Bodycams haven’t lived up to promises of exposing police misconduct. One reason: The police decide what to release. – USA TODAY

Rev. Al Sharpton and attorney Ben Crump spoke at a funeral for Andrew Brown Jr., a North Carolina man fatally shot by sheriff's deputies. USA TODAY

In the moments after a recent shooting in Times Square, New York City police officerAlyssa Vogelheard an officer yell,"There's a baby." Body camera footageshows her takeoff running,findinga 4-year-old girl bleeding from a stray bullet. Vogel quickly applieda tourniquet and helpedher to an ambulance.

Vogel's exemplary actions werehighlightedon the @NYPDnews Twitter accountlast week.Meanwhile, an appeals court recently ruled that the NYPD mustturn over a less-redacted version of body camera footage fromthe 2018 fatal shooting of Susan Muller, who was mentally ill, in her home. The police department has been fighting against releasing the video for years.

Days-old video released in one case; years of delays in another. That difference, civil liberties advocates say, is a problem.

In the years since Michael Brown's 2014 death spurred protests and unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, politicians, advocacy groups and even cops have pushed for all officers in the 18,000 or so law enforcement agenciesin the U.S.to wearsmall cameras to record their interactions with the public.

Those cameras are supposed to enablethe public to see what really happenedwhen someone is killed by police. But the reality has not lived up to thepromise. Police departments often get to decide what the public sees and when, exploiting exceptions in the law, selectively releasingclips, and even arguing against release based on a dead person's right to privacy. In some cases, videos have been released as public-relations tools.

"Technology is inherently neutral;it's how you use it that decides whether it's a net positive or negative," saidScott Greenwood, a prominent constitutional rights attorney. For those who "thought body-worn cameras were to catch bad officers and prove bad conduct, I think they have been largely disappointed."

Activists are pictured protesting near Mayor Lori Lightfoot's home in Chicago, a day after the release of body camera footage that showed a Chicago police officer fatally shooting Adam Toledo, 13, in late March.(Photo: Tyler LaRiviere, AP Images)

Within two years of Brown's death, more than 7,200 law enforcement agencies had acquired body-worn cameras, according to a 2018 Bureau of Justice Statistics analysis. Thenumber is probably much higher today, experts said.

But nearly 38%of those agencies had no formal policy governing their use. And roughly 60% allowed anofficer involved in an incident to accessthe recording withouthaving to file a formal request which could raise questions about whether an officerused the video to get his story straightor tampered with the recording.

More than 80% of police departments andsheriff's offices that employed 500 or more full-time officers allowed them to informally access their recordings.

In this Saturday, May 30, 2020, photo taken from police body camera video released by the Atlanta Police Department, an officer points his handgun at Messiah Young while the college student is seated in his vehicle, in Atlanta.(Photo: AP)

A 2020 study of 30 body-worn camera analyses concluded there is "substantial uncertainty" about whether they reduce officers' useof force, but they can be effective in some situations and can reduce citizen complaints.

Body-worn cameras have captured a Los Angeles police officer fondling a dead woman's breasts, aBaltimore police officer fabricating evidence in a drug case, and other terrible orcriminal actions. For officers who are wrongfully accused,the cameras have helped dispelallegations based onminutes of footage, rather than months ofinvestigations.

Thecameras have transformed police training,said Chuck Wexler, executive directorof the Police Executive Research Forum in Washington, D.C. His organization used bodycam videosto develop de-escalation tactics to deal with "suicide by cop" scenarios involving peopleexperiencing a mental health crises.About 600 departments have viewed them, he said.

Body-worn cameras have shown a side of policing the American people were not aware of. ... The reality is, the cameras are just capturing what has been going on for a long time.

While bodycam videois not always helpful in police misconduct cases, theyhave contributed to a groundswell of activism over issues like qualified immunity, saidChad Marlow, senior policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. That's because body cameras enable everyday Americans tosee exactly what the lawempowers police to do and what the legal system considersacceptable.

"Body-worn cameras have shown a side of policing the American people were not aware of," Wexler said. "The reality is, the cameras are just capturing what has been going on for a long time."

In the years since body cameras were adopted, there has been an interesting reversal of viewpoints, said JimBueermann,retired chief of the Redlands, California, police department andformer president ofthe National Police Foundation.

At first, "community advocates were vocally in support of cameras and police unions were opposed to them," Bueermann said. "And over time as camera footage has exonerated so many officers, now it is just the opposite."

A police officer's body camera caught the dramatic moments immediately after the Christmas Day explosion in Nashville, Tennessee. (Dec. 29) AP Domestic

Today, Bueermann said, community activistsare less vocal because the cameras"have not produced this stunning kind of police reform that they had hoped for."

Technology has changed, but laws governingwhethera police officer'suse of force is excessivehavenot. The Fourth Amendment and a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case gives police officers the benefit of the doubt.

An officer who tells jurors he fearedfor his life or was forced to make a split-seconddecision in a fatal shooting is almost always acquitted by a jury if charges are even brought.

These days,Bueermannsaid, "I think it's clear to many police officers that when they hit the streets, it's in their best interest to have a body camera attached to them."

That's partly because law enforcement often write the rules on how these videos will be used.

As police unions and their advocacy groups began to realize body cameras were unavoidable, they put"their significant political muscle behind trying to restrict public access to the footage," Marlow said.

Police departments tend to release a videowhen it showsan officer acted properlyand delay releasewhen it doesn't, he said. "It turns policebody cameras from atransparency and accountability toolinto a propaganda tool," he said.

The policies are describedinthis bold, audacious language.Then you find out that there are all sorts of exceptions and exemptions.

Marinda van Dalen, a senior staff attorney for New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, thefirm that sued to get access tovideo in the Muller case,saidher firm still has not received a more completeversion of the video.The department claimed it was protecting Muller's right to privacy, she said.

"The policies are describedinthis bold, audacious language.Then you find out that there are all sorts of exceptions and exemptions," van Dalen said.

She saidthe New York Police Department will quickly produce videosthat validate officers' actions and "shamelessly redact" others to the point of "misrepresenting the circumstances." She said she's seen endless delays in releasing video when"it's pretty clear it's been done to protect the department and officers from oversight."

New York police Sgt. Jessica McRorie, a department spokeswoman, told USA TODAYin an email that the department follows its policies on when to release videos.Asked if the department will release a more complete video of the Muller shooting, she responded,"Thereare no plans at this time to publiclyrelease the unredacted footage."

McRoriesaidthecase, which occurred early in the department's body-worn camera program,shows that "striking the balance in every case is a complicated matter and a process we are working through."

Body-camera footage shows a Pasco Sheriff's deputy shooting at a moving vehicle driven by a man who had allegedly tried to ram deputies. The sheriff's office withheld the deputies' names and removed all audio from the video, citing Marsy's Law. USA TODAY

When the Police Executive Research Forumcrafted recommended guidelines for body-worn cameras in 2014, it saidagencies should make videos available to the public.

Wexler said he still believes that if police aren't prepared to release video to the public quickly,"you probably shouldn't have this program" because unreasonable delays erode public confidence.

Police departments'focus on how bodycams benefit officers is illustratedin Bureau of Justice Statisticsdata. Its 2018 analysis found the top four reasons police acquire cameras are to "improve officer safety, increase evidence quality, reduce civilian complaints, and reduce agency liability." Then came "improve officer/agency accountability."

Some states, like New Hampshire and Ohio, have established strong public access to bodycam video. But others like North Carolina and South Carolina seemto be "putting up as many impediments as they possibly can to access" so much sothat they seem to miss the point of the technology, Marlow said.

The public should have "absolute access in police uses of forcebecausethats whywerolled out body cameras," Marlow said. "Not so we could show police in their best moments andnot so we could show a member of thepublic in their worst."

North and South Carolinatreat body camera footage as an evidence-gathering tool and itis not considered a public record,he said.

But those states allow someone who is recorded or a representative of a deceased person to request relevant portions of the video.

That's what the family of Andrew Brown did. He was fatally shot, including once in the back of his head, last month in North Carolina. A judge allowed the family to see less than 20 minutes of video;morethan two hours of videobefore and after Brown's death were notprovided.

A child holds a Black Lives Matter flag during an eighth night of protest in Elizabeth City, N.C., after a judge ruled Wednesday not to release bodycam footage of sheriff's deputies fatally shooting Andrew Brown Jr.(Photo: Dean-Paul Stevens, USA TODAY Network)

His family said theywant to see more.Theirlawyers said the footage shows that sheriff's deputies were "unequivocally unjustified" in fatally shooting the unarmed Black man as he tried to flee in his car. The district attorney has said Brown's vehicle made contact withdeputies.

Marlow said the laws limiting how much video is released and who gets to see itmeans the camerasaren't being used to change officers' behavior.

"The goal wasnt just to hold police officers responsible for misconduct," he said. "The idea is if weunderstand what went wrong today, maybe we canprevent itfrom happening tomorrow.Soevery member of the public has an interest in preventingthemselves from being the next victim."

A bystander's cell phone video brought George Floyd's death last May to public attention, but the incident was also recorded by the bodycams of the four cops involved. Those videoswere used as evidencethroughout the trial of Derek Chauvin, the officer who kneeled on Floyd's neck. Theybelied the initial police department statement describing the incident.

Chauvin wasconvicted of murder and manslaughterand is scheduled to be sentenced in June.

Police body camera shows bystanders watching Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin subdue George Floyd in Minneapolis, including Alyssa Funari, left, filming; Charles McMillian, center left in light colored shorts; Christopher Martin, center in gray; Donald Williams, center in black; Genevieve Hansen, fourth from right, filming; and Darnella Frazier, third from right, filming.(Photo: AP)

After Floyd's death, Minnesota legislators banned chokeholds, demonstrating how video can spur reform. Andsix states Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois and New Mexico joined South Carolina in mandating statewideadoption of body-worn cameras by law enforcement officers who interact with the public, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

There may not have been any body camera footage of Floyd's deathif not for the fatal Minneapolis police shooting of Justine Ruszczyk in 2017. Neither of the two officers present turned their camerason.

The police chief resignedand the city updated its body camera policies,specifying when they must be activated and adding penalties if officers don't do it.

But policing experts say it's important to note that cameras don't show everything.Toan untrained eye, or without the technology to slow down a recording, it may be hard to realize exactly what an officeris up against.

A police officer shot and killed 16-year-old MaKhia Bryant after arriving on the scene to respond to reports of attempted stabbing in Columbus, Ohio. USA TODAY

After the fatal shootingof 16-year-old Ma'Khia Bryantby Columbus, Ohio, police last month, it took closer examination of the video to determine that she appearedto be holding a knife and was aiming to stab another person, Bueermann said.

"It's not a perfect technology. It's not the fantasy we all hoped for," Bueermann said. "Police still kill about 1,000 people a year, but cameras have absolutely improved policing."

National correspondent Tami Abdollah covers inequities in the criminal justice system. Direct message her with story tips on Twitter @latams.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/05/16/police-body-cameras-have-mixed-legacy-criminal-justice-reform/5064170001/

More:
Bodycams haven't lived up to promises of exposing police misconduct. One reason: The police decide what to release. - USA TODAY