Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 4020 AMERICAN POLICE BEAT: APRIL 2016 T here are essen- tially two parts of the national debate on body cams for law en- forcement officers currently taking place. The first part is hemming and hawing about the hypo- thetical. Who decides when the cams get turned off and on? What about privacy? Are civilians sitting on ju- ries capable of interpreting video footage? These are all important questions to be worked out among officers, agencies, associations and the public. But when it comes to actual body cam footage, as opposed to stories and ar- ticles about disabled equip- ment and missing videos, the evidence would appear to back the claim that cams are far more likely to get cops out of a jam than put them in one. The same is largely true for surveillance footage. In Boston recently, sur- veillance video showing the fatal police-involved shoot- ing between Boston officers and a 29-year-old man with a lengthy criminal record appears to show that the man fired first. In Boston, department of- ficials have taken the unusu- al and frankly revolutionary step of giving selected com- munity leaders a chance to see the video before it became public. “The tragic shooting was provoked by the victim and not by the police,” said Dar- nell Williams, president and CEO at the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, who said he based his comments on about seven minutes of surveillance videos and audio of the encounter. “They were fired upon, and they returned fire, and tragically the young man was killed,” Williams said. Many of the non-law enforcement people who attended the meeting said they were surprised and Inclusion improving trust The default position of most cops is that the public will never be able to understand or interpret use-of- force videos; but in Boston that’s just not the case impressed with the trans- parency of both the police and prosecutors in releasing audio and video. There were just two fa- tal Boston police-involved shootings in 2015. In both of those cases community leaders were called to po- lice headquarters to view video footage within days of the incident. Despite all the talk about the idea that non-police won’t understand what the videos actually show, the experience in Boston has shown that community leaders are far more likely to back officers if they have good information and feel like they’re a part of the process. At-large City Councilor Ayanna Pressley said the incident showed how badly cameras are needed for modern day policing. “The fact is that we were able to have this transpar- ent exchange to ensure that there was accountability all around. And keep in mind this exercise would not even be happening if there had not been cameras,” Pressley told reporters for the Boston Globe. “It’s about protecting everyone involved.” The resident who shot the footage agrees. The man, who wished to remain anonymous, said he turned over video footage to police from his home’s camera that captured the incident. What did he think of the cops’ actions? “I think they did what they had to do,” he said. Making former critics part of the process is paying off huge for Boston Police. It turns out when people see what cops were facing they’re extremely likely to back officers. 6HVVLRQVDUHDYDLODEOHGXULQJWKH1DWLRQDO3ROLFH6XUYLYRUV·&RQIHUHQFHIRU&R:RUNHUVRIDQRIÀFHUZKRGLHGLQWKHOLQHRIGXW\LQ RUSUHYLRXV\HDUV7KHUHLVDOVRDVHVVLRQDYDLODEOHIRUWKHVSRXVHVVLJQLÀFDQWRWKHUVDQGGRPHVWLFSDUWQHUVRIVXUYLYLQJ&R:RUNHUV 7KHVHVHVVLRQVDUHKHOGDWWKH+LOWRQ$OH[DQGULD0DUN&HQWHULQ$OH[DQGULD9$DQGDUHFREEKRZHYHU\RX0867UHJLVWHURQOLQH 7RUHJLVWHUDQGJHWPRUHGHWDLOVDERXW1DWLRQDO3ROLFH:HHNYLVLW National Police Survivors’ Conference 2016 0D\ 0D\:DVKLQJWRQ'&(during National Police Week) www.nationalcops.org National Police Week 2QFHWKHUH click on this tab!