Distrust in government is as old as time. It’s human nature to question authority or the intent of those in power; especially when those in power have given you good reason. We’re living that in real time.
Introduced in 1965 and signed into law on July 4, 1966 by President Lyndon Johnson, the Freedom of Information Act was intended to quell some of those fears by disclosing, even if only in part, previously unreleased documents and information controlled by the federal/state/local government, as well as any other public authority under the control of any of the aforementioned. The hope was that all government and public agencies would operate in a more transparent way and give the illusion of control to the people.
Over time, boundaries have been pushed and the line between what you, the citizen, NEED to know and what you WANT to know have been blurred. Nothing serves as a better example of this than the push for the American police officer to wear body worn cameras. While not clearly covered by FOIA and with some footage being exempt from mandatory release, the gross overreach by the public as it applies to body worn camera footage is nothing short of masked voyeurism.
Society has been obsessed with police work since the first shield has been pinned on a chest. No profession has been more covered or featured in any form of media…pick one. Police related TV shows, COPS for example, have ranked as some of the longest running TV shows of all time.
I am always tickled by the notion that the public “needs” to see police worn body camera footage in order to create accountability or transparency; as though a society that is as morally corrupted as we see in 2023 is somehow going to serve as a bootleg form of ‘checks and balances’ for an already over-scrutinized profession.
Let me be very clear here. No good…NONE…comes from an uninvolved individual seeing body worn camera footage depicting an incident where either a police officer or a citizen is injured or killed.
First and foremost, police use of force, especially by a police in uniform, will NEVER look good. We’ve seen this played out countless times. Uniforms piling on a suspect and the public questioning every move that each individual officer made; showing empathy for a CRIMINAL while disregarding what that criminal was actually wanted for and what they may have done minutes before the footage being shown all over the news. It’s the low hanging fruit for anyone who was already predisposed to hate law enforcement and only fuels false narratives.
For those who have nothing to do with a specific incident, there is absolutely no other reason to see police body worn camera footage other than to stir emotion; by proxy making level-headed analysis by either side impossible…See, also, Fort Worth’s (former) Police Officer Aaron Dean. Emotionless analysis of Aaron Dean’s shooting of Atatiana Jefferson would result in anyone agreeing that it was absolutely a tragedy. However, releasing police worn body worn camera footage for an already anti-police mob comprised of uninvolved citizens to feed on and dissect as though they have one ounce of police training, resulted in Aaron being completely unable to receive a fair trail and now serving 12 years for manslaughter. Manslaughter. For shooting a woman who, while he was in full uniform and in the law performance of his duties, pointed a loaded gun at him (albeit in the lawful defense of her home against what she likely believed to be a prowler).
There are, on average, 250,000 medical malpractice deaths per year in the United States; approximately 63,000 of which are surgery related. Healthcare and insurance entities wouldn’t dare release the details about someone’s medical history, let alone release video from operating rooms for fear of some form of legal retribution or violating HIPPA laws. While it’s not apples to apples, it’s pretty damned close.
I am a proponent of police body worn cameras. I have been long before I was even required to wear one. Because, as most people are finding out, police body worn cameras have exposed more evil in SOCIETY than they have behind the shield. Since the advancements in technology and the availability of a smart phone, cameras are everywhere anyway. I have always told my coworkers that, if you’re opposing a police body worn camera because you have a fear of being recorded, get over that. You’re already being recorded by likely seven different cameras between the people you’re dealing with all the nosey looky-loos walking by. My attitude is: if there are already seven cameras there, there are going to be eight; and one of them is going to be MINE; and mine is not going to start recording only when we are rolling on the ground already. Mine is not going to be edited and chopped down to show just what’s useful for the anti-police media. No. Mine is going to cover everything and have every grimy word you uttered to me, every threat you made, every time you spit at or on me, and so on.
Police body worn cameras are a valuable tool being used incorrectly. The only people who should be entitled to view police body worn camera footage of a critical incident of any kind are the individuals directly involved, the families of the individuals involved, police administration (to include local/state/federal governments), attorneys and courtroom personnel (juries included). You will never be able to give me a justifiable reason as to why anyone not directly involved NEEDS to see police body worn camera footage.
Accountability?
I love hearing people criticize law enforcement by saying, “If only the good cops wouldn’t cover for the bad cops…”, spoken by the very same people who teach their kids that ‘snitches get stitches’. Have you ever tried to get a witness statement from anyone in regards to a crime that occurred in broad daylight in the courtyard of a crowded housing project? Try it. Then come lecture me on who covers for who and what is drowning society faster.
Accountability only works if we all subscribe…both sworn and civilian.
So, I propose this: Since we’re all about accountability, I am 100% in favor of police wearing body worn cameras. I am also completely in favor of anyone who feels that they have been wronged by a police officer to have the means and resources to report that alleged abuse of authority. With police body worn cameras being mandatory, we won’t need to rely on a he said/she said. We’ll go right to the video tape; and if what is alleged to have occurred is NOT 100% in line with what is shown on the video, the complaint should be treated as filing a false police report, with enhanced penalties. Because, not only would the accuser be wasting the time and resources of a police officer, they would be attempting to end a police officer career and irreparably damage his/her reputation through lies. I’d sign up for that quid pro quo all day long.
Unfortunately, that’s not the kind of “accountability” society wants. No one wants us watching a go-pro attached to THEIR chest all day long.
Or maybe they do.
But let’s not pretend like it’s for anything other than the twisted need to be a voyeur.
