Body Cameras for Police Officers on Patrol: Overview
Body cameras for police officers on patrol have emerged as a significant topic of discussion in the United States, particularly since the events surrounding the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014. Advocates argue that these cameras enhance transparency and accountability in law enforcement by providing accurate records of police interactions with the public, which can aid in evidence collection and training. The movement gained momentum as calls for police reform became more pronounced, especially amid high-profile incidents of police violence against marginalized communities.
Despite their potential benefits, the implementation of body cameras has sparked debate regarding their effectiveness and the privacy concerns they raise. Critics contend that video footage may not fully capture the complexities of incidents and question whether the presence of cameras truly deters misconduct. Furthermore, discussions around footage control, access, and the potential for misuse highlight ongoing tensions between accountability and privacy for both police officers and citizens.
As body cameras continue to be adopted across various police departments, the ongoing discourse reflects a broader societal interest in ensuring equitable and just policing practices, emphasizing the need for clear policies and independent oversight to address concerns surrounding the use of this technology.
Body Cameras for Police Officers on Patrol: Overview
Introduction
Throughout the 2010s and into the 2020s, the concept of having police officers wear body cameras while on patrol duty received much attention in the United States. Proponents argue that body cameras (also known as body-worn video) can provide accurate and contemporaneous records of events, thereby enhancing the transparency and accountability of the police by protecting members of the public while also improving the ability of the police to gather evidence, prosecute suspects, and conduct training. Calls for police officers to be equipped with body cameras intensified after the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014 and continued as other high-profile police-involved killings kept police reform in the spotlight as a prominent social issue. A growing number of police departments across the United States implemented or experimented with body-camera programs. However, the issue has also sparked considerable debate. Skeptics often suggest that camera footage cannot truly provide full and accurate details of incidents, that the increasing use of video technology raises privacy concerns, and that the adoption of body cameras fails to deter problematic policing or to address the underlying causes of social problems.
Understanding the Discussion
Body cameras: Small, portable cameras that can be affixed to one's person; usually worn on the chest, shoulder, or head to record the carrier's point of view.
Dashboard cameras: Cameras mounted on a police car dashboard to record visuals in front of the car and audio up to a couple of dozen feet from the car.
Indictment: A formal written charge of a crime, evidence of which has been brought forward by a prosecutor and decided upon by a grand jury.
Grand jury: A group of people legally empowered to decide whether there is sufficient evidence to formally charge a crime suspect and proceed to trial.
Stop and frisk: The practice of police officers stopping members of the public for seemingly suspicious behavior, questioning them, and frisking them for weapons and other contraband items.
Background
Video recordings have been used in police work essentially as long as the technology has been available. Video footage can provide a relatively stable record of events, giving it obvious appeal to law enforcement officials seeking evidence of a crime. Closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, for example, are routinely used to monitor high-risk areas, such as banks, airports, military installations, and convenience stores. Similarly, defendants in legal cases may turn to video recordings to help argue their innocence. The existence of relevant footage can be especially useful in situations when there are multiple, contradictory accounts of the same event.
The influence of video recordings on criminal justice has proven especially prominent in encounters between police officers and members of the public. Police began experimenting with car-mounted cameras, later popularly known as dashcams, to document traffic violations and other incidents as early as the 1960s, and these devices became increasingly common over the decades as technology improved. In the 1990s, many police departments pushed for in-car cameras as a way to both promote officer safety and counter growing allegations of racial bias in law enforcement.
However, greater media attention tended to surround the potential for citizen video recordings to capture evidence of possible police misconduct. One notable early example was the case of Rodney King, a Black man who was severely beaten by officers of the Los Angeles Police Department in March 1991. The incident was videotaped by a bystander from his apartment balcony, who then sent the footage to a local news station, contributing to intense public interest and outrage that eventually burst into major riots after four police officers were tried and acquitted of assault. The ability of civilians to record video of police encounters only increased with technological developments, especially the proliferation of cellphone cameras in the 2010s. An especially high-profile example came in July 2014, when Eric Garner, a forty-three-year-old Black man, died as a result of a chokehold administered by a New York Police Department officer. The incident was recorded by a bystander on his cellphone and the video was posted online, bringing viral attention to the case and helping to make Garner's memorable last words, "I can't breathe," an icon of the Black Lives Matter protest movement for racial justice.
While the Rodney King and Eric Garner cases demonstrated the social power video recordings could have in documenting police-citizen interactions, many more incidents went unfilmed. Therefore, as portable camera technology became available, some observers advocated for body cameras (also known as body-worn video) as standard equipment for police officers on patrol. Proponents suggested that such cameras, which can record events directly from an officer's point of view, would essentially serve as an extension of CCTV and dashcams, benefitting police by gathering evidence while also benefitting the public by deterring officer misconduct.
Local police departments began experimenting with body cameras in the late 2000s. For example, the Chesapeake Police Department in Virginia launched an early pilot program in 2008. However, adoption of body cameras—and public awareness of the technology—accelerated sharply in the 2010s, largely in tandem with growing attention to criticisms of law enforcement raised by Black Lives Matter and other reform-minded groups. In August 2013, for example, a federal judge ruled that the stop-and-frisk policies adopted by the New York Police Department amounted to an indirect form of racial profiling and violated the constitutional rights of minorities. The judge recommended a number of police reforms, including a pilot program to equip police officers with body cameras in at least five precincts. Body-camera technology was widely touted as a simple way to encourage lawful and respectful interactions between police officers and members of the public; provide an objective record of such interactions; and ultimately alleviate mistrust between the police and minority communities.
Calls for body cameras for all police officers on duty increased significantly after the fatal shooting of Michael Brown, an unarmed Black teenager, by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014. Police officers in Ferguson began wearing body cameras when dealing with protesters following Brown's death. In December 2014, the administration of US president Barack Obama proposed a number of reforms for police departments, including $75 million in federal funding over three years to equip police officers with body cameras. This helped spur wider adoption of the technology, although laws regarding police use of body cameras and the treatment of recorded footage varied.
In 2016 the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that about half of US police departments had deployed body cameras. A nationwide survey of police departments conducted that year found that 95 percent of large police departments reported they were committed to acquiring and implementing body cameras or had completed the implementation of body cameras. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, by 2021 five states legally required the use of body cameras by at least some on-duty police in certain situations. Thirty-four states, as well as the District of Columbia, had passed laws regarding body cameras in some fashion, including funding programs and documentation of best practices. Some states treated body camera video footage as public records, while others exempted such data from open-records requests.
Body Cameras for Police Officers on Patrol Today
The use of body cameras by police officers continues to receive considerable attention from police departments, lawmakers, researchers, and the public. Proponents of the use of video recordings in police work have argued that it leads to a reduction in the use of force by the police and can improve relations with the community. However, decisions not to indict police officers responsible for high-profile killings like Garner's have raised questions about the effectiveness of body cameras in police work. Skeptics have emphasized the fact that even video evidence is subject to interpretation, and suggested that the increasing use of cameras in police work may not result in a significant reduction in police use of force. The use of video technology has also raised concerns about the privacy of both citizens and police officers. Each side has drawn on research to support its claims. More fundamentally, some have suggested that increasing technological sophistication cannot resolve the deeper social issues at stake.
Even some proponents of body cameras have raised concerns about their implementation, including questions about who should control the footage. With little federal oversight steering body camera legislation, a patchwork of policies developed across different states and localities. Critics noted that in many cases police departments exercised wide control over body-camera footage, even when officially required to turn it over to other authorities, and often declined to release it at all. Civil rights activists often advocated for placing body-camera footage under the control of an independent entity, fearing that footage showing police officers in a negative light may be suppressed if controlled by police departments or even local government leaders. Some police officers have similarly called for independent oversight, raising concerns that footage may be used to punish them for things unrelated to their job performance, such as making critical statements about their department while on the job. They argue the footage should only be reviewed in light of a complaint, investigation, or other incident so that officers are not subject to undue scrutiny while performing their jobs. Other issues have revolved around the ability to access recordings and the timing of release; implementation without clear plans for video usage; inconsistency in compliance and enforcement of body camera policies where they exist; and the costs associated with adopting and maintaining a body camera program.
Body cameras made headlines again following the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis, Minnesota, police officers in May 2020. Video recordings of the fatal incident were made both by a bystander, whose online posting brought immediate attention to the case, and by two police body cameras. Amid global outcry over Floyd's death, multiple public opinion polls conducted in early June found widespread support among Americans for requiring all police officers to wear body cameras, with a 92 percent of Reuters/Ipsos respondents and 87 percent of Yahoo/Yougov respondents in favor.
With that surge of interest came renewed examination of the effectiveness of body cameras, to what ends, and for whom. A National Police Foundation report released in 2020 presented evidence that officers with body cameras faced fewer formal complaints than those who did not wear body cameras. In 2021, a study published by the Council on Criminal Justice's Task Force on Policing and the University of Chicago Crime Lab found that body-camera use reduced not only complaints against police but also police use of force, and that these benefits were enough to make the technology relatively cost-effective. However, criticisms also continued, especially regarding delayed or denied release of footage to the public. For example, a ProPublica investigation published in December 2023 found that there were seventy-nine police killings of civilians recorded by body cameras in June 2022 alone, but footage had been released in only 42 percent of those cases. Some observers also raised concerns about the application of artificial intelligence (AI) to reviews of body-camera footage, including the potential impacts of systemic bias.
These essays and any opinions, information, or representations contained therein are the creation of the particular author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of EBSCO Information Services.
Bibliography
“Body-Worn Camera Laws Database.” NCSL, National Conference of State Legislatures, 30 Apr. 2021, www.ncsl.org/civil-and-criminal-justice/body-worn-camera-laws-database. Accessed 2 Apr. 2024.
Corley, Cheryl. "Study: Body-Worn Camera Research Shows Drop In Police Use of Force." NPR, 26 Apr. 2021, www.npr.org/2021/04/26/982391187/study-body-worn-camera-research-shows-drop-in-police-use-of-force. Accessed 2 June 2021.
Farooq, Umar. "Police Departments are Turning to AI to Sift Through Millions of Hours of Unreviewed Body-Cam Footage." ProPublica, 2 Feb. 2024, www.propublica.org/article/police-body-cameras-video-ai-law-enforcement. Accessed 2 Apr. 2024.
Friedman, Uri. "Do Police Body Cameras Actually Work?" Atlantic. Atlantic Monthly Group, 3 Dec. 2014. Web. 25 Jan. 2015.
Goodal, Gloria. "Does Eric Garner Chokehold Case Show Limits of Body Cameras for Police?" Christian Science Monitor. Christian Science Monitor, 4 Dec. 2014. Web. 25 Jan. 2015.
Kahn, Chris. “Exclusive: Most Americans, Including Republicans, Support Sweeping Democratic Police Reform Proposals - Reuters/Ipsos Poll.” Reuters, 12 June 2020, www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-poll-exclusive/exclusive-most-americans-including-republicans-support-sweeping-democratic-police-reform-proposals-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN23I380. Accessed 22 July 2020.
Kaste, Martin. “Should the Police Control Their Own Body Camera Footage?” NPR, 25 May 2017, www.npr.org/2017/05/25/529905669/should-the-police-control-their-own-body-camera-footage. Accessed 18 Oct. 2017.
Ladwig, Boris. “Police Body Cams Getting Positive Reviews.” Greensburg Daily News. Greensburg Daily News, 11 Sept. 2015. Web. 16 Oct. 2015.
Lum, Cynthia, et al. “Research on Body‐Worn Cameras.” Criminology & Public Policy, vol. 18, no. 1, Feb. 2019, pp. 93–118. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12412. Accessed 22 July 2020.
Miller, Lindsay, Jessica Toliver, and Police Executive Research Forum. "Implementing a Body-Worn Camera Program: Recommendations and Lessons Learned." Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. US Dept. of Justice, 2014. PDF file.
Norwood, Candice. “Body Cameras Are Seen as Key to Police Reform. But Do They Increase Accountability?” PBS NewsHour, 25 June 2020, www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/body-cameras-are-seen-as-key-to-police-reform-but-do-they-increase-accountability. Accessed 22 July 2020.
Sanders, Linley. “What Police Reform Does America Support?” YouGov, 1 June 2020, today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/06/01/police-reform-america-poll. Accessed 22 July 2020.
Stross, Randall. "Wearing a Badge, and a Video Camera." New York Times. New York Times, 6 Apr. 2013. Web. 25 Jan. 2015.
Ulmer, Alexandra, and Julia Harte. "Explainer: How Police Body-Worn Cameras are Used in the United States." Reuters, 30 Apr. 2021, www.reuters.com/world/us/how-police-body-worn-cameras-are-used-united-states-2021-04-30/. Accessed 2 June 2021.
Umansky, Eric, and Umar Farooq. "How Police Have Undermined the Promise of Body Cameras." ProPublica, 14 Dec. 2023, www.propublica.org/article/how-police-undermined-promise-body-cameras. Accessed 2 Apr. 2024.
White, Michael D. "Police Officer Body-Worn Cameras: Assessing the Evidence." Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. US Dept. of Justice, 2014. PDF file.