Culture

Remember When The ACLU Wanted Police Bodycams?

Remember when civil rights advocates, such as the ACLU, demanded accountability from police and wanted all officers to wear police bodycams? Times are changing, again.

What Happened?

A group called The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights claims that police bodycams pose a “threat to civil rights.”

They released a report titled, “The Illusion of Accuracy: How Body-Worn Camera Footage Can Distort Evidence,” in which they decry police bodycams because the officers can view the footage before they write incident reports.

In the report, Vanita Gupta, the leader of the Leadership Conference, who is a former ACLU director and former acting assistant attorney general of the civil rights division under former President Obama. He writes, ”

The vast majority of the nation’s leading police departments with body-worn camera programs allow unrestricted footage review – meaning, officers are permitted to review footage from body-worn cameras whenever they’d like, including before writing their incident reports or making statements.”

police bodycam

What More?

The report adds:

Unrestricted footage review creates an illusion of accuracy because it produces a false impression about how much officers actually remember about an incident. It makes officers’ memories appear to be more accurate, and thus more credible, than the memories of other eyewitnesses — which can distort how an independent factfinder, like a judge or a jury, might understand how an incident truly unfolded. In the worst cases, because of the inherent limits of body-worn cameras, unrestricted footage review allows officers to square their version of events to the footage, and potentially create false beliefs about what actually happened.

The Fight Against the Police Bodycam

You would think that those who are championing our civil rights would want to simply see the facts of the case, but the report seems to be more concerned that a police officer might be more credible than any eyewitness:

Yet unrestricted footage review gives officers the opportunity to augment their initial incident reports with information that would not otherwise be available to them from their own memory. This makes officers’ reports artificially consistent with video footage and appear to be unnaturally comprehensive and credible, particularly compared to reports of other witnesses to events.

As we all know, whether it’s Ferguson, Missouri or anywhere else, supposed eyewitnesses are uniformly accurate in their depiction of events.

With cannabis is on the verge of complete legalization in the United States, you would think that the police would want to work with the people of America, in making it a better place. Unfortunately, removing police bodycams will likely increase police profiling of minorities.

The United States is struggling hard with being the front-runner of the world in cannabis legalization and being the front-runner in the world in fighting a drug war that can never be won.

Facebook Comments