It'll be a cold day in hell when this happens in Good Ole Boy Fairfax County
Police in Prince William prepare
to use body cameras
By Victoria St. Martin July
19
If all goes according to plan, by
next summer, Prince William County police officers will be wearing not only
uniforms and bulletproof vests, but also body cameras.
Before officers don devices that
could record each traffic stop or arrest, the department teamed with Fairfax
County police to see exactly what’s out there.
“This is new technology. It’s
evolving,” said Lt. Javid Elahi, the Prince William County Police Department’s
information technology manager. “There’s a lot of pieces that go to this — it’s
not just as simple as buying a camera and turning it on. You need to have
policy, you need to have infrastructure, you need to have people to manage it.”
To put to rest questions such as
how body cameras weigh and feel, the two departments hosted an expo in
Chantilly last week with about 35 vendors. Organizers said hundreds of police
departments from near and far registered, including those in the District and
Montgomery County.
Sgt. Kim Chinn, a Prince William
police spokeswoman, said the two-day expo was all about research.
“It’s new technology that we’re
all going to have to get comfortable with, and I think there’s anxiety as well
as the feeling that we may need this to protect ourselves, so there will be
quite a learning curve,” Chinn said.
“It’s not like you go out and
just buy a new car,” she added. “There’s so much that goes with it — all the
backup, the storage, the retrieval, the managing, the randomly pulling tapes,
pulling them for court, things like that. It’s a huge project.”
And it’s a project Prince William
police said they are ready to tackle.
In April, county officials
approved a $3 million plan to equip 500 of the department’s officers with the
technology.
“My preference for body cameras
is they go more places and see more interactions,” Police Chief Stephan Hudson
said after the action.
Criminologists, police
accountability advocates and officers say body cameras are beneficial because
they provide a video record of interactions with the public. After last
summer’s shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo., police
departments across the nation began examining their camera policies.
Prince William plans to kick off
a pilot program with 35 cameras by next year, said Tom Pulaski, who oversees
the department’s technical services division.
At the expo, Capt. Todd Jones of
the Virginia Beach police examined the types of body cameras.
“We want to research thoroughly
and make as educated a guess as we can,” said Jones, who added that his
department has been examining the technology for three years. “Every time we
answer one question, we uncover three or four or 10 more.”
Tod Burke, a criminal justice
professor at Radford University and a former police officer in Ocean City and
Howard County in Maryland, said that when it comes to the issue of body
cameras, throwing money at the problem won’t solve it.
“That’s like throwing a Band-Aid
on a hemorrhage,” he said. “You have to have policies in place with proper law
enforcement training and, certainly, community education.”
Burke said policies should
address sensitive situations, such as a domestic dispute — would the camera be
on or off? Also, he noted, the technology raises concerns about witnesses and
informants, and officer safety issues.
“You want to be able, as a police
officer, to react to a situation,” Burke said. “You don’t want [them] to have
to worry about, ‘Am I being recorded? Is something that I’m reporting going to
be used against me?’ That type of thing. You don’t want them to hesitate.”
Burke said that cameras can’t
prevent situations but that they can aid authorities, adding that early
statistics show that departments with officers who wear body cameras have fewer
incidents of police and citizen misconduct. And the video could help bolster
eyewitness identification, said Burke, who usually conducts a class exercise
that he says highlights the problems that arise when relying on witnesses
alone.
He said he tells his class, “ ‘Okay, you’re a
police officer, you’re giving a broadcast — be on the lookout for a white,
black, Hispanic, transgender person, who is anywhere between 5-foot-5,
6-foot-3, 135 to 200 pounds,’ and they start laughing,” he said. “It’s not that
[witnesses are] lying; this is really what they thought they saw.”
Burke said when it came to
witnesses and Ferguson, there was a question of whether Brown had his hands up
just before the shooting.
“Perception really does make a
difference,” Burke said. He pointed to an investigation that later concluded
that Brown’s hands probably were not raised. “The advantage of having a body
camera at that time, that would have been answered.”
Its called blaming the victim.................
Nine minutes of obfuscation
By Editorial Board July 19
FOR NINE FULL MINUTES of a video
released last week, Fairfax County Police Chief Edwin C. Roessler Jr. stared
into a camera and delivered a bland recap of the in-custody death of Natasha
McKenna, the 37-year-old woman who died Feb. 8 after sheriff’s deputies at the
county jail shot her four times with a Taser stun gun. And for nine full
minutes, Mr. Roessler, who announced the police investigation is finished,
managed to reveal absolutely nothing.
Mr. Roessler did so while at the
same time impugning Ms. McKenna, who was mentally ill, as a “combative” woman
who refused commands and resisted removal from her cell. As if her death were
her own fault.
Mr. Roessler was content to
characterize her conduct but had virtually nothing to say about the conduct of
the six jail guards who struggled with her. He mentioned neither the Taser
company’s own warnings that repeated jolts may cause death; nor that Ms.
McKenna was shot after she had been handcuffed; nor that the guards — kitted
out like a SWAT team to subdue a 130-pound woman — appeared to have no training
with de-escalation, which experts recommend in the event of confrontations with
mentally ill people.
Mr. Roessler acknowledged that a
video, shot by jail personnel, exists of the struggle between the guards and
Ms. McKenna. But he offered no rationale for why the police have not released
it. (They say it is “evidence,” as if that is an explanation; it isn’t.)
Mr. Roessler divulged neither the
names nor the ranks nor the race(s) of the deputies who subdued Ms. McKenna,
who was black. Nor did he offer any explanation of why that information — which
has been released in other deaths at the hands of law enforcement officers
around the country — is being kept secret in Fairfax.
Mr. Roessler’s presentation, a
rehash of information reported by this newspaper and other news outlets months
ago, was little more than an exercise in obfuscation. Why couldn’t six guards
in an elite unit subdue a petite woman without shooting her repeatedly with a
stun gun?
Mr. Roessler didn’t say. What was
the sequence of events that led to Ms. McKenna becoming so agitated that a
struggle broke out in her cell?
Mr. Roessler didn’t say.
The history of the McKenna case
is one of official stonewalling accompanied by empty paeans to openness. At
first, Sheriff Stacey A. Kincaid, whose office runs the jail, vowed
transparency — after which she released no significant information. Then, Mr.
Roessler said the police were committed to candor — and, at the conclusion of
the police investigation, delivered nothing of the kind.
Now the case has been turned over
to the chief prosecutor in Fairfax, Commonwealth’s Attorney Raymond F. Morrogh,
whose office has never charged a police officer, let alone a jail guard, in the
death of a civilian. Whether or not
Mr. Morrogh decides to bring
criminal charges, it is critically important that he deliver a much fuller
accounting to the public of the circumstances leading to Ms. McKenna’s death —
including release of the video — than the sheriff and police have managed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)