Citizens Voice Concern Over Body-Cam Accountability

Community forum highlights lingering questions about APD body-cam transparency

Monday's community forum on APD's pending implementation of body-worn cameras made evident the work the department must still complete to finalize its relevant policies and begin deployment, and how ideologically distant concerned citizens will remain when officers begin wearing these cameras on the streets.

On the matter of implementation, APD has until Sept. 1, 2016, to begin deployment of 500 body cameras, though estimates last month suggested it could happen as early as July 4. Downtown officers substationed at APD's Eighth Street headquarters will be the first to wear the cameras. That includes foot patrol on Sixth Street and by the ARCH, as well as others in the department's central west command. APD Technology Commander Ely Reyes said that no bids for proposed services have been submitted, so any specifications concerning what the cameras will look like or where they'll go on the officers' bodies aren't yet clear. Reyes did mention a number of requirements determined both by the law laid out in Senate Bill 158 (which grants money to local law enforcement agencies to begin the use of body cameras) and departmental needs. Before submitting any bid proposals, APD must finalize activation and deactivation techniques; how footage will be stored, and for how long; policies for videos that involve use of deadly force or lead to investigations of involved officers; and specifications for certain capabilities (like audio/video quality). Otherwise, Reyes said that a number of the policies will be gleaned from existing dashboard-camera standards. "We've had our in-car system for many years, and that policy has evolved over time," he said. "By incorporating [the law and dash-cam policies], we're coming up with a comprehensive body-worn camera policy."

However, what became clear over the nearly two-hour discussion Monday night was that many in the community don't believe there's enough citizen input on issues relating to the new technology. Body-worn cameras were born out of necessity, and an accepted need to create more accountability between civilians and police. The events in Chicago last week, in which police finally – after 13 months of dodging requests – released the police video of Laquan McDonald being shot 16 times by Chicago PD Officer Jason Van Dyke, represents the most recent in a succession of incidents throughout the country that have given the public cause to grow increasingly concerned with the restrictions police departments can place on the publication of potential evidence of police misconduct. That information, accountability activists say, should be public, available to be seen by the people who pay police salaries. The mindset brought a number of questions centered around when the public will have access to videos generated by body cameras, as well as follow-ups concerning penalties for policy violators. In each case, the answer provided reinforced the reality that APD, the District Attor­ney's Office, and the Office of the Police Monitor will have control over each video before its public dissemination. That means the three offices will have access to view it, interpret it, and arrive at a set of conclusions before any other interested party – be it someone who may be involved in a filmed incident, or otherwise – gets a chance to review the tape. The same rules currently apply for the release of dashboard camera footage.

It's not surprising, but it may miss the point. Part of the value of body cameras is that they create additional accountability and evidence. The decision to give APD, the D.A., and the OPM control over the videos doesn't necessarily jibe with the public's idea of transparency. The prevailing rhetoric once again becomes a form of "trust us" – a request that's easier for some than others to entertain.

A note to readers: Bold and uncensored, The Austin Chronicle has been Austin’s independent news source for almost 40 years, expressing the community’s political and environmental concerns and supporting its active cultural scene. Now more than ever, we need your support to continue supplying Austin with independent, free press. If real news is important to you, please consider making a donation of $5, $10 or whatever you can afford, to help keep our journalism on stands.

Support the Chronicle  

More body cams
Activists, Council Push APD On Body Cam Video Policy
Activists, Council Push APD On Body Cam Video Policy
How and when footage is released at question

Austin Sanders, Feb. 14, 2020

More APD
APD Racial Bias Controversy Now Includes Lawsuit
APD Racial Bias Controversy Now Includes Lawsuit
Suit alleges “a pattern and practice of discriminating against African Americans”

Austin Sanders, Nov. 29, 2019

APD's Lone Female Assistant Chief Retires
APD's Lone Female Assistant Chief Retires
Jessica Robledo was the only woman at the executive level during her tenure

Chase Hoffberger, Sept. 2, 2016

More by Chase Hoffberger
Revisiting the Railroad Killer
Revisiting the Railroad Killer
Local journo Alex Hannaford’s Dead Man Talking podcast investigates the case against a man on death row

Nov. 16, 2018

EMS Union Set for Leadership Contest
EMS Union Set for Leadership Contest
Association to cast ballot between incumbent Tony Marquardt or challenger Selena Xie

Nov. 16, 2018


Body Cams, APD, Ely Reyes, Office of the Police Monitor, Senate Bill 158

One click gets you all the newsletters listed below

Breaking news, arts coverage, and daily events

Can't keep up with happenings around town? We can help.

Austin's queerest news and events

New recipes and food news delivered Mondays

All questions answered (satisfaction not guaranteed)

Information is power. Support the free press, so we can support Austin.   Support the Chronicle