Centennial High School

The Efficiency and Protection that Body Cameras Represent

Jazzmine Jenkins
Intern/Mentor G/T
1/15/16

Jazzmine Jenkins
1/15/2016
Intern/mentor
The Efficiency and Protection that Body Cameras Represent
Imagine an eighteen year old male dead, fatally shot twelve times by an officer. Some
witnesses claim that the officer maliciously murdered the unarmed youth and others claim
that a heinous criminal was proceeding to attack an officer who was only doing his job and
defending himself. Such are the events and results of the shooting of Michael Brown that
occurred in August of 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri. In recent years, police departments and
police officers all over the country have been shrouded with controversy because of these
types of shootings, and deaths that have been taken place. These events have led to an outcry
from certain groups for justice because they have felt that the individuals who have lost their
lives in these situations were completely innocent, and that the officers are definitely at fault.
A handful of others have felt as though the officers were justified in their actions and that
these deaths are a result of uncivilized people committing crimes as they please. A debate
over which opinion is correct would not exist if there were a way to replay and analyze the
altercation as many times as needed, such as with the body camera. Body cameras are small,
pager-sized cameras that clip on to an officer's uniform or are worn as a headset, and record
audio and video of the officer's interactions with the public (Stanley 1). Implementing the
use of body cameras will hold both the citizen and the officer accountable for their behavior.
Proponents of this idea would argue that body cameras invade the privacy of citizens and can
be unnecessary during confrontations involving the police. However body cameras would be
very useful because they give the public access to the unaltered event that transpired, and

they allow a form of safety for both groups involved. The use of body cameras will decrease
tension between citizens and officers everywhere by presenting an accurate depiction of the
incident and holding both parties responsible for their actions.
In any situation that requires that a choice be made, the truth is the most important
deciding factor. Such can be said of the law; when a judge or a jury must determine whether
someone is guilty or not guilty they hear the testimony of the defendant and the plaintiff,
possibly a few witnesses, and more. Evidence may be presented in favor of either party, but
ultimately the judge nor the jurors can say for sure what happened, there may always be
some form of doubt in their minds. This is even more difficult when the case involves an
officer. However, if a video were to be presented in court that showed the truth, then there
would be no doubt in anyones mind as to what happened. This system could have potentially
changed the outcome of Michael Browns case, because clear and irrefutable evidence would
have been seen, leaving no room for an argument as to who was truly in the wrong in that
situation. The body camera will completely ensure that the truth is always presented because,
recordings are downloaded directly from the device into a central computer system for
storage and indexing, which protects them from tampering and assures a defensible chain of
custody, meaning that the police will never have the opportunity to make the videos shed a
negative light on the citizen or make themselves seem favorable (Harris). The body camera
sets up a fair and just system for finding the truth behind certain occurrences and bringing
peace for many people in the nation. Having the body camera will improve law enforcement
by giving the citizens involved in altercations a sense of safety no matter how they may feel
about police officers, which will improve the relationships between police officers and the
public.

If a person knows that their every motion, every word, and every action will be seen
and heard by an unknown number of people, then they are more likely to act in a civil,
cooperative, and non violent manner. This is the exact reasoning behind the use of the body
camera; the public, as well as police officers, will be more conscience of their behavior
because the footage of their activity will most certainly be reviewed if they cause trouble,
ultimately leading to less crime and animosity wherever the device is in use. In the first year
after the cameras' introduction, the use of force by officers declined 60%, and citizen
complaints against police fell 88% (Mims 1). Mims quote, which describes the outcome of
the body camera being used in Rialto, California, reflects on the fact that this kind of
technology has the capability to alleviate conflicts that arise between law enforcement and
civilians in an efficient and pleasing way. The eighty-eight percent decrease in complaints
shows just how much the public is able to accept and use this device to their advantage as
well as how the device can easily be integrated into everyday society. The sixty-six percent
decrease in police force signifies that the camera really does have a psychological effect on
people because they are calmer when confronted by the police and more willing to have a
peaceful encounter. These statistics provide sufficient information on how the whole nation
would respond to a nationwide use of the body camera. The results of this experiment reveal
that body cameras would have a positive effect and would be use for appropriate and useful
purposes. Additionally, the use of body-worn technology has great potential to not only
ensure that the truth is told, but to prevent abhorrent behavior from occurring in the first
place (Moser 14). The body camera is clearly an effective method to reducing tension all
over the nation between those who are opposed to authority as it pertains to contentious

shootings, such as the shooting of Michael Brown and many other youths that have lost their
lives in a similar way.
Those opposed to the body camera will argue that the device will violate the privacy
of not only the public but also the police because it would be a continuous recording that
would capture the everyday, mundane activities of each party. They may also make a point to
acknowledge that the body camera would record situations that may not be appropriate for all
to see or may be sensitive such as the aftermath of domestic violence, rape, or those who
may not want it to be known that they have spoken to the police, for their safety. The fear is
that it may record distraught victims (Sullivan). Solutions to both of these concerns have
been created so that all of the population can benefit from this form of technology, both
officer and citizen. The body camera will be set up so that it will only record situations and
events that are aggressive in nature. The camera will know to begin recording when it picks
up raised voices or senses spontaneous and erratic movement; it will continue to record until
the circumstances calm down completely and the mood changes from aggressive to assertive.
It may also begin recording when the sirens on the police car turn on or when the lights begin
to flash, signifying that the officer may be in a high intensity situation and there is an
absolute need or a possibility for an absolute need for the event to be captured. Having
signals for the cameras to turn on will also eliminate the notion that officers can control over
what goes on the recording because they will not have the ability to turn the camera on or off
automatically. Officers will also be protected because their conversations will not be
recorded, so long as they do not speak with an alarming tone. Officers would also let the
individuals that they are speaking to know that they are being recorded. Regulations and

rules for the body cameras are necessary to the successful function of the device and will
help the public accept their use and help it integrate into society smoothly.
As of now, the entire United States has not enforced a form of policy to protect both
the officer and the citizen quite like the body camera. It has been tested in certain states, such
as California, yielding favorable results. Body cameras are unique simply because of the fact
that they are designed to always benefit all parties and shed light on the truth at all times. It is
in the best interest of the country to begin using this system because it will allow incidents,
such as the Michael Brown incident, to be prevented before they even occur. This topic has
caused ample controversy throughout communities in every state, leading to riots in some
cities such as Baltimore. All who oppose the use of this device could be swayed if they were
to see exactly how effective this kind of technology can be in regards to reducing crime and
deaths. Incorporating body cameras will cause people to reflect on how their behavior may
be seen at a later time, how it may have an effect on their day in court, and their reputation.
The psychological aspects of body cameras will raise the publics awareness about how they
may be viewed by others. This system allows the truth to be presented every time it is
needed. Ideally, in every court room across America, there would be hard evidence as to what
occurred during a police altercation, leaving no room for confusion or speculation. The body
camera has the ability to eliminate forceful conflicts between individuals and the police
department all over the nation.

Works Cited
Harris, David A. "Picture This: Body Worn Video Devices ('Head Cams') as Tools for Ensuring
FourthAmendment Compliance by Police." Texas Tech Law Review,
Forthcoming (2010).
Mims, Christopher. "What Happens When Police Officers Wear Body Cameras." Wall St.
J.(Aug. 18, 2014), http://online. wsj. com/articles/what-happens-when-police-officerswear-body-cameras-1408320244 (2014).
Moser, Rikkilee. "As If All the World Were Watching: Why Today's Law Enforcement Needs to
Be Wearing Body Cameras." Rikkilee Moser, Comment, As If All The World Were
Watching: Why Todays Law Enforcement Needs To Be Wearing Body Cameras 7 (2015).
Stanley, Jay. "Police body-mounted cameras: With right policies in place, a win for all." New
York: ACLU (2013).

Sullivan, Eileen. "Police body cameras show more than just the facts. "
bigstory.ap.org. N.p., 11
Sept. 2015. Web. 4 Jan. 2016. <http://bigstory.ap.org/article/
55c385d6d6f1478ba6fece15a2db67df/police-body-cameras-may-solve-oneproblem-create-others>.