The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Non-Tulsa Discussions => Chat and Advice => Topic started by: Vashta Nerada on April 09, 2014, 09:46:57 pm



Title: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on April 09, 2014, 09:46:57 pm
Quote
Last year, the courts found that police car video was included in the Oklahoma Open Records Act -- except for OHP, ABLE and other arms of the Department of Public safety -- who would only agree to surrendering their exemption if the Act itself were weakened.

...Not just for them, but for all police agencies in the state.
Now it will be legal for police to edit any video to suit their needs before releasing it to media or the courts, which seems to show contempt for the reason the courts ordered the recordings in the first place.

LAPD is currently in trouble for turning a blind eye to widespread sabotage of their police dashcams:
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-lapd-tamper-20140408,0,7666331.story

...but why go to all the trouble if the department leadership will just hide any embarrassing records:


 BLOOMFIELD, NJ -- The tale of the police dashcam video has now helped clear a Bloomfield, New Jersey man who faced a multitude of criminal charges, including eluding police and assault.

It was quite a turnabout, all the criminal charges against Marcus Jeter have been dismissed, and two Bloomfield police officers have been indicted for falsifying reports, and one of them, for assault. A third pleaded guilty early on to tampering...thanks to those dashcam tapes that prosecutors say they never saw.
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/national_world&id=9441539


(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/02/23/article-0-1BC6567800000578-397_634x436.jpg)


All Criminal charges against Jeter were dismissed after the police dashcam from Trinidad's car surfaced.
Previously unavailable from the Bloomfield Police Department, Brown said he obtained that recording through an Open Public Records Act request.

"What [the second, withheld dash cam] captured was the fact that Mr. Jeter was not trying to resist arrest, was not trying to disarm a police officer, [and] was sitting in the vehicle with [his] hands up," Brown told Bloomfield Life on Monday.


http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/2014/02/bloomfield_mayor_alleges_cover_up_in_dashboard-cam_indicment_vows_to_purge_police_department_of_bad.html


Jeter’s attorney, Stephen Brown, said one of the videos shows an officer - armed with a shotgun - circling Jeter’s car after he stopped the vehicle on the Garden State Parkway.

Brown said Jeter put his hands in the air and had his seat belt buckled, prompting the officer to break the driver’s side window so he could unbuckle Jeter.

A second video shows a second police cruiser crossing the center median and slamming into Jeter’s car head-on, Brown said.
“When he told me that a police car rammed him, I couldn’t believe it,” Brown said. “Once we got the dashcam video from the car that rammed into Jeter’s car, they dropped the whole complaint.

The dashcam videos from the two police cars also show the officers punching Jeter and wrestling him to the ground, shouting, “Stop resisting,” Brown said. 
The footage also shows him pulling straight over, despite being charged with eluding.

A third officer has pleading guilty to tampering with evidence and retired from the force.




Why does this matter to Tulsa, Oklahoma? 
See if you recognize any of these currently popular stock phrases police used to justify their actions:


Quote
BLOOMFIELD, N.J. (WABC) -- A police officer in New Jersey seen in dashcam video who is now facing charges of assault is speaking out.

"I was completely scared. I didn't know if I was going to go home that night," said Orlando Trinidad, a Bloomfield Police Officer.

Police dashcam video that resulted in criminal charges being filed against the Bloomfield, New Jersey police officers, including 33-year-old Orlando Trinidad. Trinidad has now been indicted on conspiracy, official misconduct and assault.

"It's a 30 second clip of a 10 to 15 minute video. It doesn't show you anything that led to that," Trinidad said.
Police refused to release the remainder of that video.

Trinidad says he responded to a call of a man "eluding" police. The officer drove head-on into the car driven by 37-year-old Marcus Jeter.
Trinidad says the two others officers already on the scene pulled Jeter out of the car. One was yelling.

"Officer (inaudible) is still yelling, 'He's got my gun' or 'he tried to get my gun' and at that point, I'm in fear for my life and my partner's life," Trinidad said, "And I struck Mr. Jeter to his backside, trying to get his hands."

"You're repeatedly hitting him," Eyewitness News Investigative reporter Sarah Wallace said.

"He's not giving me his hands. And at that point, I still don't know if he's got a gun on him," Trinidad said.

"So now you get to the car and you hit him again," Wallace said.

"That was to get him to stop resisting, to get him in the car, to get him to calm down," Trinidad said.



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: cannon_fodder on April 13, 2014, 08:52:32 am
So?

Tulsa Police is under a Federal Court Order to install dash cams to help stop institutional corruption and racial profiling (this was before the more recent federal indictments of TPD for corruption).  TPD simply hasn't done it.  They need more years to get it done (other departments have competed then entire process in a querter of the time).

When it is done, they will fight every request.

When the video does show something, it will be misplaced, malfunctioning, or wasn't on.

I have never seen TPD produce any video that wasn't favorable to them.

Police *should* want video to protect them from bogus charges and to aid in legitimate prosecutions.  If the police resist cameras, it is because what they do to serve and protect is none of your damn business.  Know move along citizen.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=15579.5;wap2


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Conan71 on April 13, 2014, 04:34:18 pm
So?

Tulsa Police is under a Federal Court Order to install dash cams to help stop institutional corruption and racial profiling (this was before the more recent federal indictments of TPD for corruption).  TPD simply hasn't done it.  They need more years to get it done (other departments have competed then entire process in a querter of the time).

When it is done, they will fight every request.

When the video does show something, it will be misplaced, malfunctioning, or wasn't on.

I have never seen TPD produce any video that wasn't favorable to them.

Police *should* want video to protect them from bogus charges and to aid in legitimate prosecutions.  If the police resist cameras, it is because what they do to serve and protect is none of your damn business.  Know move along citizen.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=15579.5;wap2

They simply want it for evidence collection when it benefits them. The original push for dash cams came after the slaying of officer Gus Spanos around 20 years ago.  They said it would have helped catch his killer much quicker.  They spent a ton of money on the cams and it seems like they were all broken or inoperative within a couple of years.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on April 14, 2014, 09:58:05 pm
Officer Gus Spanos would still be alive if TPD had set up dashboard cameras in an honest, timely manner,
because TPD would have fired him.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Hoss on April 14, 2014, 10:43:51 pm
Officer Gus Spanos would still be alive if TPD had set up dashboard cameras in an honest, timely manner,
because TPD would have fired him.

Can you cite any sources?  Reports filed?


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Breadburner on April 15, 2014, 11:07:31 am
Officer Gus Spanos would still be alive if TPD had set up dashboard cameras in an honest, timely manner,
because TPD would have fired him.

A camera would not have saved his life at all....


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Conan71 on April 15, 2014, 11:59:42 am
A camera would not have saved his life at all....

I think Vashta is trying to make a point that a camera would have caught him doing something corrupt or bullying long before he got killed and gotten him jack-booted off the force.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Breadburner on April 15, 2014, 02:45:52 pm
I think Vashta is trying to make a point that a camera would have caught him doing something corrupt or bullying long before he got killed and gotten him jack-booted off the force.


What a D!ck.....!


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on December 02, 2014, 12:23:09 pm
They simply want it for evidence collection when it benefits them. The original push for dash cams came after the slaying of officer Gus Spanos around 20 years ago.  They said it would have helped catch his killer much quicker.  They spent a ton of money on the cams and it seems like they were all broken or inoperative within a couple of years.


Since the court-ordered dashcams were only about half completed, whats the outlook on Tulsa upgrading to body-worn cameras, since the feds are offering to pay for half?


Obama to provide funding for 50,000 police body cameras
 
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/225583-obama-to-provide-funding-for-50000-police-body-cameras

President Obama on Monday will announce $263 million in funding for law enforcement agencies to purchase body-worn cameras and improve training.
The White House said the funding, which would need to be matched by state and local police, could purchase 50,000 body-worn cameras.





 


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Gaspar on December 02, 2014, 01:29:09 pm
Why just the police?  Why not require all citizens to wear some form of monitoring device to document legal behavior? 

Imagine the crime that would prevent.  Michael Brown would probably be alive today if he were wearing a body camera the day he assaulted and robbed that convenience store clerk.

The program could be setup as some form of individual mandate. You could make it constitutional by representing it as a tax. There could be a fine (tax) for not wearing your tracking/monitoring device.

Of course, it would probably be difficult to get participation at first, and some would consider it an invasion of privacy, so you would want to ease the public into it by requiring it at the employer level in order to obtain liability insurance.  Just think about it!  This would help promote healthy and safe work environments and serve to thwart all kinds of business liability like sexual harassment, violation of OSHA regulations, and hundreds of other dubious labor practices.

Of course not all devices/services are the same so the government would need to regulate offerings to insure quality, compatibility and reliability. Individuals not on any sanctioned employer program would be required to purchase individual tracking & monitoring services through a limited exchange of suppliers that meet stringent requirements.  Ultimately all data would need to be centrally archived and maintained as well.

We would probably need to start with just audio, GPS, and 3D accelerometer data, and ease our way into full video and 3D situational modeling.

I think we've stumbled on something brilliant! What should we call it?







Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on December 02, 2014, 02:18:45 pm

What a D!ck.....!


FINALLY!!  I never believed I would live to see the day you finally got one right!!  Spanos was that all right!!  Didn't deserve to die, though, so Kimbrough should have!  Good to see there is at least a glimmer of thought behind all the yeasty wheat!


Am reminded of Thurman Spybuck back in the early 70's....killed by "friendly fire" from a second officer at the front of the house they "raided"....without warrant.  No uniforms.  No declaration of who they were...just busted in and started their "OK Corral" action.  Gung Ho, Gunga-Din!!   The piss-ant they busted in on had a .22, but didn't appear to be fired, according to reports at the time.  Spybuck was killed with a larger diameter, most likely .38 caliber....



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Breadburner on December 02, 2014, 02:29:34 pm

FINALLY!!  I never believed I would live to see the day you finally got one right!!  Spanos was that all right!!  Didn't deserve to die, though, so Kimbrough should have!  Good to see there is at least a glimmer of thought behind all the yeasty wheat!


Am reminded of Thurman Spybuck back in the early 70's....killed by "friendly fire" from a second officer at the front of the house they "raided"....without warrant.  No uniforms.  No declaration of who they were...just busted in and started their "OK Corral" action.  Gung Ho, Gunga-Din!!   The piss-ant they busted in on had a .22, but didn't appear to be fired, according to reports at the time.  Spybuck was killed with a larger diameter, most likely .38 caliber....



I was not referring to Spanos.......


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: RecycleMichael on December 02, 2014, 03:20:20 pm

Am reminded of Thurman Spybuck back in the early 70's....killed by "friendly fire" from a second officer at the front of the house they "raided"....without warrant.  No uniforms.  No declaration of who they were...just busted in and started their "OK Corral" action.  Gung Ho, Gunga-Din!!   The piss-ant they busted in on had a .22, but didn't appear to be fired, according to reports at the time.  Spybuck was killed with a larger diameter, most likely .38 caliber....

I remember the case very well. My father was on the force at the time and he had a son that was close to my age that I played baseball with. Losing a father to gunfire really affected my views on guns to this day.

Your facts from 1971 seem fuzzy. There was probably a lot from the 1970s that you don't remember clearly. Here are transcripts from the appeals trial and the officer's version of that day. It is an interesting read.

http://law.justia.com/cases/oklahoma/court-of-appeals-criminal/1972/59701.html


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Red Arrow on December 02, 2014, 03:52:19 pm
I think we've stumbled on something brilliant! What should we call it?

You mean other than invasion of privacy?  Full time video.  There are some things I just don't need to see.



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Gaspar on December 02, 2014, 03:59:37 pm
You mean other than invasion of privacy?  Full time video.  There are some things I just don't need to see.



'RING' 'RING'

"Yes, Mr. Arrow, we've noticed you've switched hands this week.  Is there some issue we need to be aware of?"



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Red Arrow on December 02, 2014, 04:06:35 pm
"Yes, Mr. Arrow, we've noticed you've switched hands this week.
I am unaware of anything that would cause anyone to believe that.

Quote
Is there some issue we need to be aware of?"

I was thinking of things like monitoring restrooms and other places generally considered off limits.



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: rebound on December 02, 2014, 04:16:48 pm
'RING' 'RING'
"Yes, Mr. Arrow, we've noticed you've switched hands this week.  Is there some issue we need to be aware of?"


Apparently that pitch was "juuuust a bit outside..."  Swing and a miss by Arrow.   :)

Funny.



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Conan71 on December 02, 2014, 04:33:52 pm
Why just the police?  Why not require all citizens to wear some form of monitoring device to document legal behavior?  

Imagine the crime that would prevent.  Michael Brown would probably be alive today if he were wearing a body camera the day he assaulted and robbed that convenience store clerk.

The program could be setup as some form of individual mandate. You could make it constitutional by representing it as a tax. There could be a fine (tax) for not wearing your tracking/monitoring device.

Of course, it would probably be difficult to get participation at first, and some would consider it an invasion of privacy, so you would want to ease the public into it by requiring it at the employer level in order to obtain liability insurance.  Just think about it!  This would help promote healthy and safe work environments and serve to thwart all kinds of business liability like sexual harassment, violation of OSHA regulations, and hundreds of other dubious labor practices.

Of course not all devices/services are the same so the government would need to regulate offerings to insure quality, compatibility and reliability. Individuals not on any sanctioned employer program would be required to purchase individual tracking & monitoring services through a limited exchange of suppliers that meet stringent requirements.  Ultimately all data would need to be centrally archived and maintained as well.

We would probably need to start with just audio, GPS, and 3D accelerometer data, and ease our way into full video and 3D situational modeling.

I think we've stumbled on something brilliant! What should we call it?



Makes one wonder if Go-Pro has been dumping money into Dem campaign coffers.  What a windfall that would be, especially since the government seems to pay four or five times what civilians pay for a similar product which has very little functional difference.  


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on December 02, 2014, 06:46:45 pm
I remember the case very well. My father was on the force at the time and he had a son that was close to my age that I played baseball with. Losing a father to gunfire really affected my views on guns to this day.

Your facts from 1971 seem fuzzy. There was probably a lot from the 1970s that you don't remember clearly. Here are transcripts from the appeals trial and the officer's version of that day. It is an interesting read.

http://law.justia.com/cases/oklahoma/court-of-appeals-criminal/1972/59701.html


Yeah...the officers version....  Actually, not fuzzy at all.  (And the 60's were the time I was growing up... I was already getting old by the 70's.)  Trowbridge was a cheesy little slimeball who deserved to get killed in prison.  Spybuck was a gung ho kinda guy who, in today's world would be stealing people's cell phones and slapping them around when they tried to record him.

"who were dressed in civilian clothing, dismounted from their vehicle and walked toward the defendant's house. He testified that he and Officer McCullough had beards and that their hair was somewhat longer than usual."

"The defendant raised his right hand to hip high holding a small caliber pistol."

I also knew several cops on the force at that time through a job I had then.  Some of them told a slightly different version - especially about the warrant and the approach to the house.  Much closer to the one I posted.


This guy had no input on the Trowbridge situation, but as an aside, he was a great guy, a great cop, and I thought of him as a good friend!   He told me about my FBI file and how at the time, it was about 1.5" thick!!  He got to read it.... I could never get the laws of the land to work to get me a copy of it.  FOIA works well, if ya got the money to pursue it aggressively.  Otherwise...meh!

http://www.tulsaworld.com/obituaries/localobituaries/oscar-roy-hunt/article_f2962a3a-9899-11e3-b434-001a4bcf6878.html


Here is another one who was a pretty good friend - as good as can be with a cop without being one....   Used to drag race with him regularly on 11th and 15th streets on the east side of town in the early 70's when TPD had those pastel colored Dodge cars.  The best place to start was at the corner of Wonder Bread and Sheridan, heading east!  Great street racing road!  His cop car could never even get close to my Cutlass!   I told him I could "fix" that car for him so he could actually catch someone with it....

I met him and his buddies by chance at the state fair one time while this event was going on - we hung around for a while and he was "cryin' in his beer" about how he and the buds were gonna get fired just for letting the guy know they didn't appreciate his disrespect....   Ah, the good ole' days!!

http://law.justia.com/cases/oklahoma/supreme-court/1982/5315.html



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Conan71 on December 03, 2014, 09:22:35 am

Yeah...the officers version....  Actually, not fuzzy at all.  (And the 60's were the time I was growing up... I was already getting old by the 70's.)  Trowbridge was a cheesy little slimeball who deserved to get killed in prison.  Spybuck was a gung ho kinda guy who, in today's world would be stealing people's cell phones and slapping them around when they tried to record him.

"who were dressed in civilian clothing, dismounted from their vehicle and walked toward the defendant's house. He testified that he and Officer McCullough had beards and that their hair was somewhat longer than usual."

"The defendant raised his right hand to hip high holding a small caliber pistol."

I also knew several cops on the force at that time through a job I had then.  Some of them told a slightly different version - especially about the warrant and the approach to the house.  Much closer to the one I posted.


This guy had no input on the Trowbridge situation, but as an aside, he was a great guy, a great cop, and I thought of him as a good friend!   He told me about my FBI file and how at the time, it was about 1.5" thick!!  He got to read it.... I could never get the laws of the land to work to get me a copy of it.  FOIA works well, if ya got the money to pursue it aggressively.  Otherwise...meh!

http://www.tulsaworld.com/obituaries/localobituaries/oscar-roy-hunt/article_f2962a3a-9899-11e3-b434-001a4bcf6878.html


Here is another one who was a pretty good friend - as good as can be with a cop without being one....   Used to drag race with him regularly on 11th and 15th streets on the east side of town in the early 70's when TPD had those pastel colored Dodge cars.  The best place to start was at the corner of Wonder Bread and Sheridan, heading east!  Great street racing road!  His cop car could never even get close to my Cutlass!   I told him I could "fix" that car for him so he could actually catch someone with it....

I met him and his buddies by chance at the state fair one time while this event was going on - we hung around for a while and he was "cryin' in his beer" about how he and the buds were gonna get fired just for letting the guy know they didn't appreciate his disrespect....   Ah, the good ole' days!!

http://law.justia.com/cases/oklahoma/supreme-court/1982/5315.html


 

Unless they were on the scene, their “account” of what happened is totally worthless.  Sort of like the “eyewitnesses” at the Michael Brown shooting scene who showed up a few minutes after the whole confrontation was over.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: cynical on December 03, 2014, 01:28:08 pm
This discussion is goofy. I'm surprised that no one on on this forum appears to be experienced at HR. Here's the current reality: Employees in this country, public or private, have almost no right to privacy while on the job. While the boss shouldn't monitor restroom activities and locker rooms, as far as other job-related activities is concerned, the boss gets to watch, listen, and record. Keystrokes and computer screens are monitored, phone calls are monitored, mobile devices (voice, data, and text) are monitored, cameras are on hand. Customer interactions are routinely monitored. "This call may be monitored for quality control purposes." The term "NSFW" arose because of automated monitoring systems that alert to depictions of too much skin on an office computer. It would, in fact, be perfectly legal for an employer to require its employees to wear cameras while on the job. Why don't they? Because the comprehensive monitoring that is already in place does the job well enough.

Why should the police be granted a right of workplace privacy that no one else has? Their radio communications have long been monitored and recorded. Recording interactions between the police and the public cuts both ways. It can protect a law officer from a false claim of wrongdoing. It can protect the public from genuine wrongdoing by an officer. Carving out privacy safe harbors for cops that don't apply to others would likely be a violation of equal protection unless it could be tied to a compelling state interest of some sort. Protecting cops from discipline or prosecution for their misbehavior is not a compelling state interest.

Restrooms, locker rooms, and privileged communications have a few special rules, but the general rule is that if you're a public or private employee on the job, you're an open book. If you don't like it, be your own boss and/or lobby for privacy rights for all employees, not just cops.

An interesting Q&A on employee privacy rights can be found here: https://www.privacyrights.org/workplace-privacy-and-employee-monitoring#2a (https://www.privacyrights.org/workplace-privacy-and-employee-monitoring#2a) The site, BTW, is sympathetic to privacy rights, but is realistic in laying out the facts. Even sites that start out with the proposition that "most states have laws protecting employee privacy rights" go on to explain that such protections are exceedingly narrow, and monitoring is exceedingly broad.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Gaspar on December 03, 2014, 03:24:10 pm
This discussion is goofy. I'm surprised that no one on on this forum appears to be experienced at HR. Here's the current reality: Employees in this country, public or private, have almost no right to privacy while on the job. While the boss shouldn't monitor restroom activities and locker rooms, as far as other job-related activities is concerned, the boss gets to watch, listen, and record. Keystrokes and computer screens are monitored, phone calls are monitored, mobile devices (voice, data, and text) are monitored, cameras are on hand. Customer interactions are routinely monitored. "This call may be monitored for quality control purposes." The term "NSFW" arose because of automated monitoring systems that alert to depictions of too much skin on an office computer. It would, in fact, be perfectly legal for an employer to require its employees to wear cameras while on the job. Why don't they? Because the comprehensive monitoring that is already in place does the job well enough.

Why should the police be granted a right of workplace privacy that no one else has? Their radio communications have long been monitored and recorded. Recording interactions between the police and the public cuts both ways. It can protect a law officer from a false claim of wrongdoing. It can protect the public from genuine wrongdoing by an officer. Carving out privacy safe harbors for cops that don't apply to others would likely be a violation of equal protection unless it could be tied to a compelling state interest of some sort. Protecting cops from discipline or prosecution for their misbehavior is not a compelling state interest.

Restrooms, locker rooms, and privileged communications have a few special rules, but the general rule is that if you're a public or private employee on the job, you're an open book. If you don't like it, be your own boss and/or lobby for privacy rights for all employees, not just cops.

An interesting Q&A on employee privacy rights can be found here: https://www.privacyrights.org/workplace-privacy-and-employee-monitoring#2a (https://www.privacyrights.org/workplace-privacy-and-employee-monitoring#2a) The site, BTW, is sympathetic to privacy rights, but is realistic in laying out the facts. Even sites that start out with the proposition that "most states have laws protecting employee privacy rights" go on to explain that such protections are exceedingly narrow, and monitoring is exceedingly broad.

Just haven't taken it far enough. That's why there needs to be a centralized regulatory branch for monitoring. That means the boss must be monitored too!  Let's consider the medical profession. . .

Most medical malpractice incidences are never even realized, never make it to litigation, and those that do almost never make it to court.  People put their lives in the hands of physicians and care professionals every day and die by the hundreds from simple mistakes that their loved ones will never even know about.  

Was the procedure done correctly?  Did the doc wash his hands properly?  Were the instruments appropriately handled? Were medications given in the right sequence and at the proper rate? Were the linens clean?

For Heaven's sake why are we allowing all of these people to die at the hands of careless doctors, nurses, and medical staff?  We must have body cameras, especially in professions involved in health and public safety.  That means cops, docs, firemen, crossing guards, construction workers, dentists, teachers, day-care workers, massage therapists, hairstylists, truck drivers, and anyone who serves or handles food.  

 :o Oh Lord! I just realized that some of these people may be racist too.

That's it! The right to privacy has been taken too far, for too long.  We need the government to fix this. ;)


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on December 04, 2014, 02:09:00 pm
Why just the police?  Why not require all citizens to wear some form of monitoring device to document legal behavior? 

Imagine the crime that would prevent.  Michael Brown would probably be alive today if he were wearing a body camera the day he assaulted and robbed that convenience store clerk.


Sarcasm aside, Gaspar may have a point.

With New York City is rolling out a limited pilot test program for police body cameras, former law enforcement officials and the relatives of Eric Garner are questioning what good additional footage will do in future cases if the Staten Island grand jury decided not to indict the police officer who put Garner in an apparent choke hold even with the incident caught on cell phone video.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/eric-garner-case-puts-twist-body-cameras-solution/story?id=27366336

Now, Owasso had only been using body cams a week before they documented Lt. Mike Denton's bad behavior, but he got his same exact job back.   

Even city buses have cameras, not because we have it in for bus drivers, but because they have a responsibility on their shoulders that demands that level of accountability.   It's the culture of who you work for that determines how deep the accountability rabbit hole goes.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: cynical on December 04, 2014, 03:12:03 pm
Just because it doesn't change the outcome every single time doesn't mean it isn't worthwhile. There are two purposes served by the cameras: deterring police misconduct and helping sort out the facts after an incident. Just because in one or two cases the sorting-out process didn't work out as predicted doesn't mean that it must always fail. And just because the deterrent effect of the camera failed to prevent the police from killing Eric Garner doesn't mean that it will always fail to deter police misconduct.

Seat belt laws save many lives, but some people die while wearing them. The criminal laws in general deter criminal conduct, but crimes are still committed. No one seriously suggests repealing Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes because Oklahomans continue to break the law. Perfectionists have to remember the old saying, "the perfect is the enemy of the good."

Incidentally, in his snarky reply Gaspar failed to answer the question I asked: Why should the police be granted an occupational right of privacy that no other employee, public or private, has?



Sarcasm aside, Gaspar may have a point.

With New York City is rolling out a limited pilot test program for police body cameras, former law enforcement officials and the relatives of Eric Garner are questioning what good additional footage will do in future cases if the Staten Island grand jury decided not to indict the police officer who put Garner in an apparent choke hold even with the incident caught on cell phone video.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/eric-garner-case-puts-twist-body-cameras-solution/story?id=27366336

Now, Owasso had only been using body cams a week before they documented Lt. Mike Denton's bad behavior, but he got his same exact job back.   

Even city buses have cameras, not because we have it in for bus drivers, but because they have a responsibility on their shoulders that demands that level of accountability.   It's the culture of who you work for that determines how deep the accountability rabbit hole goes.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Gaspar on December 04, 2014, 04:41:59 pm


Incidentally, in his snarky reply Gaspar failed to answer the question I asked: Why should the police be granted an occupational right of privacy that no other employee, public or private, has?



You are right. I didn't address that and perhaps should have.  I don't think the police have been granted that right by anyone, nor will they.  Sure, some like to interfere with people filming crimes, or crime scenes but I think that is more to due to a failure to understand the laws or lack thereof. 

I am unaware of any right a police officer has to privacy while engaged in a public activity.  Unfortunately our laws are not equipped to address new technology, and technology is moving faster than the law.  It's confusing. . .I can't take a picture of you at your desk and publish it online without your consent, but can I take a picture or video of a police officer at work and publish it online without his/her consent? 

Snarky as my previous posts were, and a bit outrageous at that, it will come to pass, all of it.  This is the natural progression of our path towards centralized government control, and our exponential growth and acceptance of technology to document our every waking moment. 

I already know people who wear a Narrative (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/narrative-clip-wearable-automatic-camera-gray/9785106.p?id=1219435639714&skuId=9785106) camera and many of the new wearable watches will incorporate cameras as well. At a recent tech show, I saw a device fitted into a rather stylish pair of glasses that records 360 degrees of video for 16 hours.  We have clients that plot employee locations on a map based on GPS data from their cell phones.  The employees are aware of this, but the benefit of a free smartphone outweighs any perceived invasion of privacy.

My snarky response was not a rebellion against the idea, because there can be no rebellion.  As a society we are surrendering our privacy in exchange for technology.  My post was simply to get the reader away from the myopic concept that video monitoring of police officers would somehow be a terminus of this concept.  The technology is already decades ahead of the law.  Strapping a body cam to every cop is far from a solution, and presents a whole new set of problems that the law is still ill-equipped to address.

Before we jump, it is probably wise to check the depth.

What is the penalty for failure to capture adequate video? Is there a fine for equipment or operator failure?  How may layers of liability can we afford to add? At what point do we reach total paralysis?

It's a fun philosophical exercise.  ;D


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on December 04, 2014, 10:48:25 pm

Why just the police?  Why not require all citizens to wear some form of monitoring device to document legal behavior? 

Imagine the crime that would prevent.  Michael Brown would probably be alive today if he were wearing a body camera the day he assaulted and robbed that convenience store clerk.

The program could be setup as some form of individual mandate. You could make it constitutional by representing it as a tax. There could be a fine (tax) for not wearing your tracking/monitoring device.

Of course, it would probably be difficult to get participation at first, and some would consider it an invasion of privacy, so you would want to ease the public into it by requiring it at the employer level in order to obtain liability insurance.  Just think about it!  This would help promote healthy and safe work environments and serve to thwart all kinds of business liability like sexual harassment, violation of OSHA regulations, and hundreds of other dubious labor practices.

Of course not all devices/services are the same so the government would need to regulate offerings to insure quality, compatibility and reliability.

Individuals not on any sanctioned employer program would be required to purchase individual tracking & monitoring services through a limited exchange of suppliers that meet stringent requirements.  Ultimately all data would need to be centrally archived and maintained as well.

We would probably need to start with just audio, GPS, and 3D accelerometer data, and ease our way into full video and 3D situational modeling.

----------------------



Throw in APCs, assault rifles, body armor, pepper spray, mass surveillance... couple that with unbridled authority and a national network of fraternal unions and lawyers that can help you literally get away with murder, and it's a deal. 




Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on December 05, 2014, 09:55:06 am
 

Unless they were on the scene, their “account” of what happened is totally worthless.  Sort of like the “eyewitnesses” at the Michael Brown shooting scene who showed up a few minutes after the whole confrontation was over.


We all know cops wouldn't lie or distort the circumstances or brag to their buddies about what they had done....



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: cannon_fodder on December 10, 2014, 01:48:33 pm
Gaspar:

You asked the question - why force the police to monitor their behavior with recording devices and not force every citizen to do the same.  I can answer that with... points

1) The police are government employees sworn to protect and serve the public.  As a public employee with a duty owed to the public - the public has a right to know what they are doing.

2) They are authorized to exercise the power of government upon its citizens. They can take your property and your freedom. They are authorized to carry firearms and usually, on their word, they can use that firearm to end the life of a citizen with impunity.  Given that they are allowed to exercise the utmost power over citizens, it is important that they can be held accountable for their actions.

3) Part of a police officer's job is to initiate confrontation.  They are required to confront people who they suspect are criminals.  This necessarily puts them in situations in which an accurate records of events would protect them from false claims of miscreants AND assist them in prosecuting any wrong behavior they witness.

4) A police officer is an employee - an employer can mandate 100% surveillance of their employees as they see fit.  UPS, FedEx, and many commercial carriers have GPS system tracking speed, braking, movements, etc.  Drivers are regularly fired for breaking company rules.  Many other employers record all activity of their employees.  As employees, officers are subject to the same rules.

5) Recording officers is effective.  In jurisdictions were cameras were implemented complaints against officers tumbled by as much as 80%.  FACT - when people are being watched, or even think they are being watched, they tend to follow the rules more. Historically, police departments do not self-police very well.  Massive corruption is usually brought to light by federal investigations (see repeated indictments of TPD) or citizen action.

and

6) Most citizens are not public employees, are not granted authority to exercise the power of the government, do not regularly instigate confrontations with suspected criminals (and when they do, many turn on their cameras), are subject to recording on their jobs, and are watched while on their jobs.

The reasons presented against cameras are:

1) Your slippery slope argument, which I distinguished above.
2) Cost - which continues to drop and is cheap compared to fighting civil rights violations, and
3) It may cause the officers to be less effect - to which I respond, if you are doing something you don't want people to know about... you probably shouldn't be doing it.

So bring on the cameras (as previously ORDERED by the Court)!


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on March 31, 2015, 09:52:43 pm
Performing for the (dash)camera; how police manipulate recorded encounters.

"Dont go for my gun!"
"Stop resisting"
"why are you trying to get my fu@king gun!"


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvDWrIDrQnw[/youtube]






Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on October 02, 2015, 10:00:47 pm
Recording officers is effective.  In jurisdictions were cameras were implemented complaints against officers tumbled by as much as 80%.  FACT - when people are being watched, or even think they are being watched, they tend to follow the rules more. Historically, police departments do not self-police very well.  Massive corruption is usually brought to light by federal investigations (see repeated indictments of TPD) or citizen action.

All the technology in the world wont matter if the legal system is too broken to make use of it.
Reinstated Owasso Police Lt. Michael Denton is in his second 15 minutes of videotaped mayhem fame, this time charged with a felony that includes striking another officer with a shotgun.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/homepagelatest/owasso-police-officer-charged-with-felony-misdemeanor-in-nowata-county/article_c19822b0-7606-55cc-ab28-15f8d8450c72.html


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on October 03, 2015, 05:03:23 pm
Quote

Denton used a shotgun to beat Mathews with “unlawful and felonious intent,” prosecutors claim in the charges. He demonstrated a “conscious disregard” for the safety of other law enforcement officers and created a “situation of unreasonable risk” by striking a uniformed Nowata police officer and Mathews with the end of a shotgun.


This is how he behaves when he KNOWS there are cameras?
Pay attention to who fights to keep him employed as a cop.




Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on October 04, 2015, 04:59:26 pm

Police Destroyed Video of Jail Death
http://www.krmg.com/ap/ap/oklahoma/cherokee-county-fights-ruling-on-jail-altercation-/nntG4/


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: cannon_fodder on October 05, 2015, 12:56:21 pm
Pay attention to who fights to keep him employed as a cop.

That'd be the FOP. Owasso fired him, the Union brought on binding arbitration and he was reinstated with back pay plus interest. Owasso JUST got done paying the guy like $300,000 and he does this. (Can you imagine a video of a teacher abusing a child and getting reinstated with back pay? But tell me more about how the teacher's unions are destroying America...)

I hope Owasso tries to sue him for their money back. God knows under what theory, but they will certainly lose more money than $300k now. This guy has cost Owasso millions of dollars. And he won't be punished at all.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on October 05, 2015, 09:37:39 pm
That'd be the FOP. Owasso fired him, the Union brought on binding arbitration and he was reinstated with back pay plus interest. Owasso JUST got done paying the guy like $300,000 and he does this. (Can you imagine a video of a teacher abusing a child and getting reinstated with back pay? But tell me more about how the teacher's unions are destroying America...)

I hope Owasso tries to sue him for their money back. God knows under what theory, but they will certainly lose more money than $300k now. This guy has cost Owasso millions of dollars. And he won't be punished at all.

(http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/lt/lt_cache/thumbnail/615/img/photos/2015/10/05/4b/ef/DENTON_MICHAEL.jpg)


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Breadburner on October 06, 2015, 07:56:12 am
Do you know anything about the tampering of SPAM cans......


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on October 06, 2015, 01:34:31 pm
(http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/lt/lt_cache/thumbnail/615/img/photos/2015/10/05/4b/ef/DENTON_MICHAEL.jpg)

So do you record his height from counting mini-blind leaves?
Very out-of-the ordinary arrest mugshot.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on October 30, 2015, 09:04:17 pm
Owasso dirtbag cop sued the city he was victimizing for violating his rights; a judge said nuh-uhh.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/federal-judge-rules-against-suspended-owasso-police-officer-in-civil/article_ec023c08-6809-52a6-b787-96ccca4205d7.html

(http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/tulsaworld.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/3/aa/3aa9a0d2-2ca2-50bf-9736-7098e3a6e700/562e6f88f0563.image.jpg)






Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on October 31, 2015, 05:10:44 pm
This is what "trying to get in front of a fleeing car so you can justify using your weapon" looks like:


Video shows a cop chasing a car driven by a teen, tries to step in front of fleeing car, failing that...shoots him in the back.  When he claims self defense a prosecutor says "thats all I need to hear"

https://reason.com/blog/2015/10/28/the-shooting-of-zachary-hammond-is-this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtrQQaB9fw0



Another officer on the scene, Anthony Moon, who resigned shortly after the shooting, purportedly raised Hammond's lifeless hand and gave it a "celebratory high-five."
Hammond’s autopsy revealed that the teen was shot in the back of his left shoulder and his side.
According to the FBI, a witness has recently come forward describing officers planting evidence under Hammond’s body and high-fiving his dead hand after the shooting.

A Prosecutor's Guide To Not Prosecuting A Cop Who Killed Someone

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/police-prosecutions-zachary-hammond_562fee51e4b00aa54a4bb834

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/breaking-dashcam-video-released-shows-cop-murder-zachary-hammond/






Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: cannon_fodder on November 02, 2015, 08:20:28 am
Not sure how to say this without sounding like a jerk...

But maybe you need to go start a blog or Facebook page that just posts bad behavior by cops over and over and over and over and over in an endless loop.

I generally agree with you. Police need to show more restraint, citizens rights need to be better respected, police and prosecutors do circle the wagons. And yes, it happens way WAY too often.

But this is a broken record in two or three threads.

Maybe we can limit it to Oklahoma related ones?

Dunno... but it isn't fostering any meaningful discussion anymore.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on November 02, 2015, 10:45:38 pm
Not sure how to say this without sounding like a jerk...





Youre not a jerk, but you are a mirror.

You bring up an interresting question; Is corruption and abuse so ubiquitous that society is beginning to feel the best way to deal with it is to ignore it?
Its somewhat reminiscent of the playground advice teachers gave bullied kids.  Does that really work?




Yesterday yet another new felony was created, increasing from a misdemenor the penalty for assaulting an off-duty cop, jailer, game warden, etc.
On the surface, that doesnt sound like a terrible idea, but listen to the reasoning behind it and you see a world that isnt even close to reality:

“The way the (misdemeanor) law was written gave criminals an incentive to pursue law enforcement officers in their personal lives,” said Rep. Mike Sanders, R-Kingfisher.
“It is a hardened criminal that looks to go after law enforcement. Especially in light of the continued assault on our law enforcement officers nationally, it is necessary to have the proper laws in place to prosecute these criminals appropriately,” Sanders said.”


No law enforcement numbers support that. Even the FBI shows the opposite to be true, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/10/29/fbi-data-show-assaults-on-police-officers-dropped-sharply-in-2014/  but the unions lay the BS on thick.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on November 26, 2015, 10:39:49 pm
Police Destroyed Surveillance Video Showing Moments That Led Up to Deadly Shooting
“We had no idea they were going to sit there and delete files,” he said. “I mean we were just trying to help the police officers.”

https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/06/chicago-police-accused-of-deleting-video-threatening-witnesses-after-teens-execution/

...and tampered with others
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-laquan-mcdonald-new-videos-met-20151125-story.html

Questions Surround Lack of Audio on New Footage of Laquan McDonald Shooting

https://news.vice.com/article/questions-surround-lack-of-audio-on-new-footage-of-laquan-mcdonald-shooting

Police Have No Idea How Laquan McDonald Footage Vanished Right After They Watched It
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/laquan-mcdonald-burger-king-video_5655c5abe4b072e9d1c1469b



"The fact that the police entered the Burger King restaurant without a warrant or a subpoena, accessed the system upon demanding the password, and then left and that 86 minutes or so of video is missing from all 11 cameras is something that gave us a great deal of concern."

 "The irony is, though, that the Burger King surveillance video was running while the officer erased them. And so there's a videotape of the officer erasing the video."



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on November 27, 2015, 07:32:25 pm
Police Destroyed Surveillance Video Showing Moments That Led Up to Deadly Shooting
“We had no idea they were going to sit there and delete files,” he said. “I mean we were just trying to help the police officers.”



This reporter rips local media for their habit of credulously reporting police-union talking points:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/protesting-the-corrupt-system-that-killed-laquan-mcdonald/417723/


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on November 29, 2015, 07:45:09 pm
"Now, the (Burger King) video would not have shown the actual shooting, but it would have shown the events leading up to the shooting and the police interaction with the witnesses following the shooting," he added. "There is no credible explanation for why this video is missing."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/laquan-mcdonald-burger-king-video_5655c5abe4b072e9d1c1469b



How Chicago tried to cover up a police execution

http://chicagoreporter.com/how-chicago-tried-to-cover-up-a-police-execution/




Deleting surveillance video is the new thing.....
NYPD Cops Return to Restaurant to Delete Video After Making Aggressive Arrests
https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2015/11/nypd-cops-return-to-restaurant-to-delete-video-after-making-aggressive-arrests/






Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on December 11, 2015, 12:23:58 pm
Not sure how to say this without sounding like a jerk...

But maybe you need to go start a blog or Facebook page that just posts bad behavior by cops over and over and over and over and over in an endless loop.

I generally agree with you. Police need to show more restraint, citizens rights need to be better respected, police and prosecutors do circle the wagons. And yes, it happens way WAY too often.

But this is a broken record in two or three threads.

Maybe we can limit it to Oklahoma related ones?

Dunno... but it isn't fostering any meaningful discussion anymore.


Not a jerk at all.  You are highlighting a point - lack of interest on so many topics, by most people, more concerned about day to day survival than somewhat abstract events that rarely impinge on their lives.  People letting today's urgency take over tomorrow's critical !!  Only 50 or so cops a year killed in the line of duty affecting family and friends - a relatively small number in the entire population.  1,000 or so killed by cops every year, again affecting family and friends - still a relatively small number in the overall scheme of things.  Tough to stay excited for more than "sound bite moments" when it doesn't directly touch.

I have ranted for 12 years about the insanity and just flat out wrongness of going into Iraq in 2003 to get rid of Saddam Hussein...with all the accompanying undesirable side effects.  (Dead babies - our kids, squandered wealth and goodwill, tens of thousands wounded)  It has cost me considerably in this state in great part due to the lack of education but mostly lack of interest by most people!!  But the last few months, we see the extremist right wing starting to make noises about how maybe getting rid of him wasn't such a great idea.  Ted Cruz the most recent one in the last couple of days.  Will Smith said it best in I, Robot... "Ya know,...somehow I told you so just doesn't quite say it..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBgeCZW3upg


And for decades have been a strong advocate of environmental concerns/issues.  Last decade or so, I have just kinda given up on that one - we are hell-bent for leather to just go right on down the tubes with no thought or consideration for our kids, grandkids, and other future generations!  Sad.


Last night, I watched the Holtzclaw verdict and thought how good it was that justice was served.  And then thought of the friends whose lives have been so badly disrupted by Mark Allen Eaton (another rant I have been making for a while) where the corruption, cronyism, and 'good ole boy' back room deal making by Tulsa County Tim Harris DA office, and the judge that wouldn't accept his plea, has let off a self confessed attempted murderer!!


So the question is, how do ya keep a topic in front of people's awareness zone, without it becoming tiresome and repetitive??  I sure haven't figured it out.  Probably can't be done unless it becomes so egregious, stacked on top of many other egregious events, that if finally impinges on people's sense of right and fair play.  We are still waiting on that with the whole transfer of wealth thing destroying the middle class in this country.  And rebuilding the capital building, while letting our kids suffer - literally - in today's economic reality.


Maybe consolidate onto one thread...?

I'm out of ideas for now....



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on December 13, 2015, 07:31:26 pm

Last night, I watched the Holtzclaw verdict and thought how good it was that justice was served.  And then thought of the friends whose lives have been so badly disrupted by Mark Allen Eaton (another rant I have been making for a while) where the corruption, cronyism, and 'good ole boy' back room deal making by Tulsa County Tim Harris DA office, and the judge that wouldn't accept his plea, has let off a self confessed attempted murderer!!

Do you have a thread about Eaton?


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on December 14, 2015, 09:33:17 am
Do you have a thread about Eaton?


One of my ongoing rants for a while now.  Tim Harris office, Judge Glasco, et al.

The charge felonious pointing of firearm - he came out to his front yard with his assault rifle (SKS 7.62), drunk.  (All in the police report)  Raised the gun, pointed it at two teen age boys visiting their grandparents, and pulled the trigger.  Pulled back the bolt again, found that he had forgotten to put a loaded magazine into the gun - because he was drunk - so went back into the house and got his Glock, that was loaded, came back out and tried to shoot them again, but they were disappearing into the house.  He told police that he was gonna "clean up" the neighborhood!!  How ironic - when that task would best be served by his and his 'buddies' removal from the neighborhood !  And no, the kids weren't doing illicit drugs - they were visiting their family and smoking in their front yard, since it wasn't allowed in the house.

And with their sense of entitlement engendered by the fact that any time someone in the neighborhood calls the police about the things that go on at the place, it is ignored because of the attitude, "Hey, he got away with attempted murder....what is a little complaint about noise, driving on other people's yards, parking his 'toy's on other people's yards...."  It has turned into a sweet little white trash enclave (is that racist??) where they also get away with discharging firearms in the back yard, as well as smaller things like street racing and having up to three families residing in a single family zoned neighborhood and parking on the grass.   No accountability, because it is well known that if the felony charges that he plead guilty to are so casually dismissed, then no lesser indiscretion really matters....  

I do notice from casual observation and talking to acquaintances in the neighborhood, that Daddy won't allow that stuff in his gated community - he set them up in the poor people's neighborhood...  Also, BA police were the ones involved in the initial arrest and they did an excellent job!  Their efforts were erased due to the good ole boy network in the DA's office.


He plead guilty, but was told no...we don't accept that a little later (01-24-2011)....


 11-17-2010    CTPASS    -    EATON, MARK ALLEN    76493898    Nov 17 2010 5:30:47:190PM    -    $ 0.00
   JUDGE GLASSCO: DEFENDANT PRESENT, NOT IN CUSTODY, REPRESENTED BY DAN KRAMER. STATE REPRESENTED BY ERIK GRAYLESS. COURT REPORTER IS CINDY WORKMAN. DEFENDANT WAIVES JURY TRIAL AND NON JURY TRIAL AND ENTER A PLEA OF GUILTY WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE STATE. COURT ACCEPTS THE GUILTY PLEA AND PASSES SENTENCING TO 01/04/2011 AT 9:30AM, ROOM 401 WITH PSI. DEFENDANT EXECUTES PERSONAL RECOGNIZANCE BOND. PREVIOUS BOND EXONERATED.


http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/GetCaseInformation.asp?submitted=true&viewtype=caseGeneral&casemasterID=2353817&db=Tulsa




Not that any of this makes any difference, Vash...



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on February 13, 2016, 08:04:00 pm
Chicago Police Hid Mics, Destroyed Dashcams To Block Audio, Records Show
https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160127/archer-heights/whats-behind-no-sound-syndrome-on-chicago-police-dashcams

Police officers stashed microphones in their squad car glove boxes. They pulled out batteries. Microphone antennas got busted or went missing. And sometimes, dashcam systems didn’t have any microphones at all.
Officials last month blamed the absence of audio in 80 percent of dashcam videos on officer error and “intentional destruction.”


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on May 06, 2016, 06:47:31 pm
Sapulpa police release video contradicting their claim another man tried to run them over

http://bit.ly/1SXMPuw

....and no one questions that.





Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on May 11, 2016, 04:04:21 pm
Sapulpa police release video contradicting their claim another man tried to run them over

http://bit.ly/1SXMPuw

....and no one questions that.

I think reporters have been so used to just trusting the handouts that they dont think to check to see if video backs up the story.  In this case, it clearly didnt, and it may not be the first case of "he tried to hit me" where it turned out to be nothing more than a catch phrase.


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on December 03, 2016, 01:45:27 pm
Quote
The latest batch of Friday Open Records dumps included more blurred dashcam video from incidents weeks ago.  Everything in each is out of focus except the onscreen display, so is this the trend now or just a coincidence?  

The top dashcam is from Mingo Valley and the bottom is Riverside.
In the Riverside image, the text is sharp while the image it is overlaid on is blurred, indicating the likelihood the blurring took place at the camera rather than in the editing process.

http://kotv.images.worldnow.com/images/12569387_G.jpg
http://media2.kjrh.com/photo/2016/12/02/16x9/Tulsa_Police_release_video_of_chase_and__0_50815750_ver1.0_640_480.jpg


Vaseline is the new "Transparency"


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on December 06, 2016, 08:02:43 pm
A prime example of an out-of-control police pursuit, climaxing with blindly firing a dozen shots down the middle of a residential neighborhood, and the cop (Clayton Hicks) falsely claiming he was injured.

Does this seem like someone who would deliberately sabotage their dash camera?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zHeP7usFXI


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on December 10, 2016, 07:49:54 pm
The new mayor got into another firey police chase and crash on Day 1.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/crimewatch/with-police-on-ride-along-tulsa-s-new-mayor-responds/article_bf066478-0101-577e-a7fe-155fece8c78e.html

Two children were inside one car that was hit, but escaped as it went up in flames.
Apparently Bynum was in a ride-along with a reality TV crew in tow, and police kept local media away so they could have exclusive access.




Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: dbacksfan 2.0 on December 10, 2016, 08:34:07 pm
The new mayor got into another firey police chase and crash on Day 1.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/crimewatch/with-police-on-ride-along-tulsa-s-new-mayor-responds/article_bf066478-0101-577e-a7fe-155fece8c78e.html

Two children were inside one car that was hit, but escaped as it went up in flames.
Apparently Bynum was in a ride-along with a reality TV crew in tow, and police kept local media away so they could have exclusive access.





Fox 23 was there not long after it happened.

http://www.fox23.com/news/car-catches-fire-during-police-chase-in-midtown-tulsa/474786858 (http://www.fox23.com/news/car-catches-fire-during-police-chase-in-midtown-tulsa/474786858)


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: Vashta Nerada on January 03, 2017, 07:54:40 pm
The officer didn’t hit the record button on his body camera until after the initial encounter with Dombrowski. However, these devices store 30 seconds of silent video that has already happened before the record button is actually activated. The police body camera silently captured the moment the officer exits his patrol vehicle, walks up to Dombrowski, who is seen walking a bike on the sidewalk, and pushes the man to the ground.

“As instructed and taught in training, I performed an impact push"

“When I saw that, I was very concerned,” (former police officer) Ramirez told ABC News. “It’s our contention that the police officer knew what he was doing in not starting the video until about 25 seconds into his beating of my client.”
The attorney also argued that police thought his client was resisting arrest when he was actually reacting to the pain from the Taser.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/arizona-man-claims-police-brutality-body-camera-captures/story?id=44449584


Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on July 17, 2017, 07:04:52 pm
Exactly one week after Minneapolis suburb paid the officer acquitted of killing unarmed motorist Philando Castile $48,500 to resign, a woman who called 911 and was talking to a responding officer... is shot by the officer's partner thru the door of the police car...with no explanation. 
Because of recent high-profile shootings, Minneapolis police equipped their force with body cameras.  Now the problem is deciding when to turn them on.

http://www.startribune.com/aclu-assails-failure-of-officer-to-turn-on-body-camera/434991553/





Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: heironymouspasparagus on July 18, 2017, 07:34:56 am
Exactly one week after Minneapolis suburb paid the officer acquitted of killing unarmed motorist Philando Castile $48,500 to resign, a woman who called 911 and was talking to a responding officer... is shot by the officer's partner thru the door of the police car...with no explanation. 
Because of recent high-profile shootings, Minneapolis police equipped their force with body cameras.  Now the problem is deciding when to turn them on.

http://www.startribune.com/aclu-assails-failure-of-officer-to-turn-on-body-camera/434991553/







Well, it was proven just a couple weeks earlier that they can commit murder with no consequences. 


And we are going into a 4th trial here in town about the same thing.  Cop goes up to 18 year old daughter's boyfriend - none of his business to start with, since she is 18 - and just blows him away.



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on July 20, 2017, 12:04:30 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFcvhojEAiI



Title: Re: Dashcam Tampering
Post by: patric on October 31, 2017, 11:01:01 am
If you are going to cherry-pick 14 clips from a dashcam video you might as well just release the whole video.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/assault-battery-charges-dismissed-against-property-owner-arrested-during-search/article_663f3f69-6989-5289-92c7-1c5a9a51ff41.html

https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/family-of-man-injured-in-altercation-with-police-say-officers-used-excessive-force/