Posted on 10/02/2014 10:42:52 AM PDT by redreno
What good are lapel cams and microphones if the cops are disabling them? Why aren’t they being fired for this?
“No one likes to be monitored,” says Sid Heal, recently retired commander who evaluated technology during his decades-long tenure at the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. And? If you do not want to be filmed and recorded don’t be a cop.
According to the arstechnica.com, The Los Angeles Police Commission is investigating how half of the recording antennas in the Southeast Division went missing, seemingly as a way to evade new self-monitoring procedures that the Los Angeles Police Department imposed last year.
(Excerpt) Read more at mintpressnews.com ...
Cause we live in an era where cracking one ethnically insensitive joke could land them on the unemployment line.
And you know when the camera stops working?
If you have nothning to hide you have nothing to fear, right?
Your statement doesn’t make any sense.
If “ the devices protect the police and document the crimes against police during stops” then why in the world would they disable them? The answer is they wouldn’t.
So, if they wouldn’t disable them because the recorders protect them, then the question is..Why are they disabling them?
I think I know the answer. But you first.
If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. Right?
Agreed it protects the cops when they are in the right and it protects citizens when cops are in the wrong.
Exactly
Hey, Joe, how ya doin? You treating my sister right? Well, you can just go on your way. If I had known it was you I wouldn't have pulled you over at all.
Maybe the EPA can monitor and enforce this and leave us and our catalytic converters and wood stoves alone.
That's not the way it is. Law enforcement and judiciary are part of the same club. Judges will cover for bad cops, even if the cops word is implausible, it is accepted as truthful. Citizen's word is presumed to be untruthful, although this has to be an unstated presumption, it is what exists in fact. Cameras can change the presumption, which is why the law enforcement/judiciary business resists them.
The only way to make police-self-surveillance work as a means of preventing police misconduct is to make there be consequences for the officers themselves.
A few suggestions, all of which should have an exception for undercover operations, which should require a warrant from a court to conduct:
1. No recording device or a non-working recording device on a shift when not operating under cover results in no pay for the shift.
2. Deliberate inactivation of a recording device when its use is required, or repeated failure to wear or carry such a device when required, is cause for termination from the force.
3. Lack of a functional recording device on a non-undercover police officer results in the voiding of his authority as a peace officer. All arrests or citations he or she makes are void. Use of force is judged in the same way it would be for a citizen without law enforcement duties or authority. Testimony by a police officer inactivated by lack of functional recording devices shall be considered of less value in all legal proceedings than that of other witnesses.
Number 3 is radical, but implemented in law it would fix pretty much all problems with police misconduct real quick.
Personally, I’m in favor of all three being implemented.
. . . because if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear ???
In the current litigation environment, prosecutors ROUTINELY indict ham sandwiches. . .
So, if they dpont[’ know when the cameras stop working, how can you fire them when cameras brewak and he doesn’t report it in 5-min?
Liberals just can’t get it through their heads that just because someone puts on a uniform, they are not lab rats for the liberals to experiment with. Nor do uniforms make them unthinking automatons who will obey orders without question.
Liberals have two really stupid axioms on which this is based.
1) People join uniformed services because they are incapable of performing minimum wage jobs. They are inferiors and should be treated as such. Sneering contempt.
2) Because they think this is the case, liberals believe they can round up any type of low rent gang banger, thug or criminal, put them in uniform, and they will be just as effective as professionals. (Think Obama’s personal “army”, “just as well funded and equipped as the military.” All carrying Glock .40’s, I guess.)
So imagine the unhappiness of liberals right now, finding out that the police do not want and will not tolerate being monitored by their “betters”.
I’m a member of a FB page for cops and they’re encouraging cops to wear (and request) cameras. They’re showing videos where the cop was exonerated from false accusations to drive the point home. (Happens a LOT)
All of the cops want the ability to shut off the camera so they can use the john. I agree that they should have some control, but NOT having the camera on during a contact should be an automatic suspension.
I looked up the LAPD SouthEast division and found the areas they are serving. The area has a high concentration of Blacks.
“Southeast Community Police Station
Avalon Gardens, Gardena Boulevard, Hacienda Village, Imperial Courts, Jordon Downs, Nickerson Gardens, Parkside Manor, Watts”
Their unions probably hate these cameras because they prove cops are way overpaid.
Yes, which is EXACTLY why a good cop would never object to a video record of the way he conducts his business.
If he wants secrecy he should become a spy or join the mob.
Long prison terms should await any cop who is found with disabled recording equipment.
Any area or city with the word ‘Gardens’ in it is a huge red flag to turn around and head the other way if you value your life.
Then don't do it. It's not that hard. You have been hired as a cop not a comedian.
BTW That's not why they are turning them off.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.