By Joe Mulé, Director of Training at Principis Group
Police agencies have adopted body-worn cameras citing the technology promotes transparency, accountability and assists with building trust within the community. They certainly can do that. The public, however, equates “transparency” with an almost immediate release of video in the aftermath of a critical or controversial incident. This is frequently an unrealistic expectation. The public is generally ignorant of the many legal and process obligations that an agency must follow in the aftermath of these types of incidents. This is when expectations and realities collide. The public has been promised transparency, expects immediate release, and associates immediate release with transparency. When the expectation isn’t met, public opinion automatically assumes the worst and often accuses the agency of covering up officer misconduct or negligent actions. This couldn’t be further from the truth, but, either way, the public’s perception and the associated media coverage has a lasting impact. So, how do agencies navigate these difficult waters? It begins with their department policy. Policy language should be clear about when the video will be released without compromising the integrity of the investigation or evidence, the legal constraints that may imposed on the agency by state law, and specifically how the video will be released and to whom. This language and the accompanying processes must be developed in cooperation with the local prosecutor’s office. Finally, the agency must inform the public of all these processes. This helps shift the public’s expectation an immediate response to one that balances transparency and accountability with reality.
Body-worn camera program management is incredibly complex. Principis Group has the knowledge and experience to consult with, or provide training to, your agency on this, and many other subjects related to maximize the success of your body-worn camera program.
Comments