Third police officer charged over watch house capsicum spray

FC: Pretty much, just like you see on those ‘world worst police chases’ etc. Just one that is attached to the cops’ belt (or hat).

Smack: Weight would be an issue, it would have to be a really nice, small and tough piece of equipment.

Yogie47: Resolution of DVD quality is not required for simple ‘his word against mine’ type complaints. Anything over 640×480 would be sufficient (the sound is more important, which can be encoded at high quality in real time I might add, my mp3 player already does this!). Also I think you underestimate the amount of near real time video compression you can achieve these days, especially if the unit has a dedicated mpeg compression chip (like the DVR I want to buy!).

Once recording have been uploaded to the central server, they can be compressed again using encoding formats that are too slow to be creared real-time (Like all the DivX videos you get over torrents).

I’m sure if I did some googleing on it, I could get some figures on space required, but at a lowish quality, I know you could fit at least half a shift in a portable device (If not right now, then in a year or two the hardware required would be available, i.e. large enough flash drives). If the cars where fitted with larger storage devices, then every time a cop rides in a patrol car, they sync their recorder.

I don’t think it’s a question of IF it could be done, the question is would the people, if given the option would want this?

Also would the AFPA support it, if not why not?

I’ve seen those recordings of retail and bank staff they are usually such a poor standard they are worthless. Having to record the movements and actions of all Police 24/7 would create an enormous amount of data. 1 hr of recording equals about 1 DVD. Do the math 8 DVD’s per cop, 200+ cops on shift per day, will get out of control pretty quick.

Blamemonkey,
I know little about the case in question. Could you enlighten us with you knowledge then??

Regardless of my knowledge of the case, the point I am making is that assualt is assault and they wouldn’t be getting charged if they were acting in accordance with the AFP procedures.

On the topic of recordings, The US police have those cameras in their cars that recording everything when those cops are out and about – Does anyone know of any problems these have created? and/or is this the type of thing you are talking about farq?

Anyone who works at in retail already spend their entire shift under surveillance. They are only trusted with the till. Cops are trusted with people’s liberty! Not only are the cameras used in retail to catch staff nicking from the till, but managers also review the tapes to see if staff have been slacking off.

What I am suggesting would never be monitored in that way.

In terms of privacy, the idea is if the recording is not required to substantiate the facts of a matter (brought up by either the cop or the accused) then it is deleted, having never been seen by anyone. Water cooler type conversations would be recorded, but should in theory never be reviewed.

That’s a better deal than the people already working under surveillance in retail get.

It’s would be good if police recorded all their interactions with the public (even for small stuff like tickets), it means that it’s never a case of ‘his word against mine’. People can argue the point all they like, as long as the cop does his job professionally, the recording can only serve support their actions.

If police are selectively making recordings (outside a formal interview), I assume you would have trouble discovering if a recording exists, let alone getting access to it (unless it supports a charge, then they would use it as evidence).

But if you have a complaint against a cop for unprofessional conduct, a truly dishonest one would simply deny the existence of any recordings. With this idea, the cop was required to make and keep a recording, so a complaint can be checked by reviewing the recording for that incident.

Is this too much accountability to demand from a profession given this much authority?

I take the point of cost and weight, but with enough cash a really nice small bit of kit could be developed. The data could be uploaded to a central storage system, daily or more often so the device does not need hundreds of gigs for storage. The patrol cars could even be fitted out as a sort of roving base station for the up loads (and when the car is parked back at base, it uploads the data to the central server).

A thoughtful post, farq. There are privacy implications under the Privacy Act and the 10 principles that go with it. Most importantly, any information collected under privacy conditions must only be used for the purpose for which it is collected.

It would seem to me that it would protect the police as well as the “accused” if proceedings in the watch house and interview rooms were always recorded and then destroyed after a set period of time (as fingerprints of people with minor offences are supposed to be).

We now, unfortunately, live in a surveillance society and I suppose will have to get used to it. However, we shouldn’t be rushing into it. I had similar concerns with the proposed “Health and Social Services Access Card” turning into a de-facto “Australia Card” and felt strongly enough to provide a submission to the Senate Legislative and General Purpose Standing Committee on the matter.

It was interesting that that Committee (including the government members on it) felt that the Commonwealth should reconsider important aspects of that proposal insofar as it impacted on personal privacy.

If I got sprayed with OC spray I would feel assaulted, but if in the course of their duties Police officers are required to use it, when presented with the options of using their gun, using their baton or using their OC spray I know which I would prefer to be on the receiving end of.

I would also like to point out that the AFP and IA are taking the case against the accused officers not the alleged “victims” please tell me this doesn’t smack of witch hunt and Arse covering

Farq,

Whilst it may be a good idea the cost alone would probably discount it. Also how much equipment do we expect Police to carry and still be able to do their job. A friend in the QLD Police has said that lots of officer have back problems from the current weight of the gun belt.

Seepi,

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. The first 8 times may have appeared lawful and propper. If a complaint was made on the 9th time and once reviewed, the Interal affairs may have deemed the other 8 time inappropiate. At least we know that the Police are being investigated and matters that require it are being refered to the courts.

And being charged with nine occasions of overdoing the capsicum spray – didn’t anyone notice the first 5 or 6 times?

One getting charged is unfortunate, but 3? Is this a pointer to systemic issues? The community needs to be concerned IF the resultant court cases show a reckless disregard to the duties these people have been entrusted with. I will be watching with interest.

There have always been consequences for a persons actions be they the public or police. To think otherwise is naive and narrow minded.

On 4 Corners ages ago I saw in QLD there was an Officer who wore something like what farq describes. I don’t like the idea. How many layers of accountability do there need to be. In what other profession is there such scrutiny? Would the civil libs be keen to have everything recorded? For all those who are just anti everything (including Police), before you arc up, would you accept this in your job/profession?

Should water cooler conversations be recorded? I know of some Police who record conversations on digital recorders – this has enraged some members of the public. Imagine a video camera being carried everywhere? You could point out simple traffic offences to the offender and without doubt they would still argue the point. Where does it stop?