law enforcement

Body cameras for all Phoenix police officers might be on their way. Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton and Councilwoman Thelda Williams have asked for all patrol officers to wear body cameras in the next three years.

However, this request comes with an expensive price tag. Last year, Phoenix Police Chief Joe Yahner said equipping police officers with body cameras would cost more than $3.5 million.

Despite the high price, Stanton and Williams are asking for the proposal to move forward due to the camera’s success in the Maryvale precinct.

In a memo to City Manager Ed Zuercher, Williams and Stanton said:

“In the areas where cameras were used, Phoenix saw significant drops in complaints against officers, more effective processing of cases in court and improved evidence in the prosecution of domestic-violence cases.”

If the proposal passes, behavior among police officers might improve. With the potential to make police officers more trustworthy and transparent, body cameras seem ideal. The body cameras seem a natural fit in the courtroom as well. In court, it’s usually the police officer’s word versus the defendant’s testimony. With body cameras on every officer, cases could change for defendants in the Valley. By using video evidence, cases will become clearer since video footage will be available for review.

Putting body cameras on all police officers could move Phoenix toward a new generation of policing by building trust between the officers and the communities they serve.

A new Arizona bill introduced by Senator John Kavanagh will make recording a police officer a criminal act if passed.

The bill, SB 1054, which Senator Kavanagh says he proposed as a measure to ensure the safety of police officers and those videotaping, would prohibit video recording police officers from a distance of 20 feet or less.

Members of the American Civil Liberties Union have attacked the bill as unconstitutional, citing that it violates the First Amendment. Professor Paul Bender, the dean emeritus of the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University was quoted in an article in the Guardian as saying the bill was “on the face of it unconstitutional” and problematic.

The bill supports a person’s right to videotape a police officer outside 20 feet and within that distance on private property, or in their own residence if the person records from an adjacent room.

However, the bill would also give police officers the right to end any video recording, regardless of distance, if the police officer deemed the recording an interference in law enforcement activity.

“The language in bill SB 1054 that’s most concerning for law analysts is the section that gives law enforcement officers the right to supercede the previous sections securing a citizen’s right to film law enforcement from more than 20 feet,” said Chris Corso of Corso Law Group.

“This bill would allow any police officer the right to stop citizens from recording arrests, no matter the circumstances,” said Corso, “and would subject those who refused to stop recording to legal prosecution.”

Under protection of the First Amendment, Americans have the right to film police officers while they are on duty. This right has been pivotal in recent, high-profile court cases that have been successfully defended based on video evidence taken at the scene and involving police officer misconduct.  

One such high-profile case involved the shooting of Walter Scott, a South Carolina man who was shot in the back by Officer Michael Slager as he ran away. Video coverage captured by a witness was used to strengthen the case.

In America, the right to film police has already been established and includes specific regulations. For example, although the right to photograph police is protected by the First Amendment, officials do have the power to stop anyone from filming who they believe is legitimately interfering with law enforcement, according to the ACLU.

“Photography is a form of power, and people are loath to give up power, including police officers,” Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst at the ACLU, said in The Atlantic. “It’s a power struggle where the citizen is protected by the law but, because it is a power struggle, sometimes that’s not enough.”

Although police may tell people to stop recording and ask that they turn over their footage, a guide for photographers by the ACLU, Know Your Rights, says it’s illegal for police to confiscate photos or videos without a warrant.

The First Amendment protects a citizen’s right to take pictures of anything in plain view in public space, including police officers.

We all know that privacy settings are essential on social media sites. We try our best to protect ourselves, keeping in mind that what we post, like or comment on could hurt our family or friends or even cost us a job opportunity. What we don’t consciously think about while tweeting, instagramming or posting is that we could face legal ramifications for our social media actions.

How Could I Be Engaging in Incriminating Actions?
There are multiple ways in which you could be engaging in incriminating actions. For example, the most obvious way to engage in such actions is to incriminate yourself directly. Stating openly or even posting a related picture on social media implying that you had any connection with a crime can and will be used against you. A social media post can be viewed as an admission, so if you feel that you may have made a social media connection with a crime, consult your attorney.

Connections and associations will also be taken into consideration when law enforcement agencies are investigating a crime. Even if you had absolutely nothing to do with the crime, being Facebook friends with a suspect could lead to trouble for you. If you aren’t consciously aware of your association with a potential suspect of a crime and tell police enforcements that you do not know them, they can see if you are affiliated with them via social media and you could face charges for perjury.

Location is a social media setting which we are not typically aware of but could cause a great deal of trouble. If you were to post a photo or status in which the location can be traced then your location can be pinpointed by anyone who you are digitally connected with, or even law enforcement. You do not have to be at the scene of the crime to be a suspect, but if you checked in somewhere else a few miles away, it is possible for them to launch an investigation on your whereabouts. While you can avoid using location services on social media for your own protection, you should be cautious and know that many apps are continuously tracking you on your phone and can share locations with your contacts.

While you may argue that you have the right to privacy and have secured your social media profiles to the best of your abilities, there are ways for law enforcement to access your profiles and go through them. It is crucial be aware of what you are posting whether a large crime like a drug ring busted in New York via Facebook, or even if you are petitioning for custody of your children.

What Your Lawyer Might Tell You About Social Media
Your lawyer may advise you to monitor your social media profiles even for court disputes that are not crime related like injury suits or divorces. An insurance claim investigator may view your photos and attest that your injury isn’t related to an accident that an insurance agency or other client may have to cover, but something else that they saw you were engaged in via your social media sites, like skydiving. Similarly, if you are in the middle of a divorce and fighting for custody of your children, your spouse could easily use posts or photos which portray you in a negative light. Your lawyer may advise you to shut down your accounts so make sure to speak with them and see what they feel is the best way to protect you from your own social media accounts.

Other Social Media Crimes
You may be reading this and think that none of the situations described above apply to you. Can you still be affected by what you say or do on social media? Absolutely. It is important to know that while we enjoy the freedom of speech, we could face trouble if we take that freedom too far. For example, any form of harassment, menacing behavior, threatening behavior or offensive comments could lead to ramifications. You may claim that your rants are “therapeutic” like Anthony Douglas Elonis who was arrested for threatening comments he made against his ex-wife.

What you say, or even repost could get you into trouble. Social media monitoring may feel like a violation against your rights, but in the long run it protects against negative outcomes like bullying and harassment. Be aware of the repercussions of what you are posting via social media. You may want to leave that thought for your diary rather than your digital profile, which will follow you around forever.