Laserfiche WebLink
6.D. - Page 6 of 179 <br />After weighing the advantages and disadvantages of body -worn cameras, the Grand Jury <br />recommends that: <br />• All law enforcement agencies in San Mateo County adopt body -worn cameras. <br />• The Board of Police Commissioners of the Broadmoor Police Protection District and the <br />city councils of those communities that have not adopted body -worn cameras review use <br />with their respective chief of police to determine an appropriate body -worn camera <br />implementation plan and advise the public of their plan by November 30, 2016. <br />• All law enforcement agencies in the County implement body -worn camera systems with <br />the assistance of city/county administration by October 31, 2017. <br />BACKGROUND <br />According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), "the August 2014 shooting of <br />Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and the subsequent protests and civil unrest focused new <br />public attention on the problem of alleged police violence—and on the possibility that body - <br />worn cameras might be part of the solution.112 <br />The above incident, as well as other recent officer -involved shootings in the news, has created <br />a lack of confidence in law enforcement by some of the public. The perception that law <br />enforcement is not accountable to citizens for its actions is a dangerous development and is <br />troublesome for police professionals and concerned citizens alike. The existence and media <br />replays of bystander videos and police car dashboard and body -worn cameras have contributed <br />to a heightened awareness regarding the use of force by members of law enforcement. <br />Through interviews of local law enforcement, the Grand Jury learned of incidents where the <br />use of video evidence by law enforcement was of significant assistance in determining whether <br />allegations of excessive use of force or improper behavior by police officers were valid. In such <br />cases, video evidence may be beneficial, but in addition, it can also be valuable in cases where <br />complaints against a police officer for being rude or unprofessional need to be resolved. In <br />one example, a city police chief recounted to the Grand Jury a story of a young man's father <br />calling to complain about the treatment his son received from a police officer when issuing a <br />traffic citation. When invited in to review the video, both father and son saw that the officer <br />acted appropriately. The Grand Jury's investigation further revealed that this is not an isolated <br />case. Several law enforcement officials interviewed by the Grand Jury recounted situations <br />where filmed encounters with police officers reviewed with complainants resulted in formal <br />complaints being withdrawn or not pursued in addition to rare cases that resulted in officers <br />being disciplined.3 <br />2 Jay Stanley, Police Body -Mounted Cameras: With Right Policies in Place, a Win for All v.2, American Civil <br />Liberties Union, March 2015. https://www.aclu.org/police-body-mounted-cameras-right-policies-place-win-all. <br />3 Local law enforcement: multiple interviews by the Grand Jury. <br />2015-2016 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 2 <br />45 <br />