Roundtable: How industry leaders are proactively addressing BWC concerns

Police departments are understandably wary when approaching the topic of body-worn cameras — a technology that’s becoming increasingly expected across the country and threatens the privacy of officers and communities alike, and has a significant impact on budget no matter the agency’s size.

A smart police leader is brimming with questions about privacy, cost, policy concerns, and training — and who better to answer the toughest questions than the manufacturers themselves? We rounded up six of the biggest names in body camera technology to give their take on what the most difficult obstacles are, and what their forward-thinking companies are doing to overcome them.

What do you think is the greatest benefit to police officers (and by extension, their agencies) for wearing a BWC?

Brian Kirkham (Vice President of Marketing, WatchGuard Video): Body-worn cameras are helping agencies further their goal of being as transparent as possible to the public they serve.

Chris Lindenau (Vice President of Sales & Marketing, Utility, Inc.): We’ve seen ample evidence to suggest that citizen video often portrays only one side of an incident, usually after it has escalated, thereby omitting vital information which indicates under what circumstances use of force was initiated. Citizen video often does not have ample audio either, which is also important to understanding the reason for escalation. An officer’s BWC shows the events from their point of view.

Alasdair Field (CEO, Reveal Media): The primary function of a body-worn camera is to capture video evidence, therefore the number one benefit to the police officer and their agency is a non-biased video account of frontline policing. Implicit in doing this, a whole host of other benefits follow.

With the recognition that police officers are collecting video evidence, offenders often alter their behavior, which in turn can protect officers from verbal and physical aggression. Additionally, deescalating scenarios may lead to quicker resolutions, saving time and making police officers more efficient.

Furthermore, the knowledge of a video account of an interaction can often deter criminals from making false complaints against police officers and, overall, increases the number of early guilty pleas. These factors alone can dramatically reduce costs and the time spent by agencies in dealing with prosecutions.

Steve Tuttle (Vice President for Strategic Communications, TASER International): Clearly in this post-Ferguson world, law enforcement has these powerful tools to provide better evidence of the heroic work that they often do to balance the issues of transparency and their split-second decisions constantly under the microscope. It will protect them from unfounded claims, and when mistakes are made, they can be addressed specifically instead of a litany of ‘what ifs.’

We have to get trust in the community, and if we want future generations to become the next guardians of America, we have to leverage technology that provides them the missing tools in the toolbox.

Steve Ward (CEO, VIEVU): BWCs provide liability protection for officers. When I was a police officer in Seattle, I wanted a tool that would help me demonstrate what really happened in an interaction with the public. BWCs do just that! In today’s age of increased scrutiny of police officers around the country, BWCs demonstrate to the public that their police officers are doing a great job which builds trust in communities. They provide an objective view of police rather than a very narrow portrayal that can be sensationalized by the media.

What is a feature for a BWC that is not yet available that you think should be (or will be) available in the future?

Greg Dyer (National Sales Manager, Digital Ally): There will be more emphasis on moving, storing, and sharing video, auto-activation technologies, and live streaming of video. Many departments are looking for ways to gather and share video from multiple sources. Most of our customers want to be able to quickly and easily build a digital case file with videos from multiple sources.

Lindenau: Using cameras for more than video collection. We treat the camera as a mobile computing device that should enable a whole host of other functions to be served for positive policing, reduced cost of ownership, and better technology lifecycle management, that also consolidate other disparate devices on the uniform and in the car.

Field: With the increasing sophistication of body camera technology, the battery life will be called into question. A device that needs to pre-record an entire 12 hour shift, whilst being tracked by GPS and potentially live streaming high definition video will require advanced battery technology if the products are to remain ergonomic and light.

Tuttle: Accessing databases for LPR [automated license plate readers] and other areas is the next possible glimpse into the future.

What are the looming challenges on the horizon for BWCs, and how are manufacturers addressing those issues?

Dyer: Storage continues to be a challenge, and options such as the cloud, and software systems such as VuVault allow video to be stored and indexed all while providing a cost-effective and complete video solution for agencies. Application software is being developed and utilized so officers can tag events and review video from the BWC on their smartphone or tablet, and put in notes during their shift while it is still top of mind, resulting in less overtime and eliminating busy work.

Field: Since battery life is becoming increasingly important to customers, manufacturers need to continually invest in new technologies to develop effective future products. However, a balance will have to be struck between shoehorning any and every technology into body cameras — as some companies already attempt — and adding features that add value to the officer and agency. Those companies with real insight into the frontline will be able to produce body cameras that are advanced and effective, yet simple and helpful to use.

Tuttle: The issue of turning cameras on automatically is just coming to light. It’s addressed by policy, but in expedited situations they can be left off by accident. We’ve begun to crack this issue with technology that turns cameras on automatically when a squad car’s light bar or siren is activated or whenever a Smart Weapon safety is turned off. We’ve really just scratched the surface of this auto-activation feature and the future will have more options.

Ward: The biggest challenges are from the police department’s perspective, not the manufacturers. Departments need to decide important things such as how long to keep videos, where to store them, and in what situations the cameras need to be used. These are all policy issues that departments must address. The good news is that there are great departments out there that have years of experience and they share their expertise with other police agencies. Employing former officers also helps to assist agencies with things like training issues and best practices — situations we’ve dealt with firsthand.

What is the biggest reason that you encounter from agency command staff for resistance to adopting a BWC program, and what is your response/solution?

Dyer: Budgets and state/local laws surrounding BWCs as well as police departments being tasked with developing policies and procedures surrounding when and where the body camera is to be turned on and off. Trusted resources like the IACP provide general guidelines agencies can consider when developing individual agency policies. Pricing plans and programs have been implemented to allow agencies more flexibility when evaluating hardware, software and storage needs.

We’re ready to assist agencies with hardware and software to ease the transition and to accelerate integration and adoption of such new and potentially revolutionary technology.

Kirkham: The resistance, where it exists, is more grounded in the uncertainty around deployment and not the physical deployment. Rather, the policies that need to be created, agreed to and managed when the system is in use. Currently, there are no best practices in place and laws vary from state to state. Each agency is essentially clearing its own path. Manufacturers and industry organizations need to help reduce the anxiety level through better education and sharing of lessons learned.

Lindenau: The expectation to release video without the appropriate redaction technology to do so in a cost-effective, efficient manner, while preserving citizen privacy rights [is a point of resistance].

Redaction is one of the many hurdles manufacturers are attempting to overcome to better suit the needs of agencies that are facing FOIA video requests.

Field: Very often the biggest reason for resistance is rooted somewhere in the misconceptions about body-worn video. Whether regarding cost, policy, public perception or the benefits — a real stumbling block to implementing a project can be fear in uneducated decision-makers.

Our solution, as we have found all over the world, is education and partnership. Education, because in most cases, it is likely that a department is starting to use body-worn cameras for the first time. Therefore everything in relation to body worn video is unknown.

Partnership is equally important, because often, if an agency is simply sold cameras and left to get on with their project unsupported, they are less likely to reap the full benefits of BWC and understand how to effectively manage the captured data. Because of our extensive experience in the market and our focus on building strong relationships with our customers, we are able to not only provide solutions, but also to consult and guide clients in all aspects of body-worn video.

Ward: I rarely face resistance from police commanders. They inherently understand the benefits of BWCs. Police commanders have been working hard to implement programs across the country. The biggest obstacle that they face in implementing a BWC program is funding, as well as the challenge of developing policies.