One thing that stands out in this is the claim that cameras were present but not rolling. If nothing else comes of this, I hope some law or policy is made to eliminate that excuse in the future. In my world, the camera is always on, and any attempt to disable or interfere with it is a firing offense. Not just "you don't work here anymore", but you're done in this industry. With today's technology and the stakes involved, those cameras should not be allowed to fail - or else...
Cameras don't fix schit.
They're just feel good non-sense.
Travis
Ah, there's where you are wrong, my friend. I have direct and repeated experience that audio and video evidence can kill a frivolous lawsuit quicker than a bought-off judge. And also that knowledge that the camera is always rolling is effective motivation to make it a habit to act professionally.
No - it's not a cure-all, but the camera makes a huge difference.
Not really. People still see what they want to see.
Look at the alton sterling shooting
There are always exceptions. And it depends on the quality of information recorded. But overall, cameras make a difference. The more, the better. IME, video more often keeps things from even getting to court. When faced with the evidence, the guilty or false accuser usually folds.
Then there's the effect on overall professionalism. Those of us with cameras pointed at us 100% of the time tend to act more professionally. That has an added effects of the group being looked upon more favorably.
Virtually every time one of my brothers is in direct conflict with a member of the public, a lawsuit is threatened and/or filed against us. Those used to be hard to defend. Now we win almost all of them. Many are dropped early on. We know that the camera is always rolling, so we make damned sure that the evidence will be in our favor. In other words, we are focused on doing it right.
