My dad is a high up supervisor for the local PD. He pushed and succeeded in getting a system that synchronizes the body cams and dash cams as soon as code is being run and keeps running for several minutes afterwards. There is also no way to prevent them from automatically uploading to the server once in range of HQ and no way to delete them easily. I wish all departments would go this route
IANAL, but I was on a jury this spring in a domestic assault case. In the closing arguments, the prosecutor shares slides of all the medical Foo the victim experienced after she was assaulted, including all the times she was administered painkillers. Not 3 minutes later, the defense is giving its closing arguments and states that the victim HAD to be lying about how hurt she was because her pain levels kept bouncing all over the place. (8-10 when not on pain killers, 0-3 when she was) He had completely missed the 6 times she was given painkillers and made his whole case around how unreliable she was. He concludes, we head to the deliberation room, and I immediately ask the two nurses on the jury if that sort of pain reporting was normal for someone being administered Fentanyl. They confirm it. Made several of the charges pretty easy to gain consensus on.
Cops can turn off their body cameras because they're required to turn over footage to any FOIA request, and sometimes they have to discuss sensitive information, including private information about a suspect that is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. At least that's how it's supposed to work. You better believe cops abuse the shit out of it. Personally, I think they should be required to keep them going at all times, but be allowed to edit out any sensitive information before turning it over from a FOIA request, unless a lawyer working on the case for either side, or the suspect requests the video. Then the defense can choose what they want to release of their "sensitive information" and the prosecution will have a full copy to be able to prove any selective editing by the defense.
This is not correct. The body camera is supposed to stay on. All body cam footage to be released for a FOIA is reviewed before release and the sensitive information is redacted out. Then the full video without redaction can be obtained by the process you described.
If a cop busts in on an SA and turns off the body cam because he realizes that the victim is underage and he doesn't want to be recording what is legally considered CP, should his testimony about what happened be thrown out then? Should the attacker get to walk because "the cop turned off his body cam and so *must* be lying about the situation"? And *that's* part of why they can turn off the body cams and not be automatically called liars.
@@bright_land it should be recorded, then deleted in the exact millisecond the trial ends. The cop should also get a substitute body cam, so they can't possibly be guilty of tampering with said recording (at least by them, but the priority here is guaranteeing only SA culprits get punished, no innocents and no get-aways)
I went to a lawyer for a divorce from my drug addicted husband. The lawyer asked if I would have any witnesses on my side to back up my claim. I handed her a dozen pictures of him pasted out all over the house and yard. The "gotcha moment" was the picture of our son standing next to his father in his high school graduation gown moments before we're leaving for the school graduation. Good old dad was pasted out, face down with his ass up in the air. The lawyer said, "this will do",
Anybody manufacturing a product will find away to improve things for themselves. If I do step 3 before step 2 it makes step 4 go much faster. Sometimes that doesn't get put on the wall. Don't toss out experience since it is the best teacher.
Last story: So wouldn't the two men on trial be found not guilty? They were charged of murdering X. X shows up alive. Therefore, they didn't kill him/her. Prosecution would have to charge them of the murder of the actual victim's name, not X.
They don't know each other. Think of it that way: You're arguing with a guy in a bar, you kill him. Days later, you're facing charges for the murder of "John Smith" Then as witness, they bring "Kyle Thompson", who was the guy you supposedly murdered. What I mean to say is, these guys probably didn't know each other and had no idea they were on trial for the wrong person's murder
In the story at 12:40, I honestly feel that objection should have been sustained. That is not relevant to the trial and unfair to the lady, as, yes, of course her lawyer is discussing the law and how she should answer questioning with her. That is what a lawyer's job is to do. All that serves to do is taint the well for the defense and give this impression that it's somehow wrong to discuss how you should answer questions with your lawyer. If she knew how to answer the questions, *she wouldn't have a lawyer.* Makes sense? Law is very dependent on language; you could mean one thing, but depending on your language it is interpreted totally different. There also exists incriminating lines of questioning which are meant to trap people, sometimes innocent, into saying something that damages their case. 'My life is my life' was honestly a very valid response, because the prosecution had no right to break client/lawyer confidentiality in that instance either.
Except that as someone who has been sworn in to give evidence (witness/plaintiff/defendant, doesn't matter which) you are not allowed to discuss your testimony with ANYONE during any kind of break, not even your own lawyer. That was why it was a problem. Judges usually remind people of this before lunch breaks, or if the testimony goes overnight into another day. Something like "don't forget, you are still under oath, so don't discuss your evidence with anyone else, not even your legal team"
What’s dumb about them being able to turn off their cams is the please cams also protect them if they aren’t doing anything wrong and someone claims they do well the body cams can prove their innocent
I was dealing with a tribunal case about an old lady who had been getting a British regular payment to help her pay her rent. The payment came from her local town council. They contacted her to ask about a possible change in her other income. She didn't understand and just ignored it. So they stopped her payments and she fell behind with her rent. She asked for an appeal and they said no, so it ended up in front of me. By now she owed a year's rent and was desperate. I checked the relevant law. It says quite clearly that if there is no response to the first contact, they have to try again before they can stop payments. I put this to the rather smug representative of the council. He looked at me, sighed witheringly, and said, "Well, of course we know about the guidelines, but it isn't always possible to apply them." I reminded him sweetly that it was the law, not guidelines, and as the Council now had the full details of her circumstances they should do the maths and pay her landlord [actually another department of the same council] all the arrears of her rent back to the day they stopped it. It was so satisfying.
Remember police cam footage is classed as public record and if the government or police release the footage its generally considered to be public domain, anyone can make a freedom of information request for the footage. But also, do note that most body cams are always rolling and when the record button is pressed the past 30s - 5mins is also saved. In most cases bodycams are turned off to protect an identity or protect minors.
Story 13. I can guarantee you beyond a shadow of a doubt the builder didn't lose a penny due to the judgements. All they need to do is open a new LLC. Transfer all assets to the new LLC. Then shut down the original LLC that has the judgement against it. Voila, still in business and the law can't touch them or collect on them.
I work in dispatch and our officers actually have to have their body cam off if they come into dispatch or let us know it is on because NCIC can not be recorded in any way. They in general don't actually keep their cams on, but will get told off by their LT if they don't have them on for any sort of well anything that isn't just watching the traffic or doing a report or things like that.
I was in jail for two months and there was an incident where a particular officer (we called him roid rage) threw his body cam AND the body cam of the person he was training into the trashcan before beating an inmate who didn't speak English. This inmate was sitting on his bed eating leftovers around 2am, 10 hours after dinner was served. Somehow, all the cameras in the room stopped working during this incident and so did the body cams. He was charged a second time with assaulting an officer. The EXACT SAME cop that beat the shit out of this poor Mexican guy was the one who took the witness testimonies. And he wrote whatever the hell he wanted, as we told him otherwise. Somehow THAT bodycam footage ALSO got lost. From all FIVE officers that were doing the investigation. On top of that they were only giving us 1200 calories per day. 70% of that was carbs. They told us that if we wanted to be full that we had to buy our own food. But if any money got sent to us they took FOURTY PERCENT of what was sent to us for commissary. Jails and Prisons are for profit businesses, if you didn't know. There was a solid five days in a row we were ONLY served peanut butter. Some people were allergic to peanuts. So they couldn't eat for 5 whole days. The cops LAUGHED at them for asking for something they weren't allergic to. ACAB forreal.
I wish cops weren’t able to turn off their body cams. Like, I get there being sensitive information and whatnot, but… surely the safety and comfort of the public is important, too? Like, I get there’s a lot of legal things that can make things difficult, but on the surface level as an average citizen, I dislike that cops are able to turn off dash and body cams, without much trouble.
7:09 im not a expert but when there on duty they can’t and I know they have them for when stuff like this happens and I think it’s also for the cops partition slash for evidence but that’s the only 1 I’m not 100% shur on not a expert so probably don’t “me on that lol
I agree about the The body cam thing. To the point where if an officer is accused of something and the body cam footage is mysteriously missing, it should be treated as a 100% undeniable admission of guilt and should carry the absolute maximum sentence for whatever they are accused of during that time frame.
BEST STORY EVERY - SHORT VERSION!!! (Defendant Insist On taking The Stand! She Closes Her Self Defense Stating) - . . . "AND DATS WHEN DUH MY GUNz WENT OFF" (Lawyer Walking Away From Questioning Her, Turns Around and Says) - . . . "SIX TIMES!?!" . . . "Thank You Your Honor." . . . "That Will Be All, The Witness May Step Down"
Or have a video of several vehicles driving by a camera, ask the officer to identify the speed of each, and then reveal they're all going the same speed 😂
That one comes across as someone who chronically gets speeding tickets and has learned the methods lawyers use to get them invalidated failing to do so himself at trial
1:58 - im 10 sec into this scenario and all i can see in my mind's eye is the equation math woman meme. something tells me this isnt gonna be worth it...
Part of the reason cops can turn off body cams (and aren't automatically assumed to be lying about events if they do) is simple: if they come across children in states of partial or full undress (interrupt an SA, raid a crackhouse with neglected kids inside, removing kids from unsuitable conditions, etc.), they're *legally prohibited* from recording it. Such footage would be considered CP, so the cops *have* to be able to turn off the recordings. You could argue that an exemption could be made in the law about such footage/police possession of, but either the legislators never thought of it or they decided not to risk creating any loopholes that somebody could try to exploit. Plus as others pointed out, having them run all the time would be a waste of batteries and storage capacity (and thus tax dollars). They should only be on when the officers are actually doing something. And even then, as noted there *are* some cases that they legally *cannot* record.
about your question about the cops head camera being able to be turned off: EVERY electric device should have an off button/switch and for nearly all of them it makes sense to have one. in the case of the cameras, if they run nonstop 24/7, they would either run out of data storage or battery charge constantly. and they would also produce MANY hours of useless recordings from situations like having them sitting on their charging station or in some lockers after work. i agree that there should be a stricter protocol for turning them off ,but this is reality, people will always find ways to just not follow them, be it laziness, convenience, forgetfulness or criminal energy.
Hold on. Did I miss something with that last story? So the two dudes sat through an entire trial hearing about how they were responsible for the murder of some guy they never heard of, rather than they guy they thought they killed? A whole trial went forward with the witnesses describing an argument that never happened? Maybe there's something I'm not getting, but I'm calling bullshit on that one.
Should we record the cops taking a piss? Eating lunch? All of the little things you do on the job, that aren't related to the job. Dude, have you ever had a job?
god I love channels stealing Reddit posts to make profit off by doing minimal effort in reading said posts, thanks for being a stain on the RUclips algorithm!
Bro channels like this are grate and li-me I always say if you don’t like it why are you takeing the time out if your day yo click on it and comment also you don’t need to be braking your back all the time to get payed the less work the. Better wtf are you talking about oh my god peoples brains that think like you need to be studied
That last story... "But... You were dead!" "The tales of my death were... Greatly exaggerated."
😂when the two guys saw him they probably thought he was a ghost at first
@@jacobmuench5277 they probably looked at each other, looked at the guy, back to each other and thought they were both going insane
My dad is a high up supervisor for the local PD. He pushed and succeeded in getting a system that synchronizes the body cams and dash cams as soon as code is being run and keeps running for several minutes afterwards. There is also no way to prevent them from automatically uploading to the server once in range of HQ and no way to delete them easily. I wish all departments would go this route
IANAL, but I was on a jury this spring in a domestic assault case. In the closing arguments, the prosecutor shares slides of all the medical Foo the victim experienced after she was assaulted, including all the times she was administered painkillers. Not 3 minutes later, the defense is giving its closing arguments and states that the victim HAD to be lying about how hurt she was because her pain levels kept bouncing all over the place. (8-10 when not on pain killers, 0-3 when she was) He had completely missed the 6 times she was given painkillers and made his whole case around how unreliable she was.
He concludes, we head to the deliberation room, and I immediately ask the two nurses on the jury if that sort of pain reporting was normal for someone being administered Fentanyl. They confirm it. Made several of the charges pretty easy to gain consensus on.
That's a really bad letter abbreviation
you anal???
Hahahahhahahahaha the factory instructions story is gold
Story 3: (in best CSI Miami voice) I guess you can say the writing *puts on sunglasses* was on the wall.
YEEEEEAAAAAAAA!
*bad to the bone plays*
Cops can turn off their body cameras because they're required to turn over footage to any FOIA request, and sometimes they have to discuss sensitive information, including private information about a suspect that is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. At least that's how it's supposed to work. You better believe cops abuse the shit out of it. Personally, I think they should be required to keep them going at all times, but be allowed to edit out any sensitive information before turning it over from a FOIA request, unless a lawyer working on the case for either side, or the suspect requests the video. Then the defense can choose what they want to release of their "sensitive information" and the prosecution will have a full copy to be able to prove any selective editing by the defense.
Well someone did there research good job
This is not correct. The body camera is supposed to stay on. All body cam footage to be released for a FOIA is reviewed before release and the sensitive information is redacted out. Then the full video without redaction can be obtained by the process you described.
@@LM-wz9yw is that a local policy or a law?
@@LM-wz9yw isn’t that basically what I said only wors in every way
@@TyranicalBanana Law, reinforced by the Supreme Court
Speeding ticket guy should’ve chosen a jury trial, never chose a bench trial, always go with the jury. Probably would’ve won
we should make a law that says if a cop turns off their bodycam, they are presumed to be lying about what happened
yeah i agree
If a cop busts in on an SA and turns off the body cam because he realizes that the victim is underage and he doesn't want to be recording what is legally considered CP, should his testimony about what happened be thrown out then? Should the attacker get to walk because "the cop turned off his body cam and so *must* be lying about the situation"?
And *that's* part of why they can turn off the body cams and not be automatically called liars.
@@bright_land it should be recorded, then deleted in the exact millisecond the trial ends. The cop should also get a substitute body cam, so they can't possibly be guilty of tampering with said recording (at least by them, but the priority here is guaranteeing only SA culprits get punished, no innocents and no get-aways)
The secret Krabby Patty Formula ingredient was the lovely old ladies who worked at the original factory
The secret ingredient... was love ❤️
I went to a lawyer for a divorce from my drug addicted husband. The lawyer asked if I would have any witnesses on my side to back up my claim. I handed her a dozen pictures of him pasted out all over the house and yard. The "gotcha moment" was the picture of our son standing next to his father in his high school graduation gown moments before we're leaving for the school graduation. Good old dad was pasted out, face down with his ass up in the air. The lawyer said, "this will do",
Anybody manufacturing a product will find away to improve things for themselves. If I do step 3 before step 2 it makes step 4 go much faster. Sometimes that doesn't get put on the wall. Don't toss out experience since it is the best teacher.
Lost it right at the beginning at, “Did kindergarten not go well for you?” 🤣🤣🤣
Last story: So wouldn't the two men on trial be found not guilty?
They were charged of murdering X. X shows up alive. Therefore, they didn't kill him/her.
Prosecution would have to charge them of the murder of the actual victim's name, not X.
They don't know each other. Think of it that way: You're arguing with a guy in a bar, you kill him.
Days later, you're facing charges for the murder of "John Smith"
Then as witness, they bring "Kyle Thompson", who was the guy you supposedly murdered.
What I mean to say is, these guys probably didn't know each other and had no idea they were on trial for the wrong person's murder
They still killed someone. It doesn't matter who.
In the story at 12:40, I honestly feel that objection should have been sustained. That is not relevant to the trial and unfair to the lady, as, yes, of course her lawyer is discussing the law and how she should answer questioning with her. That is what a lawyer's job is to do. All that serves to do is taint the well for the defense and give this impression that it's somehow wrong to discuss how you should answer questions with your lawyer.
If she knew how to answer the questions, *she wouldn't have a lawyer.* Makes sense? Law is very dependent on language; you could mean one thing, but depending on your language it is interpreted totally different. There also exists incriminating lines of questioning which are meant to trap people, sometimes innocent, into saying something that damages their case. 'My life is my life' was honestly a very valid response, because the prosecution had no right to break client/lawyer confidentiality in that instance either.
Except that as someone who has been sworn in to give evidence (witness/plaintiff/defendant, doesn't matter which) you are not allowed to discuss your testimony with ANYONE during any kind of break, not even your own lawyer. That was why it was a problem. Judges usually remind people of this before lunch breaks, or if the testimony goes overnight into another day. Something like "don't forget, you are still under oath, so don't discuss your evidence with anyone else, not even your legal team"
I love the niche stuff actually, story 3 was amazing
17:40 your honour the autopsy report was outdated
What’s dumb about them being able to turn off their cams is the please cams also protect them if they aren’t doing anything wrong and someone claims they do well the body cams can prove their innocent
I was dealing with a tribunal case about an old lady who had been getting a British regular payment to help her pay her rent. The payment came from her local town council. They contacted her to ask about a possible change in her other income. She didn't understand and just ignored it. So they stopped her payments and she fell behind with her rent. She asked for an appeal and they said no, so it ended up in front of me. By now she owed a year's rent and was desperate.
I checked the relevant law. It says quite clearly that if there is no response to the first contact, they have to try again before they can stop payments.
I put this to the rather smug representative of the council. He looked at me, sighed witheringly, and said, "Well, of course we know about the guidelines, but it isn't always possible to apply them."
I reminded him sweetly that it was the law, not guidelines, and as the Council now had the full details of her circumstances they should do the maths and pay her landlord [actually another department of the same council] all the arrears of her rent back to the day they stopped it. It was so satisfying.
Remember police cam footage is classed as public record and if the government or police release the footage its generally considered to be public domain, anyone can make a freedom of information request for the footage. But also, do note that most body cams are always rolling and when the record button is pressed the past 30s - 5mins is also saved. In most cases bodycams are turned off to protect an identity or protect minors.
Story 13.
I can guarantee you beyond a shadow of a doubt the builder didn't lose a penny due to the judgements.
All they need to do is open a new LLC. Transfer all assets to the new LLC. Then shut down the original LLC that has the judgement against it.
Voila, still in business and the law can't touch them or collect on them.
I work in dispatch and our officers actually have to have their body cam off if they come into dispatch or let us know it is on because NCIC can not be recorded in any way. They in general don't actually keep their cams on, but will get told off by their LT if they don't have them on for any sort of well anything that isn't just watching the traffic or doing a report or things like that.
I was in jail for two months and there was an incident where a particular officer (we called him roid rage) threw his body cam AND the body cam of the person he was training into the trashcan before beating an inmate who didn't speak English. This inmate was sitting on his bed eating leftovers around 2am, 10 hours after dinner was served. Somehow, all the cameras in the room stopped working during this incident and so did the body cams. He was charged a second time with assaulting an officer. The EXACT SAME cop that beat the shit out of this poor Mexican guy was the one who took the witness testimonies. And he wrote whatever the hell he wanted, as we told him otherwise. Somehow THAT bodycam footage ALSO got lost. From all FIVE officers that were doing the investigation. On top of that they were only giving us 1200 calories per day. 70% of that was carbs. They told us that if we wanted to be full that we had to buy our own food. But if any money got sent to us they took FOURTY PERCENT of what was sent to us for commissary. Jails and Prisons are for profit businesses, if you didn't know.
There was a solid five days in a row we were ONLY served peanut butter. Some people were allergic to peanuts. So they couldn't eat for 5 whole days. The cops LAUGHED at them for asking for something they weren't allergic to. ACAB forreal.
In response to the story about the cops body cams being turned off I mean
Story 11 was pure gold!
I wish cops weren’t able to turn off their body cams. Like, I get there being sensitive information and whatnot, but… surely the safety and comfort of the public is important, too? Like, I get there’s a lot of legal things that can make things difficult, but on the surface level as an average citizen, I dislike that cops are able to turn off dash and body cams, without much trouble.
7:09 im not a expert but when there on duty they can’t and I know they have them for when stuff like this happens and I think it’s also for the cops partition slash for evidence but that’s the only 1 I’m not 100% shur on not a expert so probably don’t “me on that lol
I agree about the The body cam thing. To the point where if an officer is accused of something and the body cam footage is mysteriously missing, it should be treated as a 100% undeniable admission of guilt and should carry the absolute maximum sentence for whatever they are accused of during that time frame.
The builder one? Classic "owner"who likely got a job at 18 and "boss then told him......"
"You were dead!" "I got better?"
BEST STORY EVERY - SHORT VERSION!!!
(Defendant Insist On taking The Stand! She Closes Her Self Defense Stating) -
. . . "AND DATS WHEN DUH MY GUNz WENT OFF"
(Lawyer Walking Away From Questioning Her, Turns Around and Says) -
. . . "SIX TIMES!?!"
. . . "Thank You Your Honor."
. . . "That Will Be All, The Witness May Step Down"
for story 8, I would have had the trooper demonstrate on the street outside.
Or have a video of several vehicles driving by a camera, ask the officer to identify the speed of each, and then reveal they're all going the same speed 😂
That one comes across as someone who chronically gets speeding tickets and has learned the methods lawyers use to get them invalidated failing to do so himself at trial
1:58 - im 10 sec into this scenario and all i can see in my mind's eye is the equation math woman meme. something tells me this isnt gonna be worth it...
Part of the reason cops can turn off body cams (and aren't automatically assumed to be lying about events if they do) is simple: if they come across children in states of partial or full undress (interrupt an SA, raid a crackhouse with neglected kids inside, removing kids from unsuitable conditions, etc.), they're *legally prohibited* from recording it. Such footage would be considered CP, so the cops *have* to be able to turn off the recordings.
You could argue that an exemption could be made in the law about such footage/police possession of, but either the legislators never thought of it or they decided not to risk creating any loopholes that somebody could try to exploit.
Plus as others pointed out, having them run all the time would be a waste of batteries and storage capacity (and thus tax dollars). They should only be on when the officers are actually doing something. And even then, as noted there *are* some cases that they legally *cannot* record.
How the.. how in the... how do you kill the wrong person?.......................
My assumption is that they were so drunk that they didn't realize that the person they killed wasn't the person they were after
Aren't surprise witnesses illegal? As a judge once said during a custody hearing, that's not how you submit evidence.
As long as we have cops that pee we will need body cameras with an off switch.
Do you think all bodycam footage is publicly available?
That shit doesn't point down when they whip it out 😂
I wish these reddits had a bot that auto deleted any reply that starts with “Not a”
about your question about the cops head camera being able to be turned off:
EVERY electric device should have an off button/switch and for nearly all of them it makes sense to have one.
in the case of the cameras, if they run nonstop 24/7, they would either run out of data storage or battery charge constantly.
and they would also produce MANY hours of useless recordings from situations like having them sitting on their charging station or in some lockers after work.
i agree that there should be a stricter protocol for turning them off ,but this is reality, people will always find ways to just not follow them, be it laziness, convenience, forgetfulness or criminal energy.
What is that game called?
Hold on. Did I miss something with that last story? So the two dudes sat through an entire trial hearing about how they were responsible for the murder of some guy they never heard of, rather than they guy they thought they killed? A whole trial went forward with the witnesses describing an argument that never happened? Maybe there's something I'm not getting, but I'm calling bullshit on that one.
Should we record the cops taking a piss? Eating lunch? All of the little things you do on the job, that aren't related to the job. Dude, have you ever had a job?
You can't have surprise witnesses. The last story is fake.
i’m early-ish???
god I love channels stealing Reddit posts to make profit off by doing minimal effort in reading said posts, thanks for being a stain on the RUclips algorithm!
his commentary is so fucking annoying too like holy shit
At least he actually reads it instead of text to speech and doesn't do God awful ad skits
Bro channels like this are grate and li-me I always say if you don’t like it why are you takeing the time out if your day yo click on it and comment also you don’t need to be braking your back all the time to get payed the less work the. Better wtf are you talking about oh my god peoples brains that think like you need to be studied
It’s the American way.
@@blueroux4776 yeah with you I hate people who uses ai don’t hate ai just ai voices
Police can turn off camera because they can claim they were discussing private information sensitive to whoever is being filmed