You're damn right they should be on camera

McLean group supports countywide police-body-cam effort

by BRIAN TROMPETER, Sun Gazette Newspapers

Fairfax County officials should move ahead with implementing a body-worn-camera program for the county’s police force, according to a resolution passed Sept. 4 by the McLean Citizens Association’s board of directors.

 “Body-worn cameras are a win for all of us, members of our community, the police and the criminal-justice system,” said MCA president Dale Stein.  “What they record can be reliable evidence for investigations and prosecutions, a deterrent against unjustified complaints, and pluses for transparency  and accountability.”

As of last year, more than 80 percent of large U.S. police forces were using such cameras or planning to do so, the resolution noted.

If implemented countywide, the Fairfax County Police Department’s camera program would cost an estimated $30 million over five years.

County police conducted a pilot program at the department’s Mason, Mount Vernon and Reston district stations between March and August 2018, with half of the officers at each station being assigned cameras and half not.

A report on the pilot program, released in July this year, found county residents overwhelmingly supported widespread adoption of the camera program. Police agreed the program would improve evidence-gathering efforts, increase departmental transparency and help settle complaints against officers.

MCA’s resolution asks the county to begin implementing the body-worn-camera program as soon as possible this fiscal year. MCA board members noted they would not have supported the program if it would have competed budgetarily with officers’ salaries.

So, like, let me get this straight...ha! I said get straight, imagine? so like when that like noise happens from this, its someone calling me? Wow. what will they think of next.

Fairfax County Police drunk driving seminar planned for October "How to drink and drive safely"

oh God help us, not ANOTHER made up award....I mean...jesus....enough already

Gay marriage now legal in Virginia

Fairfax County Police unions sues after members forced to finish elementary school education

".... this here's a dyke attractor, why do you ask?"

Danny Chun

Why is this not a surprise?

Fairfax County Juvenile Detention Officer Accused of Sexually Assaulting Minor: Police

A juvenile detention officer in Fairfax County, Virginia, was charged with raping and having sexual contact with a minor, authorities say.

Clifton Townsend Jr., 60, was arrested Monday on four felony sex offenses, the Loudoun County Sheriff's Office said.

The victim was not someone Townsend knew through his job as a detention officer, the sheriff's office said.

Investigators were told about the alleged crimes on Saturday.

Townsend, of Leesburg, was charged with rape, carnal knowledge of a child and two counts of sodomy.

He is being held at the Loudoun County Adult Detention Center on no bond.

...I...I....just don't know what to say....look at this guy. Look at his hair. He's got a blockhead, and I don't mean that as speculation...I mean, look at it

And another one bites the dust

Daniel Pantaleo—the police officer involved in the death of Eric Garner, who was killed five years ago on Staten Island during an interaction with police—was fired from the New York City Police Department by Commissioner James O’Neill on Monday.

A magistrate said police could force a man to unlock his phone. Is that legal?

It isn’t completely a question of the legality it is a question of the integrity of the Fairfax County Police who record is appalling. In the past decade, the department has murdered unarmed citizens and lied about and ruined the lives of several innocent people they have investigated.   

Bear in mind, a magistrate is not necessarily an attorney at law and the cop knew that when she asked permission to break into the man’s phone.

Think she did the right thing? Well then, how about if I SUSPECT you of a crime and break into your locked home to prove it?

  

A magistrate said police could force a man to unlock his phone. Is that legal?

By Justin Jouvenal

When Fairfax County police arrested a man last month in connection with the brutal sexual assault in May of a 15-year-old with developmental delays, they seized a piece of evidence that might hold crucial evidence of the crime: his iPhone.

The phone’s GPS might have placed Kevin Caldwell at the scene, contained texts between him and his alleged accomplice or even video of an incident, but authorities quickly realized they could not access any of it.

The phone required Caldwell’s fingerprint to unlock it.

A detective resorted to a novel and controversial approach: She went to a magistrate and got an order to have Caldwell provide his fingerprints to gain access, but police said they ultimately decided not to follow through with the thumbprint.

In an age of increasing encryption, law enforcement officials say compelling a person to cooperate is sometimes the only way to retrieve make-or-break evidence. They have asked magistrates and judges to order suspects to give up their fingerprints to unlock phones, as well as face scans and passwords.

The trend has touched off heated legal battles in some state and federal courts over the constitutionality of such searches, resulting in a welter of legal opinions. Defendants often argue that such searches violate their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

“These are newer technologies for securing devices, but they’ve been around for several years now,” said Andrew Crocker, a senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “You’ve started to see police trying to force people to unlock their phones with their fingerprints or faces and courts having to deal with that.”

Fairfax police said the incident involving the teenage girl occurred May 16. The girl told detectives that she went to a family event at the Mount Vernon Country Club, where she got into a disagreement with her brother, according to a search warrant filed in Fairfax County.

The teen went out to get some air and ended up walking into the Wingstop restaurant on Cooper Road, according to the search warrant, where she asked Caldwell for a ride, saying she was lost. He declined, the search warrant states.

Caldwell and a second man, Andrew Collins, who was an employee at the restaurant, followed the teen into the bathroom and blocked the door, she told detectives, according to allegations in the warrant. The girl was taken to another location she described as “sticky,” where both men allegedly assaulted her, according to the search warrant.

After an investigation, Caldwell, 21, and Collins, 22, were arrested in July. Caldwell was charged with forcible sodomy, and Collins was charged with animate object penetration. Neither has a fixed address, and they have yet to enter pleas. Caldwell’s attorney declined to comment, and it could not be determined whether Collins had an attorney.

Fairfax police Detective Alyson Russo applied for a search warrant for Caldwell’s fingerprints to unlock the phone in late July, citing a 2014 Virginia Beach Circuit Court ruling that touches on many of the crucial legal arguments surrounding such searches.

In that case, police wanted the state to force a man charged with assault to give up his passcode or a fingerprint to unlock a phone they suspected contained video evidence of the assault. The defendant objected, saying it would violate his Fifth Amendment protections against providing incriminating testimony against himself.

Crocker said the courts generally have held that the Fifth Amendment bars law enforcement from forcing people to provide testimony that would reveal the contents of their minds.

The judge ruled that the state could compel the man to produce a fingerprint but not a passcode.

“The fingerprint, like a key . . . does not require the witness to divulge anything through his mental processes,” the judge wrote in his opinion. “Unlike the production of physical characteristic evidence, such as a fingerprint, the production of a password forces a ‘defendant’ to disclose the ‘contents of his own mind.’ ”

Other courts have decided differently. Some have compelled defendants to reveal passcodes, even jailing people who have refused. Courts in California, Illinois and Idaho have found that compelling the production of fingerprints is unconstitutional under the Fifth Amendment, although most of those decisions have been reversed.

The Fairfax public defender’s office, which is representing Caldwell, objected to the police’s quest for his fingerprints. “It is a violation of the 5th Amendment to compel someone’s fingerprint,” Dawn Butorac, a public defender, said in an email.

But Fairfax police Capt. Eli Cory said the searches were lawful. He said that such searches are rare and that the department did not maintain statistics on how often they happen. Because the case is pending, he declined to say whether police ever gained access to Caldwell’s phone through means other than the fingerprint.

“We face encryption all the time in some shape or form,” Cory said. “It’s something we have to overcome in the context of law.”

In major rulings in recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has strengthened privacy protections around police searches of cellphones, citing the wealth of information they contain. Last year, the high court ruled that police generally need to obtain a warrant to get cellphone location data; and in 2014, the Supreme Court ruled that authorities must obtain a search warrant to look through the contents of a cellphone.

Riana Pfefferkorn, associate director of surveillance and cybersecurity at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, said the issue of compelling defendants to give up access to their phones may be an issue the Supreme Court ultimately takes up, too.

“The constitutional questions are still developing,” Pfeffer

No surprises here

Another good point

Free legal advice

Good point

We don't have a crime problem, we have a cop problem.

For those of you who argue that ALL cops are not mentally challenged, read these two cases.....

  

Charges Dropped for 119 People After Cop Caught on Video Planting Meth on Innocent Grandma

Jackson County, FL — Dozens of innocent people who were rotting in jail have been freed and their charges erased after the corrupt cop who put them there was caught on his own body camera planting meth on an innocent mother. Jackson County Sheriff’s Deputy Zachary Wester has since been fired and a slew of lawsuits are now rolling in.

Wester’s fall from law enforcement grace and the 119 people who were exonerated are due largely in part to the diligence of a single person, assistant state attorney at the 14th Judicial Circuit, Christina Pumphrey.

Pumphrey’s job as assistant state attorney included reviewing evidence before moving forward with charges against individuals. When she began reviewing cases, she found something very peculiar.

“This is an exaggeration, but it felt like his (Wester’s) name was on half the cases,” Pumphrey told The Appeal.“It was seriously disproportionate.”

When Pumphrey began watching the body camera footage from Wester’s arrests, she found something even more disturbing. Many times, Wester was seen conducting illegal searches. Also, his written affidavits did not match what she watched in the videos. But that wasn’t the most telling aspect of all these videos.

While it is no question that folks will claim that drugs found on them or in their possession “aren’t their’s” and “they don’t know how that got there,” nearly all of Wester’s cases had this. The videos showed that people were utterly shocked when Wester claimed to have found drugs in their vehicles. While a single person may have been lying, when everyone reacts the exact same way, something is up.

Although she reviewed multiple videos, Pumphrey never saw the actual act of Wester planting drugs or otherwise hiding them. However, all that changed when Wester pulled over Teresa Odom in February of 2018.

In that video, Wester pulls Odom over, claiming her tail lights aren’t working. However, it would later be revealed that her tail lights were, in fact, working fine and Wester had targeted her to frame her.

In the video, Wester is extremely nice to the woman, complimenting her, joking around, and making small talk. But in the back of his mind, he knew the entire time that he was going to plant meth on her and have her thrown in a cage—an insidious move indeed.

After threatening to have a K-9 come search her car, Wester tells Odom that she can avoid the K-9 if she just lets him search her truck himself—a huge mistake.

An LAPD officer accidentally filmed himself putting cocaine in a suspect’s wallet

It’s reportedly the first LAPD body camera video that the media and public have seen.

By German Lopez

Police officers can’t seem to stop filming themselves potentially planting evidence.

The latest incident comes from Los Angeles, where an officer with the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) accidentally filmed himself placing cocaine in a suspect’s wallet, according to a new report by CBS Los Angeles.

The body camera video shows police picking up Ronald Shields, who was charged with felony hit-and-run, having a gun in the trunk of his car, and cocaine possession in April. The police report claimed cops had found the cocaine in Shields’s left pocket.

The footage tells a different story. LAPD officer Gaxiola, as CBS Los Angeles identified him, picks up Shields’s wallet from the street and shows it to another officer who then points to Shields. Gaxiola then puts the wallet back down, picks up a small bag of white powder from the street (which later tested positive for cocaine), picks up the wallet, and puts the bag in the wallet.

The audio turns on, signaling that the officer had manually activated his camera to record. Then, the officer shows himself supposedly finding the wallet and the drugs inside of it, and repeatedly telling other officers about it. “Just to let you know, sir, inside his wallet, he has a little bag of narco,” Gaxiola said.

So what happened? The simple explanation is that the officer apparently did not know that when he switches on his body camera, it automatically records and saves the past 30 seconds, although without audio.

Shields’s lawyer claims that the officers outright planted the drugs to frame his client.

It’s possible, though, that the cops tried to reenact the act of finding the cocaine for the cameras. But that is still very deceptive — and when so clearly caught on video, it makes it hard to trust the police officers with just about everything else they’re doing. It makes a potentially credible case lose all credibility.

The LAPD is investigating the incident. “The LAPD takes all allegations of misconduct seriously and, as in all cases, will conduct a thorough investigation,” it said in a statement.

This isn’t the first time something like this has happened. Previously, Baltimore police officers were caught doing this — twice. That led the local prosecutor to drop dozens of cases involving the officers.

According to CBS Los Angeles, this is the first time that the media has seen LAPD body camera footage since the force launched its program two years ago. It’s one hell of a debut.

Unable to find a human being who wanted to be a Fairfax County Cop, the county got desperate

Know why this is fake? A real cop would have gunned down that dog at the first bark

Even the aliens don't like you

A string of shootings in the area that left six injured were gang-related....you made that up

“The dust-up followed a contentious meeting in the Gum Springs neighborhood on July 9, during which Fairfax County Police Chief Edwin C. Roessler Jr. said a string of shootings in the area that left six injured were gang-related. Roessler declined to name the gang involved, citing a police department policy of not giving gangs publicity. Police have said the men involved in one shooting are black.

At the meeting, Annan and other African Americans sharply questioned the idea that gangs were involved in the shootings, saying police across the country had mislabeled violence in minority communities as related to gangs. Annan also said racial profiling by police was a problem in the county and criticized police for connecting the violence to a local recording studio that caters to hip-hop artists. “We don’t need a surge of police,” Annan said. “We need a surge of resources.”

Cop's wife

FCPD is hiring

FCPD is hiring

Criminals

Cops Can Kill Non-Threatening People As Long As They Say They Were Scared

The Supreme Court has now reversed the 9th Circuit court’s decision, and in its opinion on the case, the court argued that there should not be a debate over whether Hughes’ Fourth Amendment rights were violated, because Kisela should automatically be afforded “qualified immunity” as a police officer.

“The Court need not, and does not, decide whether Kisela violated the Fourth Amendment when he used deadly force against Hughes. For even assuming a Fourth Amendment violation occurred—a proposition that is not at all evident—on these facts Kisela was at least entitled to qualified immunity. ‘Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Because the focus is on whether the officer had fair notice that her conduct was unlawful, reasonableness is judged against the backdrop of the law at the time of the conduct.’”

As SCOTUS Blog noted, even if the Supreme Court judges believed that Kisela was guilty of violating Hughes’ Fourth Amendment rights, “Kisela still could not be sued because any rights that he might have violated were not clearly established—a key factor in whether government officials enjoy immunity from lawsuits.”

Even though Chadwick testified that she did not feel threatened by Hughes or the knife in her hand at the time of the shooting, the Supreme Court has chosen to side with the police officer who chose to open fire within seconds, before taking the time to accurately assess the situation.

By supporting Kisela’s actions, the Supreme Court has essentially given all police officers a blank check, which says that if they see a person standing in the distance on her property, and she appears to be holding a weapon in her hand, the officer has the right to open fire and shoot her multiple times—as long as the officer maintains that he feared for his safety, even if he cannot prove that the person he targeted was threatening him.

This is why those low lifes need to have body cameras on them and required to be turned on with ANY interaction.

Ex-Deputy Arrested On 52 Counts After Allegedly Planting Meth On Innocent People

Former Jackson County Sheriff's Deputy Zachary Wester faces up to 30 years in prison if convicted.

Crawfordville, FL – A former Jackson County Sheriff’s Office (JCSO) deputy has been arrested on multiple counts for allegedly planting methamphetamine on random, innocent motorists while he was working as a law enforcement officer.

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) began investigating 26-year-old Jackson County Sheriff’s Deputy Zachary Wester in August of 2018 at the request of his department, the DFLE said in a press release.

The JCSO requested the probe after a prosecutor noticed that the deputy’s reports were often inconsistent with what appeared on his bodycam – if he turned the recording device on at all, according to The Washington Post.

If his bodycam was activated, it was generally only turned on after he “found” methamphetamine inside of a suspect’s vehicle.

Wester, who comes from a prominent law enforcement family, began working as a deputy in May of 2016, the Tallahassee Democrat reported.

Over the course of the next two years, the rookie deputy “routinely pulled over citizens for alleged minor traffic infractions, planted drugs inside their vehicles and arrested them on fabricated drug charges,” the FDLE said.

“Wester circumvented JCSO’s body camera policy and tailored his recordings to conceal his criminal activity,” investigators noted.

He generally told the unsuspecting vehicle occupants that he smelled marijuana, which then led to a search of the vehicle, The Washington Post reported.

But instead of “finding” marijuana, he would come out of the vehicles with meth.

“A patrol officer just does not get lucky time and time again under the same circumstances without engaging in a pattern and practice of violating persons’ constitutional rights and/or framing people,” one federal lawsuit filed against the now-former deputy declared, according to the Tallahassee Democrat.

Some of the people Wester targeted were guilty of other offenses, such as outstanding warrants or traffic infractions, but many had done nothing wrong, The Washington Post reported.

One man was sentenced to a year in a residential rehabilitation center due to the deputy planting drugs in his car, and another man lost custody of his daughter.

“He’s ruined lives,” a family member of one of the people Wester arrested told the Tallahassee Democrat. “People are losing their lives, their freedom, their children, their marriages — all because of this one man. It’s not just innocent men. It’s innocent children. It goes a lot deeper than everyone realizes.”

At least 119 criminal cases that Wester either initiated or was heavily tied to have been dropped since the probe began, the Tallahassee Democrat reported.

Sentences for at least eight inmates were vacated, resulting in at least five of the inmates being immediately released from prison, WFAA reported.

Over a dozen people have filed notices of their intent to file lawsuits against the JCSO for their various arrests, according to the Tallahassee Democrat.

“There is no question that Wester’s crimes were deliberate and that his actions put innocent people in jail,” said FDLE Pensacola Assistant Special Agent in Charge Chris Williams said in the FDLE press release.

Wester was fired by the JCSO on Sep. 10, 2018, the Tallahassee Democrat reported.

On July 10, he was arrested on 52 counts of false imprisonment, racketeering, fabricating evidence, official misconduct, possession of controlled substances, possession of drug paraphernalia, and perjury, according to The Washington Post.

Wester is being held without bond at the Wakulla County Jail, the FDLE said.

“I would like to thank the citizens of Jackson County for their patience during the investigation and my staff for continuing to serve our citizens during this difficult time,” Jackson County Sheriff Lou Roberts said in the press release. “I also appreciate FDLE and the State Attorney’s Office for their commitment to this investigation.”

State Attorney William “Bill” Eddins said that investigators have been unable to determine why Wester carried out the crimes he’s been accused of, The Washington Post reported.

“You’re never certain of what lies in the heart of man,” Eddins said.

The prosecutor noted that Wester faces up to 30 years in prison, and said he has no intention of offering him a plea bargain.

Don't EVER trust them...keep the cameras

"Hit this button here to turn it off and later on blame it on a car door making your gun go off" 

Fairfax County Board of Supervisors considering police body cameras

by: Marcus Dash

FAIRFAX, Va. (WDVM)– Fairfax County is a step closer to adding body cameras to the uniforms of all Fairfax County Police officers.

The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors met Tuesday night to discuss the findings of a year-long pilot program of Fairfax County Officers wearing body cameras. The study took place from March to September of 2018. The purpose was to see what effect the body cameras have on police activity and perceptions of police legitimacy in the community. Lee District Supervisor, Jeff McKay, says the report shows a great amount of confidence we have in our officers and the body-worn cameras need to be permanent.

“It is beneficial to people who are on either side of the equation. It’s beneficial to our officers and their safety, it’s beneficial for people who are being questioned or are approached by police officers. To me it’s an investment in a fair justice system,” said Lee District Supervisor Jeff McKay.

The county will draft up a plan to show the full board of supervisors in September.

Fairfax Co. leaders voice support for police body camera program

Michelle Basch | @MBaschWTOP

Fairfax County, Virginia, police tested body-worn cameras in 2018, and several county leaders are expressing support for plans to bring them back permanently.

It’s estimated that a program to outfit some 1,200 officers with cameras would cost almost $30 million over the first five years.

The price tag includes hiring 34 additional people to help handle the video: 23 in the Commonwealth’s Attorney’s office, six in information technology, and five in the police department.

Board of Supervisors Chairman Sharon Bulova thinks the cameras are needed. “I think that we should move forward,” she said Tuesday at a meeting of the Public Safety Committee.

Lee District Supervisor Jeff McKay agreed, adding, “I don’t think this board is going to reject this. I would hope this board would accept the body-worn camera program. I think it’s important.”

Springfield District Supervisor Pat Herrity said that he would love to see police get the body-worn cameras because they help determine facts, but he is concerned about the expense.

“It’s pretty cost prohibitive at this stage, in my opinion,” Herrity said.

Also concerned about the price is Mason District Supervisor Penny Gross. “On the one hand it sounds like a really good idea, but on the other hand the cost factor is so huge; and there are so many unknowns, so I’m not quite there yet,” she said.

The goal is to come up with a plan to put before the full board in September.

A study by American University researchers determined that a body-worn camera pilot program conducted by Fairfax County police from March 3 to Sept. 1, 2018 went well.

During the test, half of the officers at the Mason, Mount Vernon and Reston police stations were randomly assigned to wear body-worn cameras, while the other half went about their jobs without the cameras. A total of 191 cameras were deployed.

Among the study’s findings:

— There was no indication that the cameras changed the way officers did their jobs, but the use of the cameras led to a slight decrease in the average number of complaints by members of the community against officers who wore them compared to those who did not.

— 603 people who had interacted with a police officer (some wearing cameras, others not) during the testing phase took part in a phone interview afterward. Asked to agree or disagree with a series of statements, 83% agreed that they were satisfied with how they were treated by the officer they encountered. Older people were more likely to agree than younger, and the percentages of Caucasian and Asian people who agreed were substantially higher than the percentages of African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans.

— 92% of those surveyed agreed that body-worn cameras should be worn by all officers in the department. Whether the officer they encountered had a body-worn camera or not didn’t seem to have any meaningful impact on their answer.

Residents Support Police Body Cameras In Fairfax County: Study

A survey found residents strongly supported body cameras, but the results were mixed for participating officers.

By Emily Leayman, Patch Staff

MOUNT VERNON, VA—A study of a body camera pilot program for Fairfax County Police found strong support for officers wearing body cameras. The findings of the study conducted by an American University research team were presented to the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday. The board will vote on adopting a permanent body camera program on Sept. 24.

The pilot program ran from March 3, 2018 to Sept. 1, 2018. Officers at the Mount Vernon, Mason and Reston district stations as well as a sample of Motor Squad officers and Animal Protection officers wore 203 body cameras. The three district stations were chosen due to the diversity of the communities, various types of calls for service and incidents resulting in the use of force.

Officers were instructed to turn on body cameras during encounters with residents. Recording could not happen in courts or medical facilities, when a person gave a statement in an alleged rape or sexual assault, and when a person reported a crime and requested anonymity.

American University conducted a telephone survey of 603 residents who had an interaction with an officer during the pilot program. Of these, 92 percent want all Fairfax County officers to wear body cameras, and 83 percent either agreed or strongly agreed they were satisfied with how the officer treated them. These results varied when broken down by age group and race. On the other hand, researchers found no evidence that the presence or absence of a body camera during police encounters had a significant impact on residents' perceptions.

Police Chief Ed Roessler Jr. expressed support for the body camera program. "We already have robust accountability tools with in-car video, the Civilian Review Panel and the Police Auditor," he said in a statement. "We investigate every use of force by matter of policy. The use of body worn cameras will benefit both the community and our officers to ensure that our high level of public trust is maintained."

Two squads of officers were also surveyed before and after the pilot body camera program. Most agreed body cameras would aid in gathering evidence and help settle complaints against officers. Interestingly, one squad's perception about body cameras became more negative after the program, while the other's became slightly more positive. For instance, 56 percent of one squad disagreed that body cameras would improve community relations; that dropped to 52 percent disagreeing after the pilot program. The number of officers in the other squad disagreeing went up from 41 percent to 44 percent.

There were more mixed feelings about whether body cameras would make officers more professional and reduce proactive encounters with community members. Many of the surveyed officers believe body cameras are needed in police departments with community relations problems, corruption or other issues. But they don't believe the Fairfax County Police Department has these kinds of problems.

Several supervisors expressed support for the body camera program, although a few voiced concerns about the cost. WTOP reported that the estimated cost could be $30 million over five years.

You can see the full study results for the police body camera pilot program here.

 Like Tha

Both police and civilians support body-worn cameras, concludes study of FCPD pilot program

________________________________________

FAIRFAX COUNTY, Va. — An American University research team that studied a 2018 body-worn camera pilot project Fairfax County Police had undergone concluded that the cameras are supported by both the community and officers themselves.

The program distributed 203 body-worn cameras to officers at the Mason, Mount Vernon, and Reston districts of the FCPD, and the effects were tracked from March 3, 2018 to Sept. 1. Cameras were also given to a small sampling of Motor Squad and Animal Protection officers.

The study intended to find out if body-worn cameras impacted police activity or impacted community members' perception of police.

The research team, which presented their findings at a July 9 Board of Supervisors subcommittee meeting, reportedly surveyed officers as well as community members to track the effect the cameras had.

FCPD summed up the findings with the following statements:

There was overwhelming support among community members for the widespread adoption of body worn cameras.

The majority of community members who interacted with police officers during the pilot program reported feeling positive not only about the personal experience but also about FCPD as a whole.

There was no evidence that the presence or absence of a body worn camera during a police interaction had an impact of the community member’s satisfaction with FCPD.

There was consensus among the officers involved in the pilot that body worn cameras will increase the gathering of evidence and help settle complaints against officers.

Most officers believed that their behavior and that of community members did not change because of body worn cameras.