Deputy who killed Arkansas teen fired, bodycam not on during shooting

THV11 ^ | July 1, 2021 | THV11 Digital

[Mr.Unique]

LONOKE COUNTY, Ark. — Lonoke County Sheriff John Staley announced through a Facebook video

Thursday that Sergeant Mike Davis, the officer involved in the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Hunter Brittain, was fired due to policy violations.

Staley said that the deputy's bodycam was not turned on during last week's traffic stop that resulted in the shooting death of Brittain.

Because the deputy failed to activate his bodycam, he has been terminated," Staley said in his statement.

Davis was with the Lonoke County Sheriff's Office since 2013. According to the sheriff, there's no recorded video of the incident itself, but rather recordings of the event's aftermath.

"It's tough. This whole incident has been tough. Emotionally draining for me, for the family, for all my deputies," Staley said. "This is not something we would ever wish for."

The family of Brittain has hired Devon Jacob and Benjamin Crump to represent them in the case. Both were lawyers in George Floyd's murder case.

According to Staley, the Lonoke County Sheriff's Office does not have dash cameras on its police vehicles.

[Mr.Unique]

Previous threads available on FR.

[Mr.Unique]

Ping list?

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

I don’t really have a problem with this. There may be some emergency situations where you don’t have time to activate it, etc.. Gor a routine traffic stop, there isn’t a valid excuse to not turn it on. If it is broken or non-functioning, that’s different. But if the sheriff/chief says “turn it on for all stops”, and you don’t...well, there’s a reason its called an order.

[PAR35]

the Lonoke County Sheriff's Office does not have dash cameras on its police vehicles.

Because dash cams with microphones cost almost $30 at Walmart, and who can afford that.

[Mr.Unique]

Because dash cams with microphones cost almost $30 at Walmart, and who can afford that.

Yep. It's not the cost, it's police unions fighting their use.

And when they do have to use them, they fight to be able to turn them on and off.

This way, they can "forget" to turn them on when convenient.

[coloradan]

I would make that presumptive evidence of murder, and I would not only fire him but criminally charge him.

[ScubaDiver]

This could be easily remedied by having them record constantly, only interrupted for a temporary period of time (15-minutes or less) for when the wearer needs to use the facilities. IOW, it should be a passive activation system exactly how cockpit voice recorders work.

In any event, I now have every reason to believe the story that the surviving witness told and and no reason to believe any explanation offered by the cop.

[BipolarBob]

The State police are in charge of the investigation and if/when he will be charged it will be through their agency.

[BipolarBob]

On tv he said, turn it on with any interaction with the public.

[PAR35]

Body and dash cams have saved more cops than they have hung out to dry. In some cases they have established that the politically connected person involved is lying. And in other cases, they might have mitigated the behavior of the cop.

They also make for some good Youtube videos.

[Mr.Unique]

Body and dash cams have saved more cops than they have hung out to dry

Then why do unions fight the use of them?

I'd love to see some stats.

[null and void]

JBT Ping list

“Any police department (or university faculty, or military unit, etc.) is only as good as the worst psycho they tolerate.” ~ H/T RedStateRocker

My 40+ year of experience dealing with police departments from forces of three to thousands has taught me that 85-90% of police officers are honest, conscientious, brave men and women that do their level best to protect their citizens from the scum that surround them.

For the most part their personal well being is low on the list of priorities and although they tend to give the benefit of the doubt to their fellow officers

they WOULD NOT cover for them if they reasonably suspected malfeasance. ~ traderrob6

100% agree. Nearly every dealing I have has with police has been positive, even when I was ticketed. The one exception was a burn-out CHP officer on Christmas Eve a few years back, I got roundly chewed out by him. I figured out he was this way with everyone when the second CHP office showed up and apologized for his behavior, before did anything else, and without observing any of the arse chewing. He knew his colleague was out of control. He tried to smooth it over to protect (and ultimately) enable his colleague. BTW, I wasn't offended, I felt sorry for the first cop. It's only a matter of time before he mouths off at the wrong person and has a stretch of 395 named after him.

There is a LOT of social pressure to shield a bad cop, shunning, no one wanting to go on patrol with someone they "can't trust", colleagues leave the cop bar when you show up, etc. Maybe one in 10 of that 85-90% can stand up to the possibility of shunning. I don't particularly blame them, it's buried very deeply in our human DNA, shunning used to be just about the worst punishment any clan could inflict. Watch a baby freak out if mommy and daddy ignore them for a few minutes. Multiply that by how ever many friends and acquaintances you have as an adult. Could you stand it?

[Manly Warrior]

I do. I take exception that the tool was available but not used, how convenient.

I want all my interactions with an officer of the court/law to be recorded by him , I or both. Of course, its for “your protection, officer”.

I record audio when I interact with anyone of govt employ, as its official statements to/from/by both parties.

Cool thing about Missouri, my state of residence, is that only one party has to know that the interaction is being recorded. They get theirs, I get mine, any equivocation by either party is reduced to fact, any interpretation has to be derived from the actual words, not the hearsay of any party.

As it should be. Perry Mason a, Robert Cannon and Andy Griffith nothwithstanding, the truth is a rare bird.

Now that the trooper has been terminated, we are likely to see it roll into more than “oops”, he shouldnta done that”.

When all that hangs in the balance is a court officer’s word against yours, guess how that turns out?

By the way, before I get the nasty anti-cop label, it is officers of the court and the law that advise me to so do. All conversation with a govt official is prosecutable, one better have proof of the actual exchange or it all up to a judge, not even a jury, to allow or disallow any alternate summary of the words....

[Manly Warrior]

I would like to think what you say is true.

[discostu]

Unions don’t worry about facts and stats. Unions are about “protecting” their worst members from consequences. That’s why unions hate merit based raises. Body and dash cams would give us a good idea rather quickly which cops just suck and should be fired. That will not do.

[Mr.Unique]

+1

[Spktyr]

To be fair, those $30 Walmart dash cams are crappy and not terribly reliable in terms of duty use. They often don’t have the storage capacity to record an entire shift without looping and they’re subject to honest recording errors. (I’ve been using dashcams for years.) They’re better than nothing, but not by much.

That said, a good quality civilian dash cam is under $100. A full on police certified dash cam system is about $2K. Mandatory body cam use can be a good part substitute for the latter.

[Spktyr]

A perfect case for that: https://abovethelaw.com/2012/06/motorcyclist-roughly-arrested-after-refusing-to-give-up-his-helmet-cam-camera-films-the-whole-thing/

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

The deputy’s dashcam recording? Missing. Mysteriously malfunctioned when he was abusing the motorcyclust.

[Spktyr]

Part of the problem is that we won’t see media-reported stats on that. Partially because most of the incidents where a cop gets saved by a bodycam don’t go beyond internal affairs and the officer. Never gets reported to the media.

As for why do unions fight the use of them - why do auto industry unions fight the termination of members found doing drugs and alcohol during work hours?

https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/13-uaw-workers-at-chrysler-who-were-caught-red-handed-drinking-and-smoking-weed-during-work-hours-are-reinstated/

Why do unions fight to get contracts where teachers can do drugs and alcohol at work without being fired?

https://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/17596

Unions fighting the use of something does not mean that it’s a bad thing. Often it’s the exact opposite.

[MercyFlush]

Thank you for the ping.