In the wake of the USA Ferguson killing there is a clamour and wide public opinion in favour of police using body cameras – latest US polls are indicating over 70% in favour.

In one of our stories today from the Jamaica Gleaner “US to donate J$45 Million for police body cameras” it is becoming a reality that the Jamaican police force will be wearing body cameras. This follows in the aftermath of the controversial police killing of popular cook shop operator Nakia Jackson in downtown Kingston, on January 20^th.

In the UK, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe believes cameras will help improve policing and in May 2014 a trial of 500 devices were distributed to officers across 10 London boroughs.

Officers stored material from each incident and kept it on file for a month unless it was required for evidential purposes.

In an article published in The Guardian on August 15 2014 “Those cheering for police body-worn cameras must think a little deeper”, the writers, Daniel Bear and Johannes Rieken, say “the focus has been on encouraging better behaviour by both officers and members of the public in the hopes of improving the often difficult relationship between the two groups. A study by the Rialto police in California saw the use of force drop by 60% after the cameras were introduced.

“However, with all the potential benefits we must be careful to not be blind to the potential problems, or miss an opportunity to improve policing. With body cameras, Andrew Mitchell’s Plebgate would have been a much shorter affair, and there might be more clarity over what happened to police shooting victim Mark Duggan; but will cameras really help the thousands of citizens (overwhelmingly young black men) who are stopped for drug searches? These searches, especially if roughly conducted, are the quickest way for the police to lose the trust and confidence of young people. The cameras may help to document such encounters, but unless they are used to review and improve policing activity may not by themselves improve trust and confidence in police.

“Immediate feedback from supervisors after an incident is critical if the cameras are to be used to improve interactions with the public, not just document them. But only some body cameras allow sharing of footage at the street level: the cameras being trialled by the Metropolitan Police Service do not.”

The article also makes these strong points:

“And let’s not forget that those few officers who already abuse the public’s trust will find ways to resist such control: cameras will break, and in crucial moments the camera may find itself pointed in the wrong direction.

“To ensure that the cameras capture all encounters, effective policies for their use must be developed and enforced. While the public may like the idea of rigid control over when officers have to begin video recording, they may not appreciate that lack of discretion when they are the ones being filmed. A camera-equipped officer working with the Traveller community reported that the device made interaction more difficult because some members of this community resist being filmed. With this lack of cultural sensitivity, the cameras’ introduction could damage relations between officers and vulnerable communities.”

To read the whole story go to: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/15/police-body-worn-cameras-liberal-democrats-proposals-policies

So what exactly are body cameras?

Body cameras are small devices, usually attached to the head or upper body of a police officer, and they’re used to record their day-to-day-work. Some cameras have enough battery life for a couple hours of recording, while others can last as long as 12 hours. The cameras generally run between $200 to $1,000.

Where they have been used in the US even a skeptic, Ed Mullins, a sergeant in the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and president of the NYPD sergeants union has agreed the devices could benefit police and local governments in some ways. “The city settles lawsuits because it’s cheaper” than taking them to trial, he said. “There’s a value there.”

Mullins is worried that recordings from body cameras could harm an officer’s day-to-day work. A confidential informant, for example, could be reluctant to talk to a cop who’s wearing a body camera. That could make it harder for police to track down a suspect or do other regular work in the line of duty.

The major concern is battery life. With the battery of some cameras lasting as little as two hours, it’s possible that the cameras may not always be usable when police officers need them most. Or to conserve battery life, police might need to charge the cameras in their cars and only turn them on right before they confront a suspect or take some other action. That may not always be feasible in emergency situations.

So will there be a call for body cameras for our police force?

Not for a while but I am sure it will come.

And then the problem will be remembering to switch them on and if they work.