First scientific report shows police body-worn-cameras can prevent unacceptable use-of-force

December 23, 2014
Screenshot taken from a West Midlands (UK) officer's body-worn-camera.

As President Obama pledges investment in body-worn-camera technology for police officers, researchers say cameras induce 'self-awareness' that can prevent unacceptable uses-of-force seen to have tragic consequences in the US over the past year—from New York to Ferguson—but warn that cameras have implications for prosecution and data storage.

Researchers from the University of Cambridge's Institute of Criminology (IoC) have now published the first full scientific study of the landmark crime experiment they conducted on policing with body-worn-cameras in Rialto, California in 2012—the results of which have been cited by police departments around the world as justification for rolling out this technology.

The experiment showed that evidence capture is just one output of body-worn video, and the technology is perhaps most effective at actually preventing escalation during police-public interactions: whether that's abusive behaviour towards police or unnecessary use-of-force by police.

The researchers say the knowledge that events are being recorded creates "self-awareness" in all participants during police interactions. This is the critical component that turns body-worn video into a 'preventative treatment': causing individuals to modify their behaviour in response to an awareness of 'third-party' surveillance by cameras acting as a proxy for legal courts—as well as courts of public opinion—should unacceptable behaviour take place.

During the 12-month Rialto experiment, use-of-force by officers wearing cameras fell by 59% and reports against officers dropped by 87% against the previous year's figures.

However, the research team caution that the Rialto experiment is only the first step on a long road of evidence-gathering, and that more needs to be known about the impact of body-worn cameras in policing before departments are "steamrolled" into adopting the technology—with vital questions remaining about how normalising the provision of digital video as evidence will affect prosecution expectations, as well as the storage technology and policies that will be required for the enormous amount of data captured.

President Obama recently promised to spend $75m of federal funds on body-worn-video to try and stem the haemorrhaging legitimacy of US police forces among communities across the United States after the killing of several unarmed black men by police caused nationwide anguish, igniting waves of protest.

But some in the US question the merit of camera technology given that the officer responsible for killing Eric Garner—a 43-year-old black man suffocated during arrest for selling untaxed cigarettes—was acquitted by a grand jury despite the fact that a bystander filmed the altercation on a mobile phone, with footage showing an illegal 'chokehold' administered on Garner who repeatedly states: "I can't breathe". (A medical examiner ruled the death a homicide).

Screen capture from a Rialto PD officer's body-worn-camera. Credit: Rialto PD

For the Cambridge researchers, the Rialto results show that body-worn-cameras can mitigate the need for such evidence by preventing excessive use-of-force in the first place. Data from the Rialto experiment shows police officers are deterred from unacceptable uses-of-force—indeed, from using force in general—by the awareness that an interaction is being filmed; but this 'deterrence' relies on cognition of surveillance.

While the evidence provided by the video of Garner's death would suggest a heinous miscarriage of justice, say researchers, the filming itself by a bystander would not generate the self-awareness and consequent behaviour modification during the incident as observed during Rialto's institutionalised camera use.

"The 'preventative treatment' of body-worn-video is the combination of the camera plus both the warning and cognition of the fact that the encounter is being filmed. In the tragic case of Eric Garner, police weren't aware of the camera and didn't have to tell the suspect that he, and therefore they, were being filmed," said Dr Barak Ariel, from the Cambridge's IoC, who conducted the crime experiment with Cambridge colleague Dr Alex Sutherland and Rialto police chief Tony Farrar.

"With institutionalised body-worn-camera use, an officer is obliged to issue a warning from the start that an encounter is being filmed, impacting the psyche of all involved by conveying a straightforward, pragmatic message: we are all being watched, videotaped and expected to follow the rules," he said.

"Police subcultures of illegitimate force responses are likely to be affected by the cameras, because misconduct cannot go undetected—an external set of behavioural norms is being applied and enforced through the cameras. Police-public encounters become more transparent and the curtain of silence that protects misconduct can more easily be unveiled, which makes misconduct less likely." In Rialto, police use-of-force was 2.5 times higher before the cameras were introduced.

The idea behind body-worn-video, in which small high-definition cameras are strapped to a ' torso or hat, is that every step of every police-public interaction—from the mundane to those involving deadly force—gets recorded to capture the closest approximation of actual events for evidence purposes, with only case-relevant data being stored.

In Rialto, an experimental model was defined in which all police shifts over the course of a year were randomly assigned to be either experimental (with camera) or control (without camera), encompassing over 50,000 hours of police-public interactions.

The dramatic reduction in both use-of-force incidents and complaints against the police during the experiment led to Rialto PD implementing an initial three-year plan for body-worn cameras. When the police force released the results, they were held up by police departments, media and governments in various nations as the rationale for camera technology to be integrated into policing.

Ariel and colleagues are currently replicating the Rialto experiment with over 30 forces across the world, from the West Yorkshire force and Northern Ireland's PSNI in the UK to forces in the United States and Uruguay, and aim to announce new findings at the IoC's Conference for Evidence-Based Policing in July 2015. Early signs match the Rialto success, showing that body-worn-cameras do appear to have significant positive impact on interactions between officers and civilians.

However, the researchers caution that more research is required, and urge police forces considering implementing body-worn-cameras to contact them for guidance on setting up similar experiments. "Rialto is but one experiment; before this policy is considered more widely, police forces, governments and researchers should invest further time and effort in replicating these findings," said Dr Sutherland.

Body-worn cameras appear to be highly cost-effective: analysis from Rialto showed every dollar spent on the technology saved about four dollars on complaints litigations. However, with technology becoming ever cheaper, the sheer levels of has the potential to become crippling.

"The velocity and volume of data accumulating in police departments—even if only a fraction of recorded events turn into 'downloadable' recordings for evidentiary purposes—will exponentially grow over time," said Ariel. "User licenses, storage space, 'security costs', maintenance and system upgrades can potentially translate into billions of dollars worldwide."

And, if body-worn cameras become the norm, what might the cost be when video evidence isn't available? "Historically, courtroom testimonies of response officers have carried tremendous weight, but prevalence of video might lead to reluctance to prosecute when there is no evidence from body-worn-cameras to corroborate the testimony of an officer, or even a victim," said Ariel.

"Body-worn-video has the potential to improve legitimacy and enhance democracy, not least by calming situations on the front line of policing to prevent the pain and damage caused by unnecessary escalations of volatile situations. But there are substantial effects of body-worn-video that can potentially offset the benefits which future research needs to explore."

Explore further: London police to wear body cameras in year-long trial

Related Stories

White House backs use of body cameras by police

September 16, 2014

Requiring police officers to wear body cameras is one potential solution for bridging deep mistrust between law enforcement and the public, the White House said, weighing in on a national debate sparked by the shooting of ...

Police in US capital put body cameras to the test

September 24, 2014

Washington's city police force began putting body cameras to the test Wednesday, making the US capital the latest to use video technology as a routine part of law enforcement.

Body cameras join cops on the beat in US

September 30, 2014

For a growing number of police officers in the United States, miniature video cameras are becoming as much a part of the uniform as a pistol, handcuffs and badge.

New York police to wear body cameras

December 3, 2014

About three dozen police officers will be fitted with body cameras in New York by this weekend, as part of a three-month pilot program.

LA mayor plans 7,000 police body cameras in 2015

December 16, 2014

Mayor Eric Garcetti announced a plan Tuesday to equip 7,000 Los Angeles police officers with on-body cameras by next summer, making LA's police department the nation's largest law enforcement agency to move forward with such ...

Recommended for you

Paleontologists discover major T. rex fossil (Update)

August 18, 2016

Paleontologists with the Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture and the University of Washington have discovered a Tyrannosaurus rex, including a very complete skull. The find, which paleontologists estimate to be about ...

11 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rolyat136
not rated yet Dec 24, 2014
How long before the "defensive" "focus" of the cameras is widened to capture whatever is in its field of vision for "real time" or later review in search perpetrators, suspects, p.o.i.'s,, witnesses, "threats" to public safety, or other "illegalities" not readily apparent to a single, physically present officer? Aren't the armed services equipping their ground, air, and naval forces with imaging equipment that makes a particular view of the "battle-space" available to all participants at all times? Aren't these body cameras the first step in establishing a roving 24 hour surveillance system under the direction and control of the STATE?
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (4) Dec 24, 2014
Will they stop idiots from attacking the police?
"I can't breathe". (A medical examiner ruled the death a homicide).


1) Had he not resisted arrest he would likely still be alive.
2) Had he not been breaking the law (albeit a bad law) he would likely be alive.
3) Had he not been so fat and out of shape, he would likely be alive.

Had Brown not robbed a convenience store, he might be alive. Had Brown followed the orders of the police to walk on the sidewalk, he might be alive. Had he not attacked the police, he might be alive.

The racists chose two very poor cases to justify their riots and promote police assassination.
ryggesogn2
1.3 / 5 (3) Dec 24, 2014
"After a police officer who was "fearing for his life" shot and killed an 18-year-old who was brandishing a pistol at him on Tuesday evening, protesters reportedly brought bags of rocks, smashed police cars, hurled explosives and bricks at and assaulted police officers on the scene."
"Belmar said the suspect's "defaced" 9 mm gun "had five rounds in the chamber and one round in the magazine." The suspect, reportedly identified by his mother at the scene, "was known to police for various charges including weapons and stealing.""
http://www.breitb...-yr-old/

The real issue is that the racist 'liberals' refuse to blame themselves for creating the black criminal culture.
Sigh
5 / 5 (3) Dec 25, 2014
1) Had he not resisted arrest he would likely still be alive.
2) Had he not been breaking the law (albeit a bad law) he would likely be alive.
3) Had he not been so fat and out of shape, he would likely be alive.

You forgot one:
4) Had he not been strangled with an illegal chokehold he would likely still be alive.

Don't you think that is the most important one, you who so often protest the excessive power of the state? Why the sudden reversal?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Dec 25, 2014
Had he not been strangled with an illegal chokehold he would likely still be alive.

He was NOT strangled.
"So what was Pantaleo doing? He was applying a submission hold, which is not barred by the NYPD, and is designed to deprive the brain of oxygen by stopping blood flow through the arteries. So say the experts on submission holds.

It appears that the so-called chokehold was instrumental in triggering Garner's pre-existing health problems and causing his death, but Garner was not choked to death,"
http://www.breitb...-garner/

Of course the other side of the issue is how far will the govt go to stop the sale of un-taxed cigarettes?

"In January 2014, tough new penalties for selling untaxed cigarettes took effect in New York City. In July, emboldened by the new law, the city's highest-ranking uniformed cop, Philip Banks, issued an order to crack down on loosie sales days before Garner died."
Sigh
5 / 5 (3) Dec 26, 2014
Had he not been strangled with an illegal chokehold he would likely still be alive.

He was NOT strangled.
"So what was Pantaleo doing? He was applying a submission hold, which is not barred by the NYPD

All the reports I read says it is illegal. I looked up the NYPD web site, and found no information. What is your source?

and is designed to deprive the brain of oxygen by stopping blood flow through the arteries. So say the experts on submission holds.

I learned that same hold in Judo. Does that make me and the others in the club experts? We always considered it strangling if someone cut off blood supply to the brain. Difference is, we stopped if someone tapped out or said he can't breathe.

It appears that the so-called chokehold was instrumental in triggering Garner's pre-existing health problems and causing his death

Do you think that risk might be a good reason to outlaw that technique?
Sigh
5 / 5 (2) Dec 26, 2014
Of course the other side of the issue is how far will the govt go to stop the sale of un-taxed cigarettes?

Yes, that was another surprise about your attitude. Didn't you complain that taxes were theft, on the grounds that you didn't sign a contract, yet if you don't pay, men with guns come to take your stuff under threat of violence? Yet you defend not merely the threat but the lethal application of violence to enforce tax laws. What makes this case so different?
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Dec 26, 2014
Do you think that risk might be a good reason to outlaw that technique?

What do you propose be done to subdue someone resisting arrest?
Tasers are risky.
When a guy that big resists arrest, what are the police supposed to do?

I think the larger issue being ignored is why was he arrested in the first place?
If you buy a carton of cigarettes, paying the govt taxes, and you stand outside selling individual cigarettes to people who don't want to buy a pack, of course at a profit, why is that a crime? The cigs are YOUR property. YOU paid for the product and paid the tax. Why can't you sell them?

I don't believe he should have been arrested in the first place, but the police did their job with no intent of killing and without racial bias.
Racist leaders, Obama, Holder, DeBlasio escalated racial bias and bear responsibility for the assassination of two NYPD cops.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (2) Dec 26, 2014
Yet you defend not merely the threat but the lethal application of violence to enforce tax laws. What makes this case so different?


Enforcing bad laws is the first step in having those laws repealed.

Selective i enforcement of laws weaken all laws and promotes corruption as we see how Obama gnores immigration law enforcement and attacks others, like Joe Arpaio for trying to enforce immigration laws.
Wolf358
not rated yet Dec 26, 2014
What I'm taking from this is that some police simply cannot be trusted unless they know someone is watching them... otherwise they are as violent and vindictive as they want to be, regardless of the law. Body cameras? Hell yes. Switched on and off with a key at the beginning and end of shift. And while we're at it, let's put them on politicians.
ryggesogn2
4 / 5 (1) Dec 26, 2014
This is why Garner was arrested:

http://www.nyc.go...-faq.pdf

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.