Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byHester Rose Modified over 8 years ago
1
WMP Body Worn Video Trial West Midlands Police Body Worn Video Trial Inspector Darren Henstock
2
Rapid entry
3
Theory BWV CCTV Observation Certainty of apprehension Modified behaviour
4
Why Test? Rialto Trial – One US based study Benefits driven by suppliers and press? Magical panacea in times of austerity Rigorous evidence of benefits
5
The WMP Replication: Hypotheses Wearing body worn videos by patrol officers will: Decrease number of recorded incidents of use of force Decrease number of citizens complaints Increase satisfaction of members of the public coming into contact with the police Improve self-legitimacy of police officers Increase rate of prosecution/charge/early guilty plea Compared to not wearing cameras
6
Birmingham South RCT 46 officers across two units 430 officer shifts over 6 months 592 arrest records 99% compliance with random allocation Part of multisite RCT with intention to do 24 tests in West Yorkshire, Peterborough, PSNI, Wolverhampton, Sacramento, etc.
7
Deployment Protocol Trial looked at personal issue (BS) and pool issue (WV) to response teams Compulsory to wear Officer discretion to record incident High visibility only, no covert use Only standard response deployment, no Public Order/ Football/ Firearms etc. Pre-record shut off for trial
8
Findings
9
Prosecutions Overall charges: 12% Increase –DV incident charges –13% increase –Public Order offence charges – 22% increase –Racially-motivated incidents charges –12% increase Early Guilty Pleas: 9% Increase –Overall increase in charges and EGP’s leads to 13% reduction in NGP’s - over 2000 less cases/annum.
10
Complaints Birmingham South: 100% reduction in complaints registered against officers in participating units. Wolverhampton: 46% reduction in complaints across all response officers £267,000 in staff and officer savings for investigation of complaints against response officers (31% of complaints relate to response officers)
11
Use of Force The devil is in the details… The complexities exceed the bottom line story
12
Fisher’s Test: p= 0.476 - Not statistically significant
13
Fisher’s Test: p= 0.0002*** 106% increase in use of physical restraint when no cameras present Fisher’s Test p= 0.0011*** 100% increase in use of handcuffs when offender is non-compliant Fisher’s Test: p= 0.0008*** 89% increase in chances of force being used if cameras are not present, when complaint handcuffs category is removed Masks the effect
14
Fisher’s Test: p= 0.0008 – Very statistically significant
15
54% reduction in confrontational encounters
16
Unconsidered consequences: effect of force on suspect & Injury to officers
17
Fisher’s Test: p= 0.0011*** 188% increase in chance of offender being injured when cameras not present
18
Fisher’s Test: p= 0.0873 250% increase in reported injuries to officers
19
Reflection from the wider RCT
20
Compliance with protocols
21
Consistent reductions
22
Enhance Transparency and Accountability
23
There is no turning back… Asking whether or not we should procure BWCs is last year’s question….. What we can offer insight on: Use of Force Complaints Effect on CJS outcomes Activation policies Non-response policing environments What is not considered yet: How BWV effects legitimacy/public support The technological coupling of BWV evidence and other criminal case elements Unintended consequences.
24
WMP Body Worn Video Trial West Midlands Police Body Worn Video Trial Inspector Darren Henstock
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.