This may turn ugly...
https://www.npr.org/2020/12/23/94972...ds-of-encounte
Ohio Officer's Bodycam Shows He Shot Unarmed Black Man Within 10 Seconds Of Encounter
This may turn ugly...
https://www.npr.org/2020/12/23/94972...ds-of-encounte
From the body cam, it is really hard to tell what the decedent was doing with his right hand.
Of course there's almost always more to the story, but on skimming through that article, I think you can upgrade "may" to "will."
What initially struck me as odd was that after rolling the man over, it appeared Officer Coy didn't search for weapons or mention anything about a weapon to other officers on the scene. No effort to administer first aid is unusual.
While this may have been a non-emergency call, the reason for the call strikes me as an indication that something is off. At what point to police typically activate their body cams?
In today's climate, I would think most would want their cameras on any time there is doubt. While we know little to nothing about what happened here, body cams are likely to exonerate a lot more officers than they convict. Lack of footage when a camera is available, however, will not look good.
It depends on agency policy. At least in my state, there’s no best practices or whatnot to follow (never mind statutory law), and the only comments from the courts involve what happens when you lose the footage for whatever reason.Originally Posted by BillSWPA
Most of the more switched on agencies I deal with require they be turned on when leaving the car on a call and/or or when contact is made with a citizen, and to leave the recording on through the entirety of the contact/call. Some more modern systems will turn the camera on for the officer when certain conditions are present. It’s then up to the officer to catalog the recording at the end of the shift (how it’s cataloged determines how long it’s retained in the cloud - for example, one agency I’m familiar with uses 30 days for “general” contacts that do not result in arrest, 18 months on DUIs, 12 months on other misdemeanors, 2 years on felonies, and I think either 5 years or forever on a catch-all “significant event” category).
No offense, but you guys're going entirely off what an anti-police media says, from stuff that an anti-police city government told them. Literally, we do not know what we do not know. In fact, almost every piece of information I read about this shooting comes from Goodson's family--who not only have a few million reasons to lie, but who were also not present when the shooting occurred.
Going off what Meade's lawyer said, Goodson did have a firearm, which he pointed at Meade. I would also point out that Goodson has a cell phone screen pointed at Meade--my immediate reaction is that that's an attempt to distract--and his right hand is concealed behind the car. I'd also draw attention to the fact that Goodson was returning from the dentist, and may not have been in an altered state of mind at the time. According to the Marshalls Service--which Meade was assigned to at the time of the shooting--Meade had reported seeing Goodson driving down the street waving a handgun.
Protip for you guys: don't fucking get scene handling a firearm in public. You never know what jackass is going to see you, or what jackass is going to be in charge of patrols in your zone. Just recently I had a "subject with a gun" call, leading to a particular jackass assembling the goddamn Power Rangers lay siege to the house. Fortunately, I was able to use my magical powers to find the telephone number for the house in question, which when provided to the appropriate party, allowed them to call the residence and ask the lady to send her son out. This allowed the jackass to then advise the fourteen-year-old not to play with his airsoft pistol in the neighborhood.
You're thinking of a different Ohio shooting.
He also turned his back on the guy before cuffing or before backup arrived. I'm thinking that it may have been super clear that he was dead, and/or maybe beginning to realize he'd made bad decisions.
I don't think this part of Ohio is likely to have riots, for reasons, but the officer is done.
I have no idea what's typical, but ours automatically activate when you get close to a dispatched call or it detects certain things like you drawing your gun, turning on your emergency lights, etc. You can manually turn it on as well. They are still new for us and we have a policy but no general order yet. The summary of the policy is that it's always on when dealing with the public in an official capacity (ie, not ordering lunch, etc.) unless one of a few exemptions apply. The only exemption that's relevant to the public is you're in a private residence, the situation is completely non-confrontational, and the citizen asks for the camera to be turned off.
Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.
We heard a talk by our local PD a ??year?? ago when they were relatively new here. They said that initially officers were pretty lukewarm, but they noticed that formal complaints dropped dramatically - something like 50%. And it wasn't that officers were all of a sudden acting nicer because they were on camera - they had the same number of people walking in the door saying 'Officer X did Y to me last night and I wanna file a complaint'. Step one now, before starting the complaint paperwork, is 'that's terrible, let's pull up the bodycam vid and see what he did to you'. After watching the video, half of the people decide they don't want to file a complaint, and a non-trivial number say something like 'Ooohhh...that's not what I was remembering ... I guess I was a little more tipsy/angrier/whatever than I thought, sorry for wasting your time'.
One example that stuck in my mind, because it was funny: twenty something kid comes in saying that officers used excessive force in the arrest, just look at the bruises. What the tape showed was that there was a passed out drunk, the officer had called for the drunk van (locally, passed out drunks get picked up by a van and taken to a detox place, no arrest). Mr. Threesheets Twentysomething starts filming with a cell phone and generally berating the cop ... "Why are you persecuting that poor man, effing cops" (answered by "I'm not arresting him, but he's passed out, and someone might rob him, plus it's a cold night, ..."). The kid keeps escalating, despite a number of polite warnings. When he starts doing the thump his finger on the cop's chest thing, the officer tells him he's under arrest. Kid takes off at a dead run, the officer doesn't pursue ... kids gets 30 yds, trips, and faceplants on a curb, leading to the aforementioned bruises. After watching himself star in that little vignette, the kid decided he hadn't been abused after all.
Reply With Quote