• ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    137
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’ve been saying for years that simply turning it off should be grounds for immediate suspension if not full termination.

    The only time those cameras should be off is when they go to the bathroom and even then I’m fuckin iffy.

    • NotBillMurray@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      6 months ago

      I feel like the solution is a “taking a shit” button which flags that chunk of the video. That way unless there is some suspicion that a crime happened in that chunk of time it goes unwatched.

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Just have it time limited so that every sixty seconds they get a quick audible countdown to point away from their exposed body part at the roll of toilet paper or wall of the urinal. They can’t beat someone and keep breaking to arrange a fake shot from atop a toilet.

      • Dicska@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        Cop walks into the toilet, closes the door, turns off the camera. Immediately exits, jumps into police car to find and beat some people they don’t like, then turns around, goes back to the toilet and turns it back on before opening the door to leave.

  • bl_r@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    128
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Another thing of note. If you see car hoods up, take out your camera and film. The pigs will pop their hood to block their dashcams.

    ACAB

    • Soggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      132
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Because cops are the violent arm of the ruling class, and it’s convenient for them to be immune to legal consequence.

        • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          43
          ·
          6 months ago

          Hi. Former prison guard here. It turns out that as a cop you can dictate the reality going forward. Just say what you wanted to happen and everyone with authority will say that’s what happened.

        • SeedyOne@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Enforcement and accountability barely exist these days and you think those are going to work on police? The same police working every day with the very same officers, judges and prosecutors that would investigate them?

          Tell me another fairy tale…

            • lugal@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              6 months ago

              The only thing that works against a bad cop is a good cop. Except there ain’t no good cops. Police is inherently not reformable.
              #defundthepolice

            • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              I mean, if we massively increased the number of officers we might actually be able to police the police.

              who watches the watchmen?

          • GoosLife@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Independent police complaint authority, authorized by the government, but run entirely by people from the community. There is a legal department there who handles cases, paid for through taxes. If you have any relationship to anyone on the force, you’re ineligible to serve, and no one can handle a case that concerns anyone they know.

            It works in my country, but I am aware that doesn’t mean we can translate the solution 1:1 to the US, so I’d be interested to know why you guys think this would or wouldn’t work.

            It is not a perfect system that will solve all problems immediately. There are thousands of daily cases of harassment and abuse of power on a small scale that might end in the big pile and take forever to process. But it will effectively solve a lot of cases - fx cases about covering badge numbers and turning off body cams. These will be open and shut cases, and the punishments will be decided by the Independent Police Complaint Authority, meaning no bullshit paid vacation. Also cases in general that have an obvious outcome to the public, such as unnecessary police brutality and excessive force would probably be handled better by an independent authority.

            • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              20
              ·
              6 months ago

              Every time one of these oversight committees gets set up in the US, the local police Union infiltrates it and prevents it from doing anything.

              • rhsJack@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                6 months ago

                OR the police union just litigates any punitive damages against one of their own and off they go, scot free.

    • pop
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Why do you think body cam was introduced? Pigs do shady shit when no ones watching and they don’t want to be identified when they do.

  • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Body cams should also work as a time clock. If the camera isn’t on, they are off the clock and not getting paid.

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      That’s actually an interesting idea. Always capturing, perhaps at half-fidelity to save wear and tear on the storage card and full quality when they activate for a call. I don’t know why I’ve never seen anyone suggest this.

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      I can see legitimate grounds to switch them off. E.g. talking to a witness, or informant, who doesn’t want anything on record.

      It should be properly noted in their records however, and viewed with suspicion if overused.

      FYI, good police actually love the cameras. They vastly cut down on false accusations, or at least nip them in the bud. It’s also, apparently extremely satisfying and effective to show someone exactly how they came across. It really runs in a drunk tank hangover.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Also they should never be believed for anything they say happened without the camera on, not just the thing itself, but also the context.

        Like, you had the option to record this behavior and chose not to, why should I trust you

      • III@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Then they can submit a formal request with detailed documentation to request payment for those times their camera is off. Still seems like a perfect idea.

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    This should void their qualified immunity or whatever you American kids call it these days.

    • henfredemars@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I don’t think the legal principle is even that important these days. It’s more so that some people are immune to laws because no one will prosecute. It’s just power.

      Rights seem to be taken not granted.

  • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    I cant recall it specifically, but I am sure Ive heard of a term which describes this in a legal sense - if whatever accountability that exists is intentionally blocked, its presumed to be worst case scenario

    • Bananigans@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not sure if it’s what you’re remembering, but adverse inference can be drawn when a party fails to present evidence known to exist by the court.

      • breadsmasher@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        6 months ago

        That sounds familiar. “Show us x and if you can’t we will assume its incriminating towards you”?

        In this case - show us the body cam footage, and if youve hidden it or otherwise impaired its capture, the adverse inference is taken

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Suppose someone who isn’t a cop does this and uses a fake uniform? How could anyone be able to tell if the officer is legitimate? That alone should make police departments not want to endorse such practices.

    • hydrospanner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 months ago

      The way they’re looking at it:

      What’s more likely? That we do sketchy or blatantly illegal shit, abuse our power, and having our badges and cams (measures created in an attempt to increase police accountability) helps us avoid any and all consequences…

      …or people decide to buy fake uniforms and badges in any significant numbers and use these same tactics to confuse the general public…in any way that we, as a police force, actually CARE about?

      Keep in mind that police impersonators would have to be impacting the police forces so much and so negatively that it would get to the point that it’s not worth preserving their own impunity. That’s incredibly unlikely.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Same. I can only get through 5 seconds of Trump before cringing the hell out. Don’t understand how anyone can be enamored with him.

  • merthyr1831@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’m glad this is happening under blue man, because otherwise this would be a sign of a fascist regime!

  • Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    For anyone who thinks Canadian cops are nicer, I still remember the G20 in Toronto. The police designated a park as a free speech zone, surrounded it, took off their name tags and put on masks, and began to beat the protesters. They tore a disabled man’s prosthetic leg off and dragged him around, they took people away from cameras and beat them. Not a single cop, including the chief in charge, suffered a single consequence. And they wonder why we no longer feel sad when one dies.