Body Cams ain’t going no where

Unregistered · 11-21-2017, 05:14 AM

Originally Posted by Unregistered

You two need to get it together. Reading biased reporting that omitted some parts, wow tremendo police work. You knuckleheads need to be terminated.

Terminated? You failed to grasp the essence of our original post. If a police officer cannot review the film before or during writing his or her police use of force report, from memory is highly probable the documenting officer could write a different and thus conflicting account. It doesn’t take much! That is all police antagonists need to create an adverse situation, wherein they would allege the officers lied and the conflict between the film and the officer’s report is “prima facie” evidence of falsification. The local and national news media will not hesitate to seize the moment and rush to advance the narrative. The State Attorney’s Office may even proffer criminal charges. This, chaos, all along has been your foes’ intention, portray police officers as liars and brutal thugs. Body cameras are proving otherwise; why the push for not allowing police officers the opportunity to view the filmed activity as they write their reports. Should your adversaries prevail, then “brevity [in reporting, as previously alluded, should be] the soul of wit.” N'est-ce pas?

Unregistered · 11-21-2017, 06:26 AM

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Terminated? You failed to grasp the essence of our original post. If a police officer cannot review the film before or during writing his or her police use of force report, from memory is highly probable the documenting officer could write a different and thus conflicting account. It doesn’t take much! That is all police antagonists need to create an adverse situation, wherein they would allege the officers lied and the conflict between the film and the officer’s report is “prima facie” evidence of falsification. The local and national news media will not hesitate to seize the moment and rush to advance the narrative. The State Attorney’s Office may even proffer criminal charges. This, chaos, all along has been your foes’ intention, portray police officers as liars and brutal thugs. Body cameras are proving otherwise; why the push for not allowing police officers the opportunity to view the filmed activity as they write their reports. Should your adversaries prevail, then “brevity [in reporting, as previously alluded, should be] the soul of wit.” N'est-ce pas?

Okay, you can breathe now. Next time follow the thread.

Unregistered · 11-21-2017, 04:54 PM

You have to understand first, that many here are so entrenched with azz beating and what-not. So, they will fight not to get them issued or at least not be given one. I wonder if your wearing a body cam and are called into a supervisor office or I.A. and they tell to you turn it off or remove it. Would that be allowed? For I.A. I wouldn't! Especially, when they keep turning off the recorder and make statements to piss you off, so you go off and they got you. I think just not patrol should wear them. Some investigation's unit should too. Not, plain cloths units or maybe? If they can be made small.