1. Body-Worn Cameras Issues and Ideas
Event/Location
Date
Presenter(s)
Title, Organization
This is the generic title slide for this presentation on body-worn cameras.
Add the event information that is pertinent to your presentation.

2. Body-Worn Camera Topics
Why Consider Body-Worn Cameras?
Research Findings
Concerns and Things to Consider
Lessons Learned
Emerging Issues
Emerging Technology
Technical Assistance Resources
Conclusion
This slide presents the topics and areas covered in the presentation.
You should add or remove slides or sections of slides as appropriate to your presentation.
Why Consider Body-Worn Cameras? Slide # 3
Research Findings Slides #4–15
Concerns and Things to Consider Slides #16–21
Lessons Learned Slides #22–25
Emerging Issues Slides #26–29
Emerging Technology Slides #30–31
Technical Assistance Resources Slides #32–33
Conclusion Slide #34

3. Why Consider BWCs? BWCs can be beneficial in two ways:
They produce more and better evidence and make law enforcement more efficient.
They support transparency and build public trust.
BWCs are not “the answer” to questions in either case.
BWCs are a new technological tool with promise to be helpful.
There are two main reasons for adopting BWCs:
To produce more and better evidence and help law enforcement fight crime more efficiently.
To help make law enforcement more transparent, especially in its interactions with the public, which should help build public trust in law enforcement.
The first reason seems to have been the impetus for adopting BWCs in England.
The goal of transparency and public trust seems to be the more prominent reason for adopting BWCs in the United States.
Both reasons are valid, and both may be present in an agency’s reasoning for adopting BWCs.
Without careful consideration of these reasons, and without careful policy development, there could be conflict and some confusion in the implementation of BWCs.
For example, the BWC policy component about whether, or when, officers can view their BWC video footage may be different if better evidence, rather than transparency, is the main reason for BWCs.
An evidence priority would likely mean officers will be able to view their footage more often to get the reports accurate.
A transparency priority would likely mean officers will have more restrictions on their ability to review footage, to preserve what they originally saw and felt during an enforcement action.
It is important to convey, especially to non–law enforcement audiences, that BWCs are another tool available to officers. They will not resolve all problems for either priority: they do not capture all evidence, they do not work perfectly all the time, and we are still learning about their impact on police operations and on society.

4. Research Findings Many studies have been undertaken recently.
Methodological rigor varies across studies (no controlled comparative analysis in some).
Scientific evidence of the benefits or impacts of cameras is promising.
Up until several years ago, there had not been many BWC research studies undertaken in the United States. There were several in England.
In the past several years, the number of BWC studies in the United States has increased.
The methodological rigor of BWC studies has also improved.
Several of the early studies had weak designs.
The were descriptive only.
They did not include comparison or control groups; they did not compare BWC wearers with similar groups of officers who did not wear BWCs.
Lack of comparative designs.
Two sets of findings are emerging with the new studies.
Evidence of the positive impacts of BWCs on police operations and in the community.
Consistent findings that BWCs reduce civilian complaints.
Mixed evidence on some measures in a few studies – use of force, assaults on officers.
Additional time and additional research will be needed to sort these issues out.

5. Independent Evaluation
Research on BWCs**
Country
Study
Citation
Independent Evaluation
Comparative Design
England
Plymouth Head Camera Project
Goodall (2007)
Yes No
Scotland
Renfrewshire/Aberdeen Studies
ODS Consulting (2011)
London Metropolitan Police
Grossmith et al. (2015)
Canada
Edmonton Police Service
Edmonton Police Service (2015)
UK/US
10 agencies
Ariel et al. (2016)
This slide and the next slide show a listing of completed BWC studies.
Note that now the completed studies are almost evenly divided between the U.K. and the United States.
Reference list of BWC studies
Plymouth Head Camera Project:
Renfrewshire/Aberdeen Studies:
London Metropolitan Police:
Edmonton Police Service:
10 agencies:
** Many studies under way in US and UK

6. Independent Evaluation
Research on BWCs**
Country
Study
Citation
Independent Evaluation
Comparative Design
United States
Rialto (CA) Police Department
Farrar (2013); Ariel et al. (2015) No
Yes
Mesa (AZ) Police Department
MPD (2013); Young & Ready (2015, 2016)
Phoenix (AZ) Police Department
Katz et al. (2015)
Orlando Police (FL) Department
Jennings et al. (2014; 2015)
Spokane (WA) & Tempe (AZ) Police Departments
White et al. (2016)
Reference list of BWC studies
Rialto (CA) Police Department Farrar (2013):
Rialto (CA) Police Department Ariel et al. (2015):
2. Mesa (AZ) Police Department Young & Ready (2015, 2016):
MPD (2013):
3. Phoenix (AZ) Police Department Katz et al. (2015):
4. Orlando Police (FL) Department Jennings et al. (2014; 2015):
5. Spokane (WA) & Tempe (AZ) Police Departments White et al. (2016): Spokane:

7. Research on BWCs Early research originated in the United Kingdom.
Most research involves independent evaluations.
Most research involves strong (comparative) designs.
There is a growing body of evidence that supports use of BWCs.
Most studies are “independent,” meaning they were conducted by someone other than a representative from the police agency that was the subject of the study.
Most studies now involve comparative designs, which represents an improvement in methodological rigor.
This growing body of research largely supports BWC implementation.

8. Research Findings: How BWCs May Improve/Benefit Policing
Benefits
Community Engagement in Planning/Implementation
Increased Transparency and Legitimacy
Improved Police Officer Behavior
Improved Civilian Behavior
Expedited Resolution of Complaints and Lawsuits
Improved Evidence for Arrest and Prosecution
Police Training – Better Performance
Generally, the BWC studies find that:
Including community and advocacy organizations in the planning and policy development phases of BWC programs has positive results – it enhances public perceptions of transparency and helps resolve difficult issues concerning privacy, activation/deactivation, officer review of BWC footage, and so forth.
Both officer and civilian behavior improve with BWCs. This improvement is often referred to as the “civilizing effect” of cameras, as people tend to behave better when they know they are being watched or filmed. There is some speculation, however, that as BWCs become more common and more a part of the daily routine, this civilizing effect may weaken a bit.
The extent of the civilizing effect varies across departments.
Studies show that BWC video and audio evidence often results in quicker resolution of complaints and potential lawsuits.
BWCs also provide better evidence for prosecutors, resulting in higher filing and conviction rates.
When BWC footage is used in police training, it leads to better performance in training and on the job.

9. Research Findings: Concerns/Limitations with BWCs
Civilian Privacy
Notification of Recording
FOIA and Access to Video
Sensitive Populations, Environments
Critical Incidents
Technology Requirements
Cost
These positive findings notwithstanding, BWC research reveals some ongoing concerns.
Civilians and advocacy groups remain concerned about privacy matters. They do not want their personal lives filmed, especially when they are in difficult and stressful situations. Officers have privacy concerns too.
Both police departments and state laws are inconsistent about whether officers must notify civilians when they are being filmed. This causes some concern.
Most departments recommend in their policies that officers notify citizens of the BWC, especially if asked about it.
There are concerns about an anticipated surge in FOIA and other requests for access to BWC footage and about the responsibilities the police agencies have for redaction and protecting privacy.
There are concerns about police filming of vulnerable and sensitive populations – juveniles, people in distress, domestic violence situations, and child molestation and child sexual assault cases.
There are concerns about police filming of critical incidents – police use of force, police shootings, mass demonstrations. These concerns relate to camera activation and deactivation and around when officers are allowed to view their own footage in use-of-force and shooting incidents.
There are concerns about the complex technology required to support BWCs – peripheral equipment, docking stations, bandwidth for file transfer, and storage of video evidence – and the associated costs of all this technology. These costs can be prohibitive for small and medium-size police agencies.

10. Research Findings: Impact on Citizen Complaints and Use of Force
Rialto (CA) Police Department
Civilian complaints dropped by 88 percent (24 to 3).
Use of force dropped by 60 percent (61 to 25).
Mesa (AZ) Police Department
Civilian complaints dropped by 60 percent among BWC officers (pre-post).
Use of force dropped by 75 percent among BWC officers.
Recent research studies in Rialto, CA, and Mesa, AZ, found dramatic reductions in civilian complaints against the police.
88 percent drop in Rialto, 60 percent drop in Mesa.
Similar reductions were found in use-of-force incidents.
60 percent drop in Rialto.
75 percent drop in Mesa.
It is important to understand a few things about these findings.
These dramatic reductions are not found in all BWC studies; some studies show only modest declines.
The reductions observed will depend in part on the state of affairs before BWCs are introduced into a department.
If complaints and use-of-force incidents are already low before cameras are introduced (for example, on average fewer than one use-of-force incident per officer per year), the introduction of cameras is not likely to produce a dramatic effect.
Similarly, if public trust in a local policy agency is at a good level, the introduction of BWCs is not likely to effect much change.
It is also important to understand that by and large, when BWCs are introduced, good things happen – complaints and use-of-force incidents tend to go down. Other benefits are realized too – enhanced trust, better prosecutions, less officer time in court, and so forth.

11. Research Findings: Impact on Citizen Complaints and Use of Force
Phoenix (AZ) Police Department
Complaints against BWC officers dropped by 23 percent.
Complaints against comparison officers increased by 10.6 percent.
Orlando (FL) Police Department
Civilian complaints dropped 60 percent among BWC officers (pre-post).
Use of force dropped by 75 percent among BWC officers.
Here we have the results from two other BWC studies.
In Phoenix, Arizona, researchers found a more modest effect – civilian complaints against BWC officers dropped by 23 percent, whereas complaints against officers in the comparison group (who did not wear cameras) increased by 11 percent.
In Orlando, Florida, researchers found dramatic reductions in complaints and use-of-force incidents.

12. Research Findings: Enhanced Citizen Perceptions of Police
Spokane Civilian Attitudes about BWCs (n=297)
Percent Agree/ Strongly Agree
Video cameras should be worn by all officers in Spokane PD.
86.3
Using video cameras will make officers act more professionally.
77.5
The use of video cameras will hurt police-community relations.
14.4
The public tends to have a positive view of BWCs, even with the lingering concerns about privacy.
Here we see that in Spokane, Washington, the majority of survey respondents had positive views of BWCs. In the Spokane study, researchers interviewed individuals who had been stopped by the police and who had had a variety of interactions with police officers; all of the individuals interviewed had been recorded by a BWC.
This is important because general community studies about the police tend to produce positive findings about citizen perceptions; people who have had actual interactions with the police may be more likely to express negative opinions.
Keep in mind, however, that this study asks people about their views of BWCs, not of Spokane police officers.
In Spokane, 86 percent of respondents felt that all Spokane officers should wear cameras – this represents a positive view of cameras, not necessarily of officers.
More than 75 percent of respondents said cameras will make officers act more professionally.
Fewer than 15 percent felt that cameras would hurt police-community relations.

13. Research Findings: Enhanced Citizen Perceptions of Police
Spokane Civilian Attitudes about BWCs (n=297)
Percent Agree/ Strongly Agree
Citizens will be more cooperative when they become aware that an officer is wearing a video camera.
71.0
Police will be more respectful to citizens when wearing video cameras.
77.4
The use of video cameras will reduce complaints against officers.
64.6
The benefits of police using video cameras outweigh the costs.
76.7
These are additional findings from the Spokane study.
Again, we see largely positive results from these survey questions about BWCs:
More than 70 percent felt that citizens would be more cooperative with BWCs present.
More than 75 percent felt that cameras would make police officers more respectful.
Almost 65 percent felt that cameras would reduce complaints against police officers.
More than 75 percent felt that the benefits of cameras outweigh the costs.

14. Mixed Findings: More Work to Be Done
Ariel et al. (2016)
Under certain conditions, use of force increases (when BWC not activated).
Assaults on officers more common when they are wearing BWCs.
Mesa PD
Under a more discretionary policy, the number of recorded encounters declined by 42 percent.
London Metro
No impact on officer activity (stop, search, arrest).
No impact on victims’ satisfaction/cooperation.
Here we note that there are some recent studies with findings different from those of the studies discussed so far.
A recent study by Barak Ariel found that in some instances, use of force increases with BWC usage, especially when the camera is not activated; the study also found that officers are more likely to be assaulted when wearing BWCs.
The Mesa study found that under a more discretionary BWC policy (e.g., a policy that gives police officers more discretion regarding activation and deactivation), there are fewer recorded police-civilian encounters.
A study by the London Metropolitan Police found that BWCs did not produce an impact on officer activity (stops, searches, arrests) or on victim satisfaction or cooperation with the police.

15. Mixed Findings: More Work to Be Done
San Diego PD
Increase in lesser forms of force.
Edmonton PD
No impact on complaints or use of force.
In San Diego, a recent study found that BWCs produce an increase in lesser forms of force by police.
A study in the Edmonton, Canada, police department found that BWCs had no impact on complaints or use of force.
These findings tell us several things:
We still have a lot to learn. Perhaps the impact of BWCs will not be universally positive; if not, we need to learn more about the conditions under which they do not produce the anticipated positive outcomes.
The law enforcement experience with BWCs is still new, and as the experience grows we can expect some changes in research findings. We need to continue this research to understand the issue better.
On balance, at this point, the results of methodologically sound research on BWCs points to more positive than negative or neutral effects.

16. Concerns About BWCs Available funding for initial and long-term costs?
What is your city’s procurement process, compared with BJA requirements?
Internal support among the rank and file? Union?
Have you engaged with important external stakeholders, especially prosecutors?
Let’s move from research findings to a more general discussion of concerns about BWC implementation. This material includes issues from research, but also from the experiences of police professionals and community groups from around the country:
First, we must all be realistic about costs. The one-time cost of purchasing cameras and related equipment and storage options is different from the long-term costs of equipment upgrades, replacement, and long-term storage. Some of this is accounted for in vendor contracts, but still, long-term costs and burdens should be considered.
When purchasing BWCs, it is important to ensure that your procurement requirements are consistent with the federal government’s, particularly BJA’s (the BWC funding agency). There is a link to BJA procurement guidelines on the resource page at the end of this presentation.
Has your body-worn camera program plan and policy been reviewed by the rank and file and by union representatives in your department? This is an advisable approach.
Have other community stakeholder groups and advocacy groups had a chance to review the program plan and policy? They too should be included in the implementation process.

17. Concerns About BWCs
Does your agency/city have the necessary technological infrastructure for BWCs?
How do you properly plan and implement an effective BWC program?
Administrative policy and training are crucial. Where can you get assistance/guidance?
Police agencies beginning BWC programs quickly find out that a basic infrastructure is necessary to support cameras because of a lot of information technology (IT) concerns – room and capacity to support multiple docking stations; information processing bandwidth to support the timely uploading of camera footage from the devices to storage locations; and, if possible, links to record management systems that support the efficient management of all the new data.
Generally, you should have a comprehensive planning process in place to guide policy development and BWC implementation, including a multidisciplinary working group (with representatives from IT, IA, rank and file, union, advocacy groups, community stakeholders, local government, prosecutors, defense bar).
Have you consulted the BJA BWC Toolkit website (on the resources page) or the CNA BWC TTA website (on the resources page)? There are several sources of advice and support you can consult.

18. Things to Consider
For the officer - Is the ability to review video to assist in writing a more complete and accurate report more important than reflecting capturing the officer’s original and immediate impressions and perspectives about an event?
For the supervisor – reviewing officers’ videos for compliance and training purposes.
For the investigator – visual evidence to review and evaluate.
As noted earlier in this presentation, careful consideration should be given to when officers can review their own video footage.
Generally, for routine activities, it is seen as beneficial for officers to review their BWC footage prior to writing reports, for accuracy’s sake.
However, when an officer is involved in a critical incident, like a severe use of force, a police shooting, or a vehicle chase, opinions differ about whether officers should be able to review their video footage prior to submitting a report or making a statement.
There is value in having the officer prepare the report and/or statement first, prior to submitting a report, because this preserves what the officer experienced and records what they did in the circumstance.
However, an officer’s perception of what happened may be different from what actually happened or what was recorded by the BWC.
BWC policies across the country are divided on this issue.
Some disallow officers viewing their videos.
Some allow viewing of the video after the report has been filed, and some allow modifications to the report after viewing the video.
Some allow officers to review their video footage with no restrictions.
The balance seems to favor officer review with some restrictions.
Most BWC policies allow supervisors to review officers’ videos (some require it) to monitor policy compliance and effectiveness and to identify footage that will be helpful in officer training.
Most BWC policies allow internal affairs and use-of-force investigators to review BWC footage to investigate critical incidents.

19. Things to Consider
For the prosecutor – there is more evidence to review in determining appropriate charges, if any, to pursue; however, more time is needed to review the additional evidence, and storage space is required.
Video retention and deletion.
Prosecutors’ offices have many things to consider regarding BWCs
How will they manage the new evidence coming their way, especially when multiple police agencies in a county will likely have different cameras, different technology, and different storage and camera data management systems? They too will need new personnel resources to manage camera evidence and review it for case preparation.
The length of time video evidence is retained in the records system (a cost issue) will typically be dictated by department evidence retention policies.
There will be some room for discretion here—for example, how long to retain nonessential videos; videos that might factor into a civilian complaint; or videos for research, analysis, and policy compliance purposes. Thus, some trade-offs will have to be considered, and some conventions will emerge about “how important is this video information given the costs for retaining it?”

20. Things to Consider Privacy – is this Big Brother?
No one will want to talk.
Punitive use by supervisors.
What if the device fails?
In the majority of cases, video exonerates the officer from citizen complaints quickly.
Although general concern has been expressed from several perspectives (community, advocacy organizations, officers) about the potential for BWCs to amount to an invasion of personal privacy, to date this problem has not emerged as a significant one. We will have to wait and see.
Concern has been expressed that people will not want to talk openly with the police when a BWC is present. This may be true; most policies allow police officers discretion in deactivating BWCs when sensitive information might be provided or when civilians request that the camera be turned off.
Concern has been expressed by officers and police union representatives that allowing supervisors to access officers’ BWC footage will allow them to go on “fishing expeditions” for officer mistakes. Some policies address this directly and forbid this activity; others provide guidelines for what supervisors can do with video footage they review and have developed nonpunitive approaches to encouraging policy compliance.
As with other equipment, when equipment failures occur, officers will record the failures in their routine report writing.

21. Things to Consider
BWCs are yet another tool in the police officer's tool box.
Implementation of BWC's will require:
A sound policy.
Adequate training.
Constant supervision.
Community education and buy-in.
There are other concerns and considerations, to be sure. We have covered just those that have come up in the research or in the ongoing dialogues and conversations we have heard around BWCs.
Let’s remember that BWCs are one more tool in the growing and rather full tool box that police officers have at their disposal.
BWCs will not solve all problems.
BWCs will introduce problems and complexities of their own.
Again, the research evidence is much more positive than negative.
And the benefits are realized for both police and the community (remember Peel’s principles – the police are the community and the community are the police).
The best approach, as long as BWCs are part of the police officer’s tool box, includes the following:
Develop a comprehensive BWC policy with input from multiple sources, internal and external.
Provide adequate training on the BWC policy as well as on the equipment.
Monitor and supervise policy compliance vigorously (not necessarily in a punitive fashion).
Keep the community apprised of how things are going and how policy is changing based on experience. Keep them involved.

22. Lessons Learned: Policy
BWC policy must be well thought out.
Privacy concerns must be addressed.
Record/don’t record/officer discretion.
Supervisory review – random.
Supervisory review of video in use of force is mandatory.
Now what have we learned about BWCs and their impact, or better yet, what lessons have we learned up to this point?
As noted above, BWC policy is extremely important and must be carefully developed with broad input and inclusion.
In BWC policy, privacy concerns must be balanced with the need for the video evidence.
Careful thought must be given to officer discretion about when to activate and deactivate the BWC. There are guidelines, but this is in part a function of local community and police department culture.
Supervisor review of video footage is essential. To guard against concerns about supervisor “fishing expeditions,” a random selection of videos for review is a good policy, and agency policy will require that supervisors review all evidence pertaining to officer involvement in critical incidents.

23. Lessons Learned: Potential Benefits of Community Engagement
Were community groups introduced to the program predeployment?
Were community groups involved in the planning process?
Did community groups have a chance to voice concerns/ask questions?
Did community groups have an opportunity to review the agency’s administrative policy? Is it publicly available now?
Did the agency “market” the BWC program internally and with the community?
Does the agency regularly communicate with citizens who are recorded?
Here we pay special attention to the issue of community engagement in BWC planning and policy development.
We ask this series of questions to illustrate how important we think community engagement is regarding BWCs, especially when issues of transparency and trust are paramount.
We suggest that if you answer “no” to any of these questions, you should consider improving the extent to which community engagement is part of the BWC planning and policy process.
The last question is particularly important. If you want to understand what impact your BWC policy has on your community, you should find a way to regularly contact people who have been recorded (as was done in the Spokane, Washington, example above). This will require allocation of resources.

24. Lessons Learned: The BWC is a Tool
Police officers prepare all manner of written reports.
The purpose of a report is to document what an officer observed, what he/she did, and why he/she did it.
The need for accuracy increases with the seriousness of the situation.
Here we return to the issue of what function BWCs serve.
In one sense, the BWC is simply a recording device that provides more (not always more accurate) information pertaining to officer actions and responses to calls for service and a range of other situations they encounter.
However, the possibility exists that the BWC will capture and reveal things that the officer did not recognize or fully appreciate when “in the moment” of a call or a response to a situation.
The more serious the situation, the more demand there will be for independent evidence of what happened.
BWCs do provide the possibility for more independent evidence, but they do not provide “purely” independent evidence, which is hard to come by. For example:
The technology can fail.
The camera can be at the wrong angle.
The camera can become detached.
Officers can purposefully dislodge them or turn them away (this is why policy compliance analysis and supervisor review is important).
So we must appreciate both the value and the limitations of BWCs.

25. Lessons Learned: The Benefit of the BWC
Benefits to officers by documenting actions and behaviors that were often undocumented before.
Benefits to police agencies by improving efficiency (better evidence = better cases) and improving officer training.
One of the great benefits of BWCs is the documentation of real police work (without the benefit of TV scripts and producers), which provides a vast amount of new information about the work police officers do, with all the problems, complications, and benefits that are involved.
Another great benefit is the capture of video evidence that can support officer testimony and advancements in officer training.

26. Emerging Issues When to record:
Significant consideration when drafting the policy.
Ranges from all the time to limited circumstances.
Caution against drafting a policy that:
No one understands.
No one can implement.
No one can articulate.
Storage of data:
Can be costly, when packed with services for redaction, data sharing, data management, and software and hardware upgrades.
Determine time limits for expungement.
We now turn our attention to some emerging issues in BWC practice and implementation.
BWC policies should provide very specific instructions for when officers should activate BWCs.
They should not mandate recording of all activities on a shift (very costly, privacy concerns).
They should not be too limiting, however.
The important point is that the policy should be clear. It should be stated in real, operational terms that officers can relate to.
Storage of BWC data and footage is an ongoing concern.
Generally, we can expect storage costs to go down as technology improves and competition continues.
Different options are emerging, such as hybrid storage systems (some data stored locally, some in the cloud).

27. Emerging Issues Accessing stored video:
Who can access and for what purpose?
Reporting officer.
Other officers involved in incident.
Supervisors.
Trainers.
Internal affairs.
DA personnel.
We expect there will be some developments regarding who has access to BWC footage.
There will be slightly different rules for officers, supervisors, training staff, IA, and so on.
The bigger issue, perhaps, concerns:
Access for researchers.
Access for prosecutors (though this issue seems to be settling down with prosecutor access to the cloud).
When video should be released to the public.
Police chiefs and prosecutors may not be in agreement on this in specific cases.
Some state laws are intervening (generally opposing release).
Police chiefs are concerned about revictimization and other privacy issues.

28. Emerging Issues
Urgency to implement can compromise thorough testing processes.
Purchasing the latest and most advanced technology versus basic technology. Should we purchase cameras that exceed human visual capability?
Urgency to implement is a very important issue.
Sometimes there is external or community pressure to implement BWCs, but a rush to implement can have several negative effects:
It can compromise the department’s ability to do a full pilot program and test different technologies.
This can result in the purchase of inadequate equipment.
It can result in violations of procurement requirements.
And it can interfere with attempts to research and study BWC impacts, if adequate time is not given for pre- and post-measurements.
Sometimes the procurement of the most sophisticated and advanced technology might not be the best approach.
If the BWCs purchased see more than the human eye, and with greater clarity, you might actually compromise evidence presented in court because the officer’s honest testimony might be inconsistent with what the camera footage shows.
Still, if accuracy of evidence is the main goal, substantial efforts will have to be invested in education about BWCs across the system, standardized jury instructions, and so forth.
Also, a prosecutor’s office might be well served by a jurisdiction in which all or most police agencies use the same basic technology. This reduces their need to accommodate multiple technologies and levels of sophistication.

29. Emerging Issues
“Civilizing” effect on officers and civilians— both are important.
Training and public education.
Officer safety should be a positive outcome.
State legislation (public access, wiretap, retention).
Initially, most of us thought BWCs were needed to moderate police officer behavior. We are learning that BWCs probably moderate both officer and civilian behavior, evidenced by the number of civilian complaints that are resolved in favor of officers based on video footage.
We have probably not fully realized or taken advantage of the value that BWC video footage has for police training and public education about the realities of police work and police-civilian encounters.
If the “civilizing effect” of cameras is real, and research suggests that it is, we should see positive results in terms of lower rates of officer (and civilian) injuries with the use of BWCs. Research is beginning to look at this issue.
State legislatures are beginning to react to BWCs, revising laws on eavesdropping, requirements to notify civilians about the fact of recording, and public access to video footage (in most cases restricting such access); link to the Urban Institute’s compendium of state laws on BWCs on the resource page.

30. Emerging BWC Technology
Intuitive technology
Automatic activation (policy-based/video triggers)
Remotely (dispatch)
Accelerometer
Voice
GEO fencing
Sensors in vehicle
Media upload to storage while recording
Live video streaming
A few notes concerning emerging technology:
Make your technology choices based on requirements for the department, court system, and community, not the vendors. In the past couple of years there has been a dramatic increase in the criminal justice use of body-worn cameras. At last count, there were more than 60 different cameras on the market, with each vendor striving to capture the biggest market share possible. Vendors frequently offer features and capabilities they think you need that are not based on actual needs of first responders.
If allowed under procurement rules, release a Request for Information (RFI) to potential BWC vendors. This will provide you with an understanding of what capabilities are available. Once the capabilities are known, match with requirements and conduct equipment trials before even thinking about developing a Request for Proposal (RFP).
Before making a decision to purchase, at a minimum talk with other agencies and find out what works, what doesn't, and what is most beneficial to the mission. 
The life cycle of BWC equipment is short, in most cases only two to three years. Plan ahead and assign someone within the department to stay current with technology advances and developments.

31. Emerging BWC Technology
Convergent and multipurpose
Communications
BOLOs
Officer down
VOIP and text messaging
Evidence management
Asset tracking
GPS location/history
Report generation/alerts
Detailed chain of custody
Automated video redaction
One final note:
The use of first-generation or early products should be approached with caution and a bit of skepticism, as vendor claims may not be the same as what is experienced in real-world use. Almost all products will invariably change and get better as the technology matures.

32. Body-Worn Camera Technical Assistance Resources
BJA Body-Worn Camera Program
BWC Toolkit
BWC TTA Website
BWC Podcast Series
Procurement
Audits and Policy Compliance
On this slide and the next several slides we provide links to a number of existing online resources for agencies implementing BWCs and for groups, organizations, or individuals interested in learning more about BWCs.
Generally, if you go to the BWC Toolkit or BWC TTA websites and search on any of these topics, you will find several pages, in some cases 10 pages or more, of relevant information by individual topic.
BJA BWC program – a link to the BJA website with information about BWC funding and technical assistance programs.
BWC Toolkit – a link to a comprehensive array of online resources addressing the topics covered in this presentation, and more.
BWC TTA Website – a link to BWC technical assistance resources developed and coordinated by the CNA Institute for Public Research; Arizona State University; and Justice and Security Strategies, the BWC TTA collaborative funded by BJA.
BWC Podcast Series – a link to the BWC Podcast Series developed by BJA and CNA, on Youtube.
Procurement – a link to special technical assistance resources on BWC procurement.
Audits and Policy Compliance – a link to a webinar sponsored by BJA on BWC compliance matters.

33. Body-Worn Camera Technical Assistance Resources
Analytics
erasinLawEnforcement.pdf
the-Use-of-Video-in-Public-Safety_Final.pdf
Impacts on Prosecution and Defense
Transcript.pdf
Transcript.pdf
March2017.pdf
A link to resources and information on how researchers are developing analytic approaches to studying BWC data and footage, from the BWC Toolkit.
Impacts on Prosecution and Defense – links to several podcasts on prosecutor issues and a link to a report from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers on their recommendations for BWC policy and practice.

34. Body-Worn Camera Technical Assistance Resources
Victims’ Concerns
pisode43_Transcript.pdf
Compendium of State BWC Laws
COPS & PERF: Implementing a Body-Worn Camera Program
IACP Model Body-Worn Camera Policy
Victims’ Concerns – a link to a podcast with Jay Stanly of ACLU on privacy concerns and BWCs and a link to a podcast with
Jessica Mindlin, National Director of Trainee and Technical Assistance at the Victim Rights Law Center.
Compendium of State BWC Laws – a link to a comprehensive listing of state laws on BWCs compiled by the Urban Institute.
COPS & PERF – a link to a report on how to implement BWC programs from the COPS Office and the Police Executive Research Forum.
IACP Model BWC Policy – a link to the model BWC policy of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

35. Conclusion
BWCs show great promise for helping police officers provide more accurate reports, for assisting in investigations, and for increasing police accountability.
They are NOT a panacea: BWCs are one additional tool at the officer’s disposal.
Without sound and collaboratively developed policies, and if not properly handled, BWCs will likely cause more problems than they resolve.