WHO watches the watchmen? Since the riots started in Ferguson, Missouri, many have decried the police shooting of teenager Michael Brown and brutal crowd-control tactics at the protests following his death (see 鈥�Crowd-control policing in the US is stuck in riot mode鈥�). The uproar has turned into a call for better surveillance of the police. How might that be done?
The US Department of Justice has the power to investigate and overhaul problematic police departments. Ferguson has not yet been investigated, but it鈥檚 a likely candidate.
鈥淧olice misconduct is not usually just caused by one rotten apple. It is caused by a rotten barrel,鈥� says Stephen Rushin at the University of Illinois College of Law in Champaign. 鈥淎 lot of people would argue that you鈥檙e seeing that in Ferguson.鈥�
Advertisement
For the US public, an investigation would not be enough. A has called for a 鈥淢ike Brown Law鈥�, requiring all police to wear an on-body camera while on duty. It garnered more than 100,000 signatures, which obliges the White House to respond to the request.
On-body cameras automatically record an officer鈥檚 interactions from a first-person perspective. Quite a few US cities are using them, including Salt Lake City in Utah, and Oakland in California. Last year, conducted the in Rialto, California. He found that officers were 60 per cent less likely to use force when wearing them. Citizen complaints, too, fell sharply. Ariel鈥檚 group is now monitoring the cameras鈥� impact in two dozen police departments around the world.
聯Police officers were 60 per cent less likely to use force when wearing on-body cameras聰
But he does not think the US is ready for a national roll-out. 鈥淚鈥檓 really concerned that we鈥檙e going to change the law before we have a little bit more time to look at the evidence.鈥�
One concern is that some interactions might work better off-camera. The cost of equipping all US police officers would be a big issue, too. And how should police store the many terabytes of video they collect 鈥� and when could they safely dump it? One police force Ariel is monitoring in Israel plans to retain everything they record indefinitely. In the UK, most departments that use on-body cameras are free to delete uncontested videos after 30 days.
In places without such cameras, citizens are taking matters into their own hands. Last week, a released a smartphone app called Five-O, in which users rate local policemen from A to F, along with details of their interactions. They say it could be used to identify abusive officers and support calls for departmental reviews.
OpenWatch, a firm based in California, has produced an app called Cop Recorder that let users covertly record and upload their experiences. And the American Civil Liberties Union in New Jersey has an app called Police Tape. It is unclear if any apps have led to notable victories for citizens: the ACLU could not provide any such examples for Police Tape, which was released more than two years ago. But it鈥檚 still early days for such approaches.
There鈥檚 no reason that surveillance should be all one-way, says Rushin. 鈥淢ost law professors can鈥檛 think of a good reason why we shouldn鈥檛 allow citizens to tape police officers.鈥�
This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淧olice in the spotlight鈥�
