you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 29 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Honestly, the right answer at this point in technology is just to let the bodycam be the police report.

We used to need police reports so there was a solid written record of what (supposedly) happened. It was a pain in the ass writing them, but it had to happen. But now, what's the point? Surely, the answer is to let cops write a three-sentence report about the broadest possible strokes of who was involved and what was the final outcome, and then "* see bodycam" for the details. Then, if it comes to some sort of proceeding where people have to dig into the nitty gritty details of what happened, they just pull the video, and see for themselves.

Everyone wins. Right?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 10 months ago

    You can embellish facts in a written report to make it sound like the police acted professionally at all times. Bodycam footage tells its own story so they don't want to release it if they can avoid it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Body cams are important but have limits. If the officer doesn't need to write a detailed report how will things that happen outside their FOV be documented? Audio will only give so much of the story.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment