At a time when citizens across the nation are calling for more police accountability and law enforcement looks for ways to protect itself from false accusations, local police agencies are taking the first steps toward outfitting officers with body-mounted cameras -- a move that will give the public, court system and victims a street-level view of how officers behave.
HOW IT WORKS
Cameras are clipped to the uniform, usually on the chest across from the badge. Some cameras look more like oversized pens and are worn above the ear. Cameras must be switched on manually when the officer encounters a situation. Officers cannot tamper with the video recorded by the camera. Some cameras can wirelessly upload the day's videos to the police station's storage when officers get close enough to the station. Other cameras must be put into docking stations to upload data. Source: Cleveland Police Department, Hamilton County Sheriff's Office
Two donors are giving $25,000 to the AEGIS Law Enforcement Foundation of Greater Chattanooga so that the Hamilton County Sheriff's Office and the Chattanooga Police Department can buy a handful of body cameras for officers to test the technology.
The agencies plan to split the money. The sheriff's department expects to purchase six cameras and the associated equipment, while Chattanooga police estimate the money will pay for eight to 12 cameras, officials said. Both agencies will test the cameras before deciding whether to put them on all officers.
The gifts from the McKenzie Foundation and an anonymous donor come during a time of growing national concern about the militarization of local police forces and how police interact with suspects.
"Just in the public interest, for the safety of citizens and the officers, we thought it would be a good thing to look into," said Johnny Smith, head of the McKenzie Foundation.
But local law enforcement leaders say the cameras -- which often are mounted on an officer's chest and are a bit smaller than a pack of cigarettes -- also offer a new layer of protection against false complaints.
"Philosophically it just leads to the idea of Big Brother, and I understand that; more and more officers are concerned about that," Sheriff Jim Hammond said. "On the other hand, we live in a litigious society where everybody wants to sue, everybody thinks their civil rights are violated and everybody wants more accountability from law enforcement -- so we have to be able to respond to that."
The donation and the camera purchases will need to be cleared by city and county governments, Hammond said, but he estimated that process would take fewer than 30 days for the sheriff's office.
If the initial test goes well, Hammond hopes to find a way to buy body cameras for all 120 uniformed patrol officers under his command. He expects body cameras will become standard equipment -- just like Tasers or patrol car cameras -- in the near future.
But cameras also create a myriad of issues that departments must work through: Policies must be written for when cameras should be turned on and off; procedures adopted to handle the influx of new video evidence; guidelines set up to govern how long the video is kept on file and how it's transferred from the camera to digital storage.
That's why a test is needed, Chattanooga Police Chief Fred Fletcher said.
"It's a long-term test as we try to assess the different ramifications of policy and procedures, technology and data storage," he said.
Police in nearby Cleveland, Tenn., have already worked through many of those issues. The department purchased 21 body cameras in early 2014, Chief Dennis Maddux said, and he has pre-ordered 33 more to be delivered this spring.
"The video makes you a better officer -- it does," Maddux said. "Just to be honest, your language, the way you approach -- everything changes. And that is to benefit both parties, both the public and officers."
Maddux has created new department policies for the cameras, but said they're flexible: Officers are still figuring out how to best use the technology.
"If an officer is in a convenience store and thinks something is about to happen, he can take this camera and set it on a shelf, you know?" he said. "I want my officers to think."
The department paid $695 per camera for its first batch, he said, and $895 each for its second order, which is for a newer, higher quality camera. That's about $46,000 for 54 cameras, which still doesn't put a camera on each of the department's 70 patrol officers -- although that's the goal.
Maddux said the body cameras, which are designed so that officers cannot tamper with the recordings, have already proven useful.
"The very first time we put a body camera on an officer there was an event that occurred that could have been questionable," he said.
A woman who was on methamphetamine barricaded herself in a house and threatened suicide, he said. Officers talked to her for a while before kicking down the door when she explicitly threatened her own life.
"She was standing there with a glass up to her throat, and the officer talked to her a little and then as soon as she looked away he Tased her," Maddux said.
"That could have been questionable. But now it's no longer his word against her word, or against the word of family members. The video proves what happened."
Contact staff reporter Shelly Bradbury at 423-757-6525 or sbradbury@timesfreepress.com with tips or story ideas.
Previous news report: