BlueCamerasMatter

I am proposing a crash program to get Body Cams on every officer, and Dash Cams in every vehicle, and turned on during every engagement. Additionally, if this is required of officers... then civilians to should participate.

Herewith,

It shall be the law in the State of California, that every POST certified officer on duty with a firearm in California shall be provided by his agency with a Chest Camera, Dash Camera, and other devices that provide forensically useful audio and video, and every such officer shall wear and use the camera(s) in any engagement in public where a firearm may reasonably be expected to be drawn or fired, or other deadly force used (includeing any "Code 10" lights and sirens event. The penalty for failure to engage the camera(s) will be loss of employment, and misdemeanor or felony charges similar to malfeasance in office, or reckless endangerment. This heavy requirement is rendered in the face of certain and urgent public need for accountability in policing.

This law is onerous, and includes sanctions on a variety of individual and agencies. This law addresses urgent life safety issues. It is the intent of this law that agencies and individuals be made aware of the urgency of the issues, and the need to act urgently, and budget and plan appropriately. This law is time limited, to ten years, but may be re-authorized in part or in full, or edited and amended.

This law focuses on firearms, as it is an easily measurable feature of most police agencies. Any officer able to apply deadly force by any means is similarly constrained - weapons, vehicles, and hand to hand combat techniques all meet this specification. Vehicles, like officers must be equipped with suitable "dash camera" technology. Agencies must similarly retain and make available radio logs, dispatch logs, and similar evidence, upon demand by courts, journalists, or the public.

This law does not regulate officers serving inside prisons. Cameras and microphones are suggested, herewith, but prisons include a variety of concerns not considered in this law. Inasmuch as prison staff may engage with the un-incarcerated public, in public facing roles, or during travel, this law shall apply.

This law (requiring wearing of cameras in the moment) does not apply to the courts, to officers visiting the court, or to officers serving the courts. Inasmuch as court staff may engage with the public outside of the courts, and in public facing roles, or during travel, this law shall apply.

Public agencies will increase their ownership and use of cameras (body cam, dash cam) and logging and forensic equipment by 15% per year, this law taking effect in January 2021, and measurements at end of year, i.e. 15% in January 2022.

Starting January 2022, no agency may offer or allow overtime to armed officers, unless all officers engaging in overtime have body cameras, dash cameras, fixed site cameras, or other suitable forensic tools, and suitable training, well documented.

No officer may work in any armed private role, unless he has and uses a suitable body camera, or suitable car or stationary cameras which cover the duty site. No public agency is not responsible for providing a body camera to an individual officer for use in a private activity; a public agency but may provide such equipment. Where the firearm is public property, public agencies are encouraged to provide recording equipment in order to limit public liability.

Starting in January 2023, no agency may be eligible for grants originating from any public or private agency governed by the laws of the State of California, unless they have reached a 30% usage rate for armed officer body cameras. This limitation will increase by 15% per year, enforcing the urgency of the issue of accountability through video and audio recording. This issue is a life safety issue. No other life safety concern may take precedence - life safety issues are equal for the purposes of this law. Agencies must plan and budget in order to comply with this law, without excuse.

Camera usage must not be considered a Human Relations (HR) or union-negotiable issue. It is necessary for the safety of citizens and the stability of the state that all officers adopt the use of body camera on an urgent basis.

A member of the public, in public, may not request that a camera be turned off. A member of the public, in private may request that a camera be turned off. Cameras should remain on, unless there is an urgent concern. Where an officer is present, there is an assumption that the need to document the public interaction takes precedence over most privacy concerns.

Camera footage is subject to subpeona, and to eventual public release. Camera footage will be made available to the public not later than one year after the date the footage was taken, unless actively involved in a criminal process requiring legal protection. All actions occurring in public are presumed public, not private. An officer on duty is at all times a public official. Officer PRIVACY is not a concern relevant to this law. Police agencies will make videos available to concerned citizens, journalist, and other interested parties upon request, with reasonable limits on delay, unless there is an explicit legal requirement such as an ongoing investigation, or pending officer discipline, which may reasonable engender delay. Union or HR concerns are not a valid reason for delay. Videos may be used in officer discipline proceedings, and such use is encouraged. Video will be provided to the public in a format usable by the general public; it is the responsibility of the agency to deliver video in a way that is economical for the public to review. Where there is a privacy issue, a member of the public may request that video or audio may be destroyed after ten years, and not released for public review during the ten year period. Videos of death, not involving criminality, are plainly eligible to be held private, and deleted. Audio may be held or released separately from video in such cases. Where a video is withheld, a transcript must be prepared and released to the public. The police may proactively place a "hold on sensitive video" - and defer release for an additional three months, pending notification to next of kin. Next of kin may request an additional one year hold, pending adjudication by the courts. A local court of competent jurisdiction will assess the questions "is further investigation required" and "Would this evidence be useful in a manslaughter or murder investigation." If the court determines the evidence is private, and not criminally relevant, the wishes of the next of kin will be respected with regards to deferring release, and destruction, in lieu of release.

Where possible, cameras should be "instant on" and have an ability to record for at least six hours (storage, power, heat) without additional maintenance. If a camera must "rest" or requires maintenance such as additional memory or a replacement battery, such equipment, and suitable training, will be supplied to an officer, in order to be able to cover a 12 hour working period. It shall take no longer than five minutes to replace all parts which may require replacement (Camera, Battery, Memory Card) and replacements will not be required more often than once every four hours. The camera will provide at least fifteen minutes warning of impending failure. At a single site of engagement, only one officer may enter a maintenance mode at a time (at least one camera will be available during any high profile event.) Officers will arrange to conduct maintenance early, if a long engagement seems likely. Failure to maintain equipment will be penalized with personnel action, potentially including firing, or criminal charges of mis-demeanor or felony, depending on the specific events, as previously described.

Cameras, where possible, should have "Loud Noise On" and "Bright Light On" and "Seismic" functions which can detect sirens, gunshots, rapidly changing light conditions, running and falling, and turn the camera on accordingly. For a vehicle, cameras should be on, and useful, during any lights and sirens event.

Officers and agencies failing to use cameras lose the "Prima Facia Assumption" and render themselves open to substantial liability for their failure to adhere to this urgent requirement.

An agency may elect 5% of the force to carry firearms without benefit of body cameras, in cases where under-cover activities or other urgent tactical constraints may require. This 5% will be documented internally, as law enforcement sensitive information, and made available only to the courts on suitable request or subpeona. The safety of undercover officers shall not be endangered by this law. While these records are subject to the one year limitation - it is reasonable that these records are not released, and are held until a court of competent jurisdiction orders the release of specific records. Officer SAFETY is a valid reason to DEFER release of records. Officer PRIVACY is not a valid reason to defer release of records. Determination of relevant safety concerns is left to the courts.

An agency with a mature body camera program, with over 50% density, may elect to allow 5% of its officers, deemed low risk, to wear, disabled, or carry in their vehicles, for use in emergent situations, cameras.

The agency will make allowance for purchase, maintenance, and replacement; the 15% per year requirement does not include additional units required for training, maintenance and replacement.

The capital requirements of this law are onerous. As such, this law is time limited, and will expire in 2031, unless sooner extended, amended, or re-authorized. If the law is not re-authorized by 2027, an agency may reasonably assume that the law will not be re-authorized, unless public notice is given by politicians and leadership that authorization is possible or likely. The intent of this clause is to allow agencies a reasonable 5 year budget horizon. In such a situation, the agency is required to abide by the law, until the expiration of the law.

For budget purposes, cameras and associated technology should be expected to have no more than a five year duty life. Therefore, in a ten year long execution window, agencies are expected not only to purchase original equipment, but also replacement equipment and conduct repair and maintenance, and should budget for at least 150% of their armed population, to include a replacement cycle.

Questions of budget or financing do not render this law moot; agencies authorizing the use of deadly force must be held accountable for their policy, and the actions of their officers. A police chief failing to implement this law will not be eligible for further appointment, extension, or election, until the requirements of this law are met. City or County Governments failing to provide for this law shall be eligible for additional sanction as the Governor of the State of California may find legal and suitable. The Governor may find that jurisdictions failing to comply are ineligible for state emergency support. The legislature may require testimony from individuals and organizations who are reasonably expected to comply with this law, and may censure accordingly. Sanctions against agencies after 2030 will limited, unless the law has been re-authorized.

A camera will have suitable video quality to be able to identify a still person, in a picture taken by a still camera, in broad daylight and fair weather, at fifty feet. The Camera will be able to capture an identifiable face and body, in a moving picture and from a moving camera at ten feet, when pointed at center of body mass (i.e. will capture from feet to hair.) The camera will be able to identify a person at ten feet in twilight conditions, or where a bright beam of light is shown on the face or trunk, where the camera is moving, or the person is moving. During daylight or similar conditions the video will be in color. During low light conditions video maybe in high quality black and white or similar renderings. A vehicle mounted camera will have suitable dynamic light range to be functional in the dark with lights and sirens engaged, and should be color, and high quality, even at night.

The audio of an officer speaking will be clearly audible in all conditions, and may include noise canceling technologies to improve the officer audibility. The audio and video systems may be separate systems, but both are required to be compliant with this law. The audio should capture a person shouting at 50 feet, under otherwise low noise conditions, while still having dynamic range to capture officer speech, and multi-party conversations at five feet or less.

As a separate element of the law, any civilian licensed or authorized to carry a firearm after 2025 must show that they own a body camera, as described in this law.

Professionals licensed to carry firearms in the course of their business, such as security guards, private investigators, and so on, must wear a body camera, or show reason before their licensing authority that a body camera is not necessary or appropriate.

A private individual exercising such right to carry a firearm as he chooses to exercise, is encouraged to wear a body camera; this law establishes the wear of a body camera while armed as a legal norm. Individual liability may increase, if a camera is not worn. Owning a body camera is required. Wearing a body camera is not. Wearing a body camera is strongly encouraged.

This law does not change any existing provisions of the business or professions code referring to fixed camera and microphone installations, and does not relax or reduce any exiting provisions requiring cameras and microphones, and recording. This law establishes certain minimums, primarily aimed at law enforcement agencies. This law intends to encourage the use of cameras and microphones in other contexts.

Individuals and businesses with firearms are strongly encouraged to provide stationary cameras, to include microphones, providing audio and video recordings.

Any portion of this law found unenforceable, illegal, or inappropriate shall be broadly re-construed to be enforceable, where possible, in the interest of accountability and public safety, and should minimize any concerns of privacy in public, and minimize privacy concerns which may shield the officer or the agency from their actions or inaction.

Any portion of this law found utterly unenforceable will be rendered inert, severed, with the remaining provisions intact; it is strongly in the interest that police and public accountability be strongly enhanced where deadly weapons are present.

Consider proposing this, or something similar, for YOUR jurisdiction.

We all agree - the police MUST be held accountable for their action. A nine year timeline, here proposed, is more than reasonable.

This proposal provides a reasonable timeline - even if the budget demands are harsh.

This proposal holds agencies accountable to their officers, by constraining overtime - which is a juicy tool used and abused by many officers.

This proposal holds agencies accountable to the state, disabling juicy grants which are the lifeblood of some agencies.

This proposal hobbles union attempts to disable - Officer Privacy and HR concerns are the usual objection unions rely on.

The proposal fires the sheriff or agency head if the legal requirements are not met.

The proposal enables the Governor to take other sanctions as may be legal. I have no idea what they may be - but a city council should not feel "immune."

This proposal asserts some reasonable technological demands - the state of the art SHOULD be much better than what is described here.

It is my opinion that #bluelivesmatter . It is ALSO my opinion that #blacklivesmatter .

While there may indeed be institutional racism, and there are certainly individual bad actors in uniform, and out - it will be difficult to solve this problem until we improve #transparency .

#BlueCamerasMatter #AccountabilityMatters