Body cameras prove useful to area law-enforcement agencies

Law-enforcement agencies around the country have expressed reservations about using body cameras.

But local agencies that use them said they caused officers to behave more professionally while on duty, can provide useful evidence during prosecutions, are a valuable training tool and protect officers from frivolous complaints.

The Union County Sheriff’s Department in Illinois announced last week deputies would begin wearing body cameras. The department bought 11 cameras for about $400 a piece and had help from a grant from its insurance company.

“They certainly have more advantages to them than disadvantages,” Sheriff Scott Harvel said. “I certainly see this as a trend. There might be mandates across the U.S. where we have to wear them.”

Scott County sheriff’s deputies have used body cameras since 2014. Sheriff’s Capt. Jerry Bledsoe has noticed a change in deputies’ interactions with the public.

“I think it puts them a little more on their toes, on the professional side,” Bledsoe said. “It keeps them on that edge to be as professional as they need to be. They know everything is being recorded.”

Perry County sheriff’s deputies have used body cameras since 2015. Sheriff Gary Schaaf said he never had a problem with an officer behaving unprofessionally, but cameras provide an extra incentive.

“It’s like having somebody over your shoulder,” Schaaf said.

Carl Kinnison, an instructor for the Department of Criminal Justice for Southeast Missouri State University and director of the regional law-enforcement training academy, said there has been a public outcry for departments to use cameras since protests over the officer-involved shooting of Michael Brown in 2014 in Ferguson, Missouri.

“It’s good to have if police tactics are questioned,” said Kinnison, also a former police chief in Cape Girardeau.

Kinnison cited a study from Rialto, California, published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology that showed cameras had an effect on officer use of force and complaints against officers.

The researchers studied patrols of officers that wore cameras and a control group without cameras. Use of force fell significantly in the year body cameras were studied in 2012, from 67 incidents to 25 incidents. Of those 25 incidents, 17 were from the group that did not wear cameras.

Officer complaints also fell from 24 in 2011 to three in 2012, although two of the three were for officers that wore cameras.

“It seems two things were going on at the same time,” Kinnison said. “Citizens were more likely to be cooperative if they knew they were being recorded, and with a lot of people, they were much less likely to file a complaint. Also, it demonstrates that officers were more mindful of their behavior.”

Harvel, Bledsoe and Schaaf said they believe cameras are an asset to deputies when residents make complaints. Bledsoe said many officers have been shown to have done nothing wrong when the video of an incident is reviewed by Sheriff Rick Walter.

Harvel, Bledsoe and Schaaf said camera footage is useful as a way to show deputies what they can do differently in situations, with traffic stops and domestic-assault calls being mentioned.

Harvel gave the example of an officer's positioning during a domestic call — the deputy needs to be in position where he has a clear line of sight around the room.

The Jackson Police Department is using body cameras and has used footage for training purposes, according to a previous interview with Capt. Rodney Barnes. The Jackson Police Department declined to comment for this story.

Prosecuting attorneys in Union County, Perry County and Cape Girardeau County said cameras should provide valuable evidence.

“They’re beneficial, especially when you’re presenting to a jury,” Cape Girardeau County Prosecuting Attorney Chris Limbaugh said. “Visuals are always beneficial when you’re presenting a criminal case.”

Kinnison said many departments hesitate to use body cameras because of concerns about storing the footage.

The Scott, Perry and Union county sheriff’s departments approached this issue differently.

In Perry County, video is kept on a server for about two weeks. If it is not pertinent to an investigation, it is deleted by the deputy, Schaaf said. Schaaf said deputies are responsible for deleting videos.

Scott County has several levels of retention. Videos that are not pertinent to an investigation are kept two weeks, and others are kept for five years.

The department also has a category of videos, such as use-of-force instances, that are kept until they are manually deleted.

Illinois law dictates all videos be stored for 90 days; if they are not deemed pertinent, they must be deleted, Harvel said.

“That’s going to create a challenge for us,” Harvel said.

Each sheriff’s department wants deputies to record every interaction with the public. Deputies have the option to turn off the camera but must indicate reasons why in reports read by Walter and Schaaf and, in Harvel’s case, on the video itself.

Missouri and Illinois laws differ on body-camera videos as public records.

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon recently signed a law that keeps body-camera footage confidential until an investigation is completed. The law gives power to a judge to determine whether the video should be released.

In Illinois, body-camera footage that is the subject of a complaint or shows the discharge of a firearm, use of force, arrest or detention or death or bodily harm are subject to freedom-of-information requests.

bkleine@semissourian.com

(573) 388-3644