reply to post by Frogs
The thing to take into account with the release of dash cam / audio footage is it is evidence, even for a minor traffic violation. If someone makes an
accusation against the officer, the video/audio becomes evidence, and vice versa. In my state if I stop someon for DWI I have to submit my dash cam /
audio as evidece with my report.
I brought up traffic stops due to the fact it is the single most action we take above all others, which uses our dash cam / body mics the most. People
have made comments about recording the officer during the stop. I was trying to point out that because you are stopped (detained) you dont really have
any "right" to record what the officer is doing (If anyone wants a more in depth reason behind this I can give it a shot - just ask).
Here is an example of Dash cam footage being used incorectly by media (another reason releasing them only occurs after an investigation is over).
Watch video 1 - watch it closely, and ask yourself what should happen to the officers involved. Once you decide based on the footage, whatch the 2nd
video, capture by a second responding officer and ask yourself what should happen to the officer.
The media only ran with a portion of the first tape, with limited information.
If anyone has already seen these I ask you to refrain from commenting. This example has been used several times for training and observation /
Dashcam Footage - Video #1
Dashcam Footage - Video #2
This is why I have no issues with people recording what we do. If anything, Law Enforcement should be held to a higher standard (within reason). From
day 1 after graduation of a Police academy you are recognized (in almost all states) as an expert witness due to training. It is Law Enforcement that
should say - Record all you want, I have nothing to hide.
I am curious what people think about the 2 videos above. Does it change anyones opinion about them?
Also, keep in mind that if you video record an incident where charges are filed, you yourself can be considered a material witness. If you refuse to
come forward as a witness to a crime, you can be charged in most states for failing to identify as a witness. Also, as a witness, any refusal to
comply with a subpoena to testify in court as to what you saw, can result in a material witness warrant being issued for your arrest. You can be held
in jail until such time you go before the court and testify.
If you record a crime, your camera can be seized as evidence provided you are not a member of the press. You must be credentialed in order to claim
media, and even that does not stop having footage seized by Law Enforcement if it contains evidence of a crime.
Hence, use common sense when doing these things. Sometimes people like to go where angles fear to tread.
As far as Rodney King, the Fedral Charges were the 42 USC 1983 - (Civil rights violation). While I dont agree with being found not guilty and State
level, and being found guilty at the Federal level, thats pretty much what happened. While being a very violent encounter, they were withing policy
and state law. The Feds got to use a different angle to charge them - violating Rodney Kings civil rights.
[edit on 4-8-2010 by Xcathdra] - My spelling sucks
[edit on 4-8-2010 by Xcathdra] - Youtube issues
[edit on 4-8-2010 by Xcathdra] - Dyslexic
[edit on 4-8-2010 by Xcathdra]