November 23, 2021
Massachusetts Body Worn Camera Commission
Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security
One Ashburton Place
Suite 2133
Boston, MA 02108
RE: Public Hearing Testimony, November 23, 2021 – 2:00 p.m. Hearing (Police Body Cameras)
My name is John Nelson, and I am the Vice President and Director of Legislative Affairs for the Massachusetts Coalition of Police. Thank you for giving us time to provide input into the process of creating recommended regulations for the use of police body cameras.
First, let me point out that the implementation of body worn cameras is a change in the everyday operation of most departments. Many fantastic policies have been negotiated that address most of the subjects that are being considered by this Commission. I know you have collected many of the policies for review and I would suggest you look at them closely and consider that this method of working cooperatively has proven to work here in Massachusetts.
There are a number of issues that have to be worked through in order for police body cameras to be a productive tool in Massachusetts. Storage costs are largely going undiscussed and will be one of the largest challenges in the process. Many vendors are willing to provide the hardware for a reduced cost because they are making their money on the storage component. Many departments across the country have had to scale back their initial program in order to deal with the unexpected cost of storage.
Who Should Actually be Wearing the Body Cameras?
This should be a carefully negotiated subject when creating a department policy. It goes without saying that uniformed patrol officers who actively go out on the street should probably be wearing them. It gets difficult when you start talking about plain clothed officers. Street crime units that wear plain clothes that are still marked with department insignias and can easily be identified as police officers could possibly fall in the previous category.
But what about plain clothes officers that are in plain clothes strictly to blend in with the public? If they are wearing body cameras, they will no longer have any advantage in their attempts at preventing crime. Detectives routinely speak with people that do not want people to know they are speaking to the police. Detectives conduct surveillance in places that must be kept confidential.
Police Body Cameras: Key Considerations
There are a number of considerations before making any blanket policy or recommendations about who should be wearing them. Every department is different and utilizes their personnel differently. Member of National Association of Police Organization, N.A.P.O.
The next issue revolves around when police body cameras should be on or off. This is another subject that should address the individual needs of the department. The biggest consideration is that Massachusetts is a two-party consent state. Currently, there has to be notice that the officer is recording and if you enter a location where a person has a right to privacy, they can request that you turn off the recording.
This will be problematic when you are in someone’s house, and they request you shut off the recording and a critical incident occurs. The scrutiny will be on the officer despite them complying with the law. There is no current exception to the confines of M.G.L. Chapter 272 Section 99.
Police Body Camera Footage to be Considered Public Record
Police body camera footage is going to be considered a public record. In order to comply with the public records laws, there will have to be personnel at EVERY SINGLE police department to make sure that the information is given out and that it is properly sanitized.
This is a costly endeavor and one that will result in police officers being taken off the street to either handle this task or for the funds dedicated to staffing to go to civilian employees to handle these tasks. Either way, there will be a reduction in police officers on the street. The cost of producing requested video will always fall back to the department.
Don’t Limit Police Ability to Review Body Camera Footage
Lastly, and a subject you have heard quite a bit of input on is whether or not the officers should be able to view the camera footage prior to making a statement or authoring a report. Police officers are mandated to review all evidence prior to writing a police report. Currently, if a police officer decided not to review any portion of evidence prior to writing a report, they would be subject to discipline for malfeasance.
To create a recommendation that limits an officer’s ability to review all evidence before making a statement or writing a report goes against every expectation that the public has of its officers. The public, every victim, anyone with common sense, expects police officers to review all of their evidence prior to writing their report. Body worn camera footage is evidence.
I have heard some people claim that they can write the report, then watch the video, and if there are any differences then they can write a supplemental report. This is a huge win for every single criminal who is caught on police body camera committing the most heinous of crimes because the defense bar is going to use that to their advantage in every single case.
This will likely result in defendants being acquitted and victimizing someone else because an officer was not able to review all evidence prior to writing a report. It is never a good policy to restrict an officer’s ability to review all evidence and then suggest it is okay for him or her to write a modified statement after watching the video. Makes zero sense.
I understand the legislation recommends that policies not allow officers to review the video prior to making a statement. I would suggest that there are varying positions on the commission on this topic. The legislature’s attempt to provide a mandated result of a study prior to it being conducted and, quite frankly, in contrast to what your results are showing is a failed mandate.
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide this testimony and we look forward to future engagement with stakeholders on this important topic.
Sincerely.
John E. Nelson, Vice President
Chairman of Legislative Affairs
See the original message HERE
