web analytics

Bodycams Don’t Mean Shit

After the death of Michael Brown and the subsequent uprising in Ferguson, Mo., police departments across the country underwent massive campaigns to integrate bodycam technology into their cache of crimefighting equipment. Or maybe it was after Freddie Gray died in Baltimore, Md. Perhaps it was after Walter Scott was gunned down in North Charleston, SC. Or maybe it was Tamir Rice. Or Eric Garner. Or…

Ok, it’s hard to pinpoint when it happened, but at some point, everyone simply accepted the idea that police-worn body cams were the answer to police brutality. According to the simple logic, if police knew that their every move was being recorded for posterity, they would be less likely to engage in corrupt or unscrupulous activities. Police departments everywhere believed in the idea so much that, by January 2016, 95% of local law enforcement agencies use or planned to implement body-worn camera (BWC) technology.

Most people thought police video would change the behavior that causes 3 times more black men to be killed by law enforcement officers than their white counterparts. They believed that BWCs would reduce the racial inequality in police brutality, especially after a study using Washington Post data proved that there is no relationship between crime rates by race and racial bias in police killings. “The only thing that was significant in predicting whether someone shot and killed by police was unarmed was whether or not they were black,” said Justin Nix, a criminal justice researcher. Everyone assumed BWCs was the cure.

But you know what they say about the word “assume:” It makes an ass out of … Wait. I think I’m being pulled over by the cops. I assume I’ll be fine.

Two years ago, the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) accepted the premise and began a program issuing body cameras to the city’s law enforcement personnel. They assumed it would “benefit the District by improving police services, increasing accountability for individual interactions, and strengthening police-community relations. The cameras might encourage positive behavioral change and the video footage might be useful as evidence.”

Not only did D.C. outfit its cops with the technology, but they conducted a “rigorous field experiment” to see if the cameras achieved the goals for which they were intended. They collected data, used the video in every aspect of law enforcement and then compared the information to previous years. Although the study is still going on, when they looked at the data, they discovered something very interesting:

The benefits of body-worn police cameras are a myth.

The MPD teamed up with The Lab @ DC, a team of research scientists in D.C.’s office of the City Administrator to study the impact of body cams. Beginning in June 2015, the MPD began randomly issuing cameras to officers. By December 2016, they had issued cameras to every officer in the city. They studied the differences in crime, police behavior, judicial impact, use of force and civilian complaints against officers. They tracked the results of cops who wore cameras and cops who didn’t. They looked at the crime rates and the conviction rates. Then the researchers compiled all of the data between June 2015 and March 31, 2017.

Here’s what they found:

  • Body worn cameras had no effect on police behavior: The researchers postulated that BWCs would result in fewer tickets, misdemeanors and arrests for disorderly conduct because people knew they were being watched. It did not happen.
  • Body cameras had no effect on police use of force: The number of incidents of police use of force was the same before body cameras were deployed as after.
  • BWCs had no effect on civilian complaints: There was no statistical difference in the number of complaints filed against cops who wore body cameras than those who didn’t.
  • Cameras don’t matter in court: The body cameras did not change how many people entered guilty pleas, how many people were found guilty or how many cases were dropped.

In every single quantifiable category, with almost 2 years of research and thousands of officers wearing cameras in the capital of the United States, body cameras didn’t make people safer, less likely to be victims of police brutality or even change their behavior. Even in their unusually large sample size, the researchers concluded, that “body-worn cameras may have great utility in specific policing scenarios, but we cannot conclude from this experiment that they can be expected to produce large, department-wide improvements in outcomes.”

What does this mean?

Some people will interpret the results to mean that BWCs proves that cops aren’t corrupt. They will say that if the number of police brutality cases and civilian complaints didn’t drop or rise, this must prove that cops were doing their jobs correctly all along.

Except that they still kill more black people. Except that cops in Baltimore were caught planting drugs on people again and again and again. Except for the fact that officers in Alberquere, NM had a system of erasing police footage. And the video capturing the 16 bullets that killed Laquan McDonald. And the Philando Castile Facebook footage. And the Daniel Shaver’s first-person slaughter. And the Patrick Harmon bodycam execution.

The research shows that police-worn cameras don’t change a damn thing. They are a make-believe solution for a real problem. They are a placebo. They are supposed to eliminate crime, spawn justice and make us safe but they don’t do much. They only make us feel secure.

Just like police.

source: the root

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.