The need to release body camera footage

Body camera footage is having fun with a vital perform in shedding gentle on what occurred all through the July 5 officer-involved taking photos in Fullerton that resulted inside the lack of lifetime of 17-year-old Hannah Williams, due to a model-new California law that I authored, AB748, which took impression July 1.

Modeled after the protection on the Los Angeles Police Department, AB748 requires laws enforcement to release body camera footage inside 45 days of a vital incident, which is printed as use of a drive that causes lack of life or good bodily damage.

I commend the Fullerton Police Department for complying with the model new laws, releasing the video solely every week after the tragic event.

It appears to current Cpl. Scott Flynn encountering Williams, who was holding what turned out to be a replica firearm and pointing it on the officer. Without understanding the gun was fake, Flynn fired his weapon.

While the investigation continues into whether or not or not or not the officer’s actions had been lawful, it’s apparent police habits are now more durable to maintain a secret, and that AB748 has ushered in a model-new interval of police transparency and accountability. No longer can laws enforcement corporations maintain body camera footage from most of the people. Although 30-day delays are permitted with justification beneath my bill, not can police cite “pending investigation” as a motive to endlessly withhold video information.

With rising corporations deploying body-worn cameras, AB748 provides consistency and clear necessities so all Californians have the identical entry to their laws enforcement’s body camera footage.

Prior to July 1, there was a patchwork of insurance coverage insurance policies that didn’t always final result inside the public being able to see these recordings.

When particulars of taking photos are unknown, withholding the video undermines most of the people’s confidence in their laws enforcement.

I take into account we need transparency and public entry to these recordings to help rebuild perception between police and the communities they serve. In addition, taxpayers paid for these body cameras; subsequently, they need to provide the choice to see the contents.

As a adjust to up to AB748, I am moreover engaged in AB1215 this 12 months to prohibit law-enforcement corporations from using facial recognition software program in these body cameras.

If this experience is allowed, body cameras principally grow to be roving 24-hour surveillance on residents without their consent. To make points worse, jurisdictions using the experience, resembling the city of Detroit, as an example, found it harbors racial biases in the direction of people of coloration. Likewise, when the American Civil Liberties Union put facial recognition to the test, it misidentified 28 members of Congress as people in a mugshot database.

There’s no method facial recognition is ready for prime time.

Let’s merely stick to body cameras’ distinctive goal: to current transparency and report energetic police encounters with neighborhood members.

Then allow most of the people to analysis any footage if important incidents occur to permit them to determine whether or not or not all insurance coverage insurance policies and procedures had been adopted.

This is what it means to dwell in an open society the place our authorities is subject to scrutiny.

Phil Ting represents the 19th Assembly District, which contains the Westside of San Francisco and elements of northern San Mateo County.

Be the first to comment on "The need to release body camera footage"

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.