The DOJ Will Finally Allow Local Cops To Wear Body Cameras When Working With Federal Agencies

from the years-after-the-tech-has-become-ubiquitous dept

The federal government is finally coming around to body cameras. While law enforcement agencies around the nation continue to buy body cameras for their officers, federal agencies have been less receptive to these tools of incremental accountability and transparency.

First, let's address body cameras. They're not a panacea. They don't turn bad cops into good cops. They're far more useful to prosecutors then they are to criminal defendants or plaintiffs in civil rights lawsuits. They tend to "malfunction" with alarming regularity during confrontations with members of the public. And they can be manipulated to act as corroboration for falsified police reports.

That being said, they do offer one thing we haven't seen since the advent of dashcams: another version of events normally only memorialized by exonerative statements and questionable report narratives.

Five years ago, the DOJ was throwing federal money at body camera programs. But only for local law enforcement agencies. The feds wanted none of it. A mandate issued by the DOJ said its agencies wouldn't partner with cop shops using the tech, even if the cameras were purchased with federal money. According to the DOJ, it was "looking into the issue," but strongly felt the presence of body cameras would "expose police methods." It said this with a straight face despite "police methods" remaining largely unchanged since the invention of the door ram.

Five years later -- and while under the now-temporary thumb of cop cheerleader Bill Barr -- the DOJ has finally decided to join the present (already in progress).

Today, the Justice Department announced that it will permit state, local, territorial, and tribal task force officers to use body-worn cameras on federal task forces around the nation. The department’s policy will permit federally deputized officers to activate a body-worn camera while serving arrest warrants, or during other planned arrest operations, and during the execution of search warrants.  

This doesn't mean federal officers and agents will be wearing body cameras. Oh my no. That accountability bridge will presumably be crossed sometime in the next decade. But it will no longer require local officers to leave their cameras at the station before assisting in warrant service. According to the DOJ's official guidance [PDF], this will finally allow the local boys to stop violating their own policies when performing arrests or searches.

To the extent state and local law enforcement agencies mandate BWCs [body-worn cameras] for TFOs [task force officers] while engaged in federal task force operations, the Department will permit federally deputized TFOs from those agencies to use their BWCs under the following circumstances.

How gracious of the federal government to allow local agencies to follow their own policies. But there are some catches. And one of those catches will allow officers to engage in searches without providing unbiased documentation of the search.

TFOs are authorized to activate their BWCs upon approaching a subject or premises, and must deactivate their BWCs when the scene is secured as determined by the federal supervisor on the scene as designated by the sponsoring federal agency.

More DOJ caveats await, ensuring even fewer recordings will occur.

TFOs are prohibited from recording: (1) undercover personnel; (2) confidential informants or confidential sources; (3) on-scene witness interviews prior to or after the operation; (4) personnel using specialized or sensitive investigative techniques or equipment; or (5) onscene actions by any non-law enforcement persons who are assisting law enforcement personnel prior to or after the operation.

So, the FBI will continue to conduct "interviews" without unbiased documentation and nearly anything involved with a task force operation will go unrecorded because pretty much everything other than breaching an entrance or placing someone in cuffs will fall into these expansive, malleable exceptions.

And if the public wants access to this footage, good luck with that. Whatever local policies and laws that normally govern public access to recordings are null and void. According to the DOJ, it retains control of recordings and will preemptively declare all recordings exempt from public records requests.

In all circumstances, TFO BWC recordings shall be treated as law enforcement sensitive information, the premature disclosure of which could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, and as potential evidence in a federal investigation subject to applicable federal laws, rules, and policy concerning any disclosure or dissemination; and therefore deemed privileged absent appropriate redaction prior to disclosure or dissemination. Nothing in this policy shall be deemed to provide a right of public access to TFO BWC recordings.

The good news is there is one exception: if anyone on the task force -- federal or otherwise -- kills or seriously injures someone, the recordings will be "expeditiously reviewed" and approved for public release as soon as is "practical." Granted, the dictionary definition of "expeditious" and "practical" will differ greatly from the DOJ's definition of those terms. But it's something. And it's something that fills a void the DOJ proactively chose to leave unfilled for years.

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: body cameras, doj, federal agencies, law enforcement, transparency


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 10 Nov 2020 @ 3:29pm

    Methods, crimes, same thing right?

    According to the DOJ, it was "looking into the issue," but strongly felt the presence of body cameras would "expose police methods."

    Strange way to spell 'brutality and law breaking', but okay. I imagine the primary objection is that the public would be more likely to learn just what the police and government consider 'acceptable methods' and be properly horrified by what that included, potentially leading to enough public pressure to outlaw said 'methods'.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    TKnarr (profile), 10 Nov 2020 @ 4:05pm

    I'd love to have political power in a jurisdiction to be able to respond "Police policy is that BWCs must always be worn and active while on duty. To the extent that Federal officers will not permit this policy to be complied with, the police department will unfortunately be unable to cooperate with them or accompany them in their activities.".

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Flakbait (profile), 10 Nov 2020 @ 6:54pm

      Re:

      "...To the extent that Federal officers will not permit this policy to be complied with, the police department will unfortunately be unable to cooperate with them or accompany them in their activities."

      To which the Feds will reply, "OK! All credit for busting bad guys on your turf goes to us then! Thanks!"

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2020 @ 8:04pm

        Re: Re:

        To which the Feds will reply, "OK! All credit for busting bad guys on your turf goes to us then! Thanks!"

        And add... "now where will we get another patsy? I know! Fish & Game!"

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 10 Nov 2020 @ 7:16pm

    Sure

    They can wear them. Will they be allowed to turn them on? Will we be allowed to see the video?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Upstream (profile), 11 Nov 2020 @ 12:57am

    Time for this link again, an article in which Radley Balko explains just how bad an idea State / Federal task forces are to begin with. Eliminate the State / Federal Joint Task Forces and the issue of BWCs on TFOs assigned to JTFs goes away.

    We still have the problem with TLAs, though, particularly the DOJ, DHS, FBI, NSA, CIA, NRO, DEA, CBP, ICE, BOP ... oh, hell, just go look here. The sheer length of the list just screams Police State! But I digress.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 11 Nov 2020 @ 11:58am

    A few dictionary entries regarding this article:

    • Next decade: next century, next millennium, never.
    • Expeditiously reviewed: expeditiously justified (tip: boys in blue are always right).
    • Practical: when we feel like it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Sponsored Promotion
Public Money, Public Code - Sign The Open Letter at publiccode.eu
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.