Body Cam proves cop was innocent

[runzwithsizorz]

Police, and Police departments can also withhold/seize, evidence, video, and audio for months, ( till things cool down and people forget ), or indifinitely. As in this case; MARCH 16
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWQ5lu8jSMc#t=283

AND NOW SEPT. 29 SIX MONTHS LATER! what the cop said he was gonna do to the victim 2 hours prior.
http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S3576368.shtml?cat=500#.VCwz0xb8b9Y

I can name dozens of cases where we will never know the outcome. Like the cop that was convicted of murder, oops I meant involuntary manslaughter, and whose wife, working in the department made certain records disappear, did less than a year, and is now a cop elsewhere.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Well, they are unions and unions need to argue about something. I know that the union for NYPD has a long history of arguing against things just to create tension for when it comes to discussing the contracts. In many cases, the union membership has no direct say in what the union leadership is doing.

I would say the biggest issue that cops have with cameras is the privacy issue with regard to them being recorded during private situations. The ACLU, while supporting body cams, has even rasised the question regarding privacy invasion to citizens as well as the police officers.

The NYPD is not exactly known for their excellent Policing tactics.....lolol

 

[bradley]

Apparently his head phones were not too loud as he turned around after being told to do so. He then responded to the command to take his hands out of his pants with, "No fool". Furthermore, he was not shot because of bad intelligence, he was shot for acting in a way as to make the officer believe he was pulling out a gun.

You are right that the kid was having trouble, and its sad that he did not get the help that might have saved him, but the officer was fully justified.

The facts or this case were scant and police tight-lipped until recently. Again, the DA conveniently only released a small portion of the actual audio, as if it doesn't necessarily support their ruling. I'm still not convinced the shooting was completely "justified." Let us hear the complete audio.

Dillon, his brother and cousin, were profiled by a 911 caller based on their clothing and claims of these "gangbangers" waving a gun, an allegation that went unsubstantiated. So yeah, this would be bad intelligence.

When Officer Cruz drove up, he saw Dillon animatedly talking to friends stopped at a red light. He was already conditioned to see such innocuous arm waving motions as menacing or threatening. At that point, Officer Cruz allowed the three to go inside the 7-Eleven and waited for their exit while calling for backup, as he believed these to be armed men.

Police are now saying that Dillon knew the inevitability of a warrant being served for a probation violation. I guess this is one reason why Dillon (when able to hear police) didn't want to acknowledge their presence. Although, belligerence shouldn't come with an immediate death sentence.

Another interesting note about these bodycams, they are data limited and only activated by the officer with *due diligence* during confrontations.

 

[smackababy]

Why are police being "tight lipped" about shit a bad thing? They never release details of an ongoing investigation... Why would that differ when it could be the cop was at fault?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Why are police being "tight lipped" about shit a bad thing? They never release details of an ongoing investigation... Why would that differ when it could be the cop was at fault?

The proper question is -- Why should that differ when the cop most likely was at fault?

 

[highland145]

The proper question is -- Why should that differ when the cop most likely was at fault?

Probably because Israel is most likely at fault, maybe?


That's about as much water as your argument holds.


No, I don't think Israel is harsh enough.

 

[runzwithsizorz]

It's true. They know it will be more of a benefit than a hindrance. It wouldn't surprise you to know the number of people that make complaints about officers to IA and it becomes a he said/she said sort of thing. To be able to easily have a video reviewed to determine what happened is a welcome thing for most cops.

- Merg

If that were true, I wouldn't be able to find hundreds of videos of cops getting all bent out of shape for being filmed. And why do so many wear ski masks?

 

[WHAMPOM]

99% of them do.

- Merg

Complaints of Police misconduct drop by 50% when cops are required to wear body cams. I see this as a simple case of cops no longer acting badly if on camera. The other 50% just don't give a shit, "we're cops, fuck the public!"

 

[The Merg]

If that were true, I wouldn't be able to find hundreds of videos of cops getting all bent out of shape for being filmed. And why do so many wear ski masks?

Because they think that what will be released will be edited or altered to display them in a bad light or not show the whole situation.

Of course, citizens would never do that though since they have no incentive to do that.

And those that wear the masks are routinely involved in undercover work so they don't want to be identified in uniform.

- Merg

 

[The Merg]

Complaints of Police misconduct drop by 50% when cops are required to wear body cams. I see this as a simple case of cops no longer acting badly if on camera. The other 50% just don't give a shit, "we're cops, fuck the public!"

Or people realize they are being recorded by the police and realize that it is not worth filing a complaint that is bogus.

- Merg

 

[mizzou]

Complaints of Police misconduct drop by 50% when cops are required to wear body cams. I see this as a simple case of cops no longer acting badly if on camera. The other 50% just don't give a shit, "we're cops, fuck the public!"

Keep in mind with those statistics it's not just "Cops don't violate rights because they have cameras" its a 2 way street.

The huge portion of complaints don't make it through because after the PUBLIC lies and reports conduct, they waffle and reverse their complaint after they find out all their bullshit was on camera.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Probably because Israel is most likely at fault, maybe?


That's about as much water as your argument holds.


No, I don't think Israel is harsh enough.

The proper question is -- Why should that differ when the cop most likely was at fault?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Keep in mind with those statistics it's not just "Cops don't violate rights because they have cameras" its a 2 way street.

The huge portion of complaints don't make it through because after the PUBLIC lies and reports conduct, they waffle and reverse their complaint after they find out all their bullshit was on camera.

actually your living in a dream world......the truth is that Cops who make contact with the public and show some manners and respect get manners and respect in return!!

That's the huge portion -- Cops know they can`t be all bad ass when on camera...

 

[Rakehellion]

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=31772096&ni...e-police-shooting&fm=home_page&s_cid=topstory

Not only do body cams protect victims, but I am sure it will save tax payers money by not having a trial and a lengthy investigation and chance of being sued.

Even if it were a cold-blooded murder, the cop would have never been punished.

 

[Jerem]

Merg, these guys have provided links supporting their claims and can come up plenty more showing the police don't want to be filmed. All you have done is make unsubstantiated claims with unsupportable numbers (99%). That BS about the NY police union not doing what the members want because they just like to argue is pretty laughable. You have anything to support your claims?

 

[The Merg]

Merg, these guys have provided links supporting their claims and can come up plenty more showing the police don't want to be filmed. All you have done is make unsubstantiated claims with unsupportable numbers (99%). That BS about the NY police union not doing what the members want because they just like to argue is pretty laughable. You have anything to support your claims?

The problem is that you will always be able to find things supporting a negative as that is what will make news. Is the 99% an exaggeration? Probably, but from personal knowledge of cops, I have found extremely few that object to body cams and in just about all instances, the issue was due to privacy concerns and not because they were being recorded or had something to hide. With regard to the NYPD Union, it has been long known that the union will raise every issue that they can in order to get a better bargaining chip when it comes to contract negotiations.

- Merg

 

[The Merg]

actually your living in a dream world......the truth is that Cops who make contact with the public and show some manners and respect get manners and respect in return!!



That's the huge portion -- Cops know they can`t be all bad ass when on camera...

That's absolutely not true. Cops deal with people that have committed crimes all the time and those people are cognizant that if a cop is having contact with them that they might go to jail. Do you really think that just because the cop is being nice, that person is going to be pleasant and respectful in return?

And cops are trained to act as if they are always being recorded even if they don't have cameras themselves. I would think that you could say that the people who cops come in contact with are more likely to act different as they realize and know that their actions in front of a cop are being recorded.

- Merg

 

[Jerem]

You didn't need to write all that. You could have just said 'I have nothing but unsupported claims' and saved yourself some time.

 

[The Merg]

You didn't need to write all that. You could have just said 'I have nothing but unsupported claims' and saved yourself some time.

http://www.nj.com/mercer/index.ssf/..._useful_but_requires_guidance_unions_say.html

- Merg

 

[The Merg]

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2024621134_bodycamerasxml.html

- Merg

 

[The Merg]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...9ee504-2549-11e3-b75d-5b7f66349852_story.html

- Merg

 

[Jerem]

That's all I was asking. Thank you.

 

[The Merg]

That's all I was asking. Thank you.

It's early and it was a long night.

- Merg

 

[The Merg]

The facts or this case were scant and police tight-lipped until recently. Again, the DA conveniently only released a small portion of the actual audio, as if it doesn't necessarily support their ruling. I'm still not convinced the shooting was completely "justified." Let us hear the complete audio.

Watching (and listening) to the video, I'm not sure that there is any audio prior to the audio starting. Right before the audio starts up, there's a tone sound as if to indicate the audio was starting.

I do know that many recording systems (especially in-car video) record a constant buffer of video for a set amount of time (30-60 seconds). When a recording is initiated, the recording will contain that buffer (so the recording actually starts 30-60 seconds before the initiated time), but there is no audio for the buffered time, thus you have a video that has no audio for 30-60 seconds.

Looking at this video, it appears that there is about 42 seconds from the start of the video to the audio comes on, although we don't know if there was any video prior to the start that we see. Also, if this system does use a buffered start, that means that when the audio starts is when the officer actually told the system to start recording, which could make some sense as the officer might have realized this was an escalating confrontation.

- Merg

 

[MtnMan]

It is only the cops that shouldn't be cops in the first place are the ones that oppose body cameras.

Face it, there is a small percentage of cops that love to handout their street justice by overuse of OC spray and tasers. Locally 3 cops tasered an elderly woman walking her dog because they said they couldn't control her otherwise. Guess she is lucky they didn't shoot her dog also.