Our police need lapel cameras
As reported in the National Post last week, Ian Scott, director of Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit (SIU), has reached the end of his five-year term. The SIU is the independent agency responsible for investigating police officers in cases where officers are involved in member of the public being killed, seriously injured or allegedly sexually assaulted. In Ontario, and indeed, across the country, there is real doubt among the public that any officer under investigation will ever truly face justice. Mr. Scott agrees that public confidence is a problem, and has a partial solution — more cameras used by police officers.
Mr. Scott would like to see every cop in Ontario equipped with a lapel camera, worn as part of the uniform, that records a video of everything and everyone the officer interacts with. There are obvious civil liberty implications to this, and such videos would need to be effectively regulated and managed, lest officers be turned into mobile spycams. But the benefits to this proposal far outweigh the admitted drawbacks.
Most Canadian police officers do excellent work under trying conditions. But in recent years, there have been far too many cases where police officers have either refused to co-operate with, or have actively impeded, investigations into alleged misdeeds by their peers. From the G20 debacle in Toronto to continuing problems with British Columbia’s RCMP detachment and ongoing investigations into allegations of police brutality in Edmonton, it’s clear that police oversight is an issue of concern right across the country.
Lapel cameras, if used properly, would help eliminate the risk of officers lying to cover up each other’s conduct, or getting together to agree upon the “official version” of events before submitting their notes. There would be a record of everything that a police officer saw, and critically, when they saw it.
It’s not a perfect solution. Costs are considerable — the chief of police in Ontario’s Halton Region, whose force is investigating the cameras, told local media that lapel c a meras could cost $ 2 , 000 per officer. And then there is the issue of having sufficient computer process- ing and storage capabilities to hold all the video. And even video cameras can’t tell the whole story — they will have their limits.
But so do written notes and officer accounts of what they saw other officers doing. Most cops are honest, to be sure, we have more proof than we’ll ever need that not all are. Currently, this taints the reputation of every force across the country; indeed, of the entire institution of policing. Since there’s little way for the general public to tell a good cop from a bad one, all officers must be regarded with an unfortunate degree of wariness. This crisis in credibility isn’t good for the public, but it’s even worse for good officers who must carry the weight for bad.
Mr. Scott has also said that Tasers should also be equipped with cameras that would record video and audio whenever the weapon was activated. This is an excellent (and more affordable) suggestion, as it would certainly reduce the chances of a Taser being misused. But it doesn’t go far enough. Most incidents of alleged police misconduct will not involve Tasers. Lapel cameras will provide the context and vantage point needed to truly understand the kind of confrontations police are involved in.
Police will understandably view this as an imposition, at best. They’re more likely to view this as a punitive measure, a tangible sign that the public does not trust them. Sadly, this is not just partially true, but largely warranted. Our oversight mechanisms simply are not keeping up. But lapel and taser cameras will also serve to highlight the good work that police do, and combat false accusations of police misconduct. Police forces in the United States which have adopted such cameras, in whole or during pilot projects, have seen not only use-of-force incidents drop, but complaints against police. Indeed, the Los Angeles Police Department is moving seeking to outfit 1,500 officers with lapel cameras, after an earlier trial project using dashboardmounted car cameras resulted in fully 92% of officers accused of misconduct during incidents that were filmed being cleared of wrongdoing. This is good news for police. The costs are adm itted ly high, but lapel cameras are worth investing in.