situation is worth recording. This withholding of basic policy information about how police will use a law enforcement tool goes against recommendations developed in 2014 by the U.S. Department of Justice, which said that body camera policy should be developed with community participation, and with full disclosure of what the rules are once they are finalized. “Policies should be specific enough to provide clear and consistent guidance yet allow room for flexibility as the (body camera) program evolves,” according to a summary of the report. “Agencies should make the policies available to the public.”
http://www.pressherald.com/2017/01/0...-body-cameras/

Aren't policies a matter of public record out there? Ours are.

I am so glad my current admin wants nothing to do with video cameras. We had cameras in every car for two years, then the admin decided they were an expensive waste of money.

I'm fully on board the body cam train. So long as the policy is written well and admin doesn't use them for witch hunts. A good admin will make or break a body cam program. Fortunately, I work for a good admin.

FYI I looked up South Portland PD, and it's a 52 man department in a city of 24K. While I agree that they should have clear policies, there really aren't any large scale implications in their current refusal to release the policy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lon

I'm fully on board the body cam train. So long as the policy is written well and admin doesn't use them for witch hunts. A good admin will make or break a body cam program. Fortunately, I work for a good admin.

---

I just left a dept where the chief sat in his office and randomly reviewed videos looking for officer mess ups. Imagine working under those conditions. Yea, I'm not a fan of body cameras.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I may be wrong, but I think they are using the word transparency wrong.

I like the idea of the body cameras, but I also understand that they are just a tool and not some talisman. They will need time to be developed in both tecnology and policy to be truly effective.

However, given the kind of "leadership" we are seeing at many levels of government I can see why many LEO would be hesitant to jump on the bandwagon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wendell

... the police department says it will not permit city residents to read the policies that govern when the police force will be recording them. Chief Edward Googins has declined to provide specifics about when they must be turned on or off, ...

---

Whether one is a fan of BWCs or not, this is assinine. Quite frankly, it is the kind of crap that makes our jobs harder, not easier. That agency, and others, need to make the policy public.

Angus is spot on. How anyone in this day and age could believe such a "policy" could survive public scrutiny, much less a court challenge under public records laws, is beyond me. Playing cute with this stuff only works until it doesn't, and then blows up in your face.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wendell

The South Portland Police Department will begin equipping its on-duty officers with body cameras in a matter of weeks, becoming the first department in Greater Portland to adopt the technology. But even as the city moves toward adopting a measure that advocates say offers greater transparency, the police department says it will not permit city residents to read the policies that govern when the police force will be recording them. Chief Edward Googins has declined to provide specifics about when they must be turned on or off, and when officers have the power to decide that a situation is worth recording. This withholding of basic policy information about how police will use a law enforcement tool goes against recommendations developed in 2014 by the U.S. Department of Justice, which said that body camera policy should be developed with community participation, and with full disclosure of what the rules are once they are finalized. “Policies should be specific enough to provide clear and consistent guidance yet allow room for flexibility as the (body camera) program evolves,” according to a summary of the report. “Agencies should make the policies available to the public.”
http://www.pressherald.com/2017/01/0...-body-cameras/

---

This will not be an issue for long.

The SPPD will arrest someone. They attorney (funded by the ACLU/SPLC) will ask for the tapes of the arrest as well as all policy related thereto. The prosecutor will object, the case will go on appeal and it will be attacked that way.

Alternatively, someone will do a 1983 lawsuit, depose the police and get the policies, then once they are disclosed in discovery they will be released (unless there is a protective order) in which case a clever attorney will make them an exhibit at trial.

You want to fuck about with secret policies? Go ahead.

The game will be played.