It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Police officers in the UK are to be given head-mouted video cameras to film incidents and arrests, the footage of which can then be used in evidence.
According to the guidelines officers are to wear a sign and to announce: "I am video recording you."
The cameras should not be used in general patrolling unless it is part of a specific operation, such as public order duties. Recordings not to be used in evidence should be deleted within 31 day
Originally posted by nerbot
I think they are going to save a small fortune in the time it takes to prosecute and make a bundle from the extra fines etc
Any "unsavoury" footage i am sure will be mysteriously lost, or excuses like "we had a flat battery...or the camera wasn't working on that day etc...etc..."
Originally posted by Karilla
According to a policeman interviewed for a NEWS24 story, the head-cams will drastically increase succesful prosecutions of domestic assault cases. Too often the results of the assault are gone by the time the case goes to trial, and sometimes even when taking photographs at the station, it is done too late to show the damage caused. With the head-cams the evidence is recorded from the moment the victim is first seen by police. It should also encourage more women to press charges.
If even one more bas*%$d wife-beater does a stretch at her Majesty's pleasure then it will be worthwhile, in my view. I can't really see where civil liberties come into the equation.
The cameras should not be used in general patrolling unless it is part of a specific operation, such as public order duties.
Originally posted by uberarcanist
Though I think the added layer of accountability is a good thing, the unreasonably high price smacks of corruption and kickbacks...I wonder what the political connections are of the manufacturer.