I think the officers originally there to serve the warrant were in plain clothes. They spotted victim playing with a gun and rolling a joint so they put on police jackets but we're not in uniform. I assume since they were not in uniform, they were not wearing body cams.

I think the officers originally there to serve the warrant were in plain clothes. They spotted victim playing with a gun and rolling a joint so they put on police jackets but we're not in uniform. I assume since they were not in uniform, they were not wearing body cams.

 

 

I think that was just the officer who ended up shooting him.

I think that was just the officer who ended up shooting him.

 

The Police Chief said two Officers were in plain clothes when they witnessed Scott rolling a joint. They ignored that, until they observed him holding a firearm as well. They then left the area and returned wearing police vests at which time they approached him.

Report says the officer who fired the shot did not activate his body camera until after he fired.

 

Convenient.

 

Happens all of the time. Keep in mind they weren't there for Scott. If you randomly have a guy pose a threat to you with a gun, your first thought isn't oh I better turn on my body camera. Just like when you're able to successfully defuse a situation and you say thank god because I didn't have my body camera on.

 

My guess is he activated it as soon as it came across his mind to do so. As soon as a shot is fired that's a crime scene and needs to be treated as such.

The Police Chief said two Officers were in plain clothes when they witnessed Scott rolling a joint. They ignored that, until they observed him holding a firearm as well. They then left the area and returned wearing police vests at which time they approached him.

 

Cool. I knew of the one but not the second. My point is that it was not just undercover guys involved.

Are we to a point that the body cameras should be on at all times?

Are we to a point that the body cameras should be on at all times?

 

No and that will never happen.

No and that will never happen.

 

What's the reasoning or rational for that?

 

What would be the downside to it?

Cost and privacy.

 

Do you want to wear a camera every day?

Got to be perfect and earn that 45K

Are we to a point that the body cameras should be on at all times?

 

No and that will never happen.

 

I wonder if there is a system where the camera, if not tripped beforehand, can be automatically triggered to activate wirelessly when a weapon or Taser is withdrawn from the holster? Surely with all the tech we have now a days that is quite possible to achieve?

I wonder if there is a system where the camera, if not tripped beforehand, can be automatically triggered to activate wirelessly when a weapon or Taser is withdrawn from the holster? Surely with all the tech we have now a days that is quite possible to achieve?

 

This could help solve a lot of issues and at the very least insure to capture the primary event in a situation like this.

What's the reasoning or rational for that?

 

What would be the downside to it?

 

Privacy. It's only a matter of time before someone tries to file a lawsuit cause a camera was on in their house or in an ER.

 

And cops have some privacy too. You want a camera constantly running while you eat your lunch, use the bathroom, taking a call from your spouse on the phone?

 

It's not "convenient" when you forget to turn it on, it's an accident. The cameras are still fairly new, so sometimes you forget to kick it on in a high stress encounter.

Cost and privacy.

 

Do you want to wear a camera every day?

 

Privacy. It's only a matter of time before someone tries to file a lawsuit cause a camera was on in their house or in an ER.

 

And cops have some privacy too. You want a camera constantly running while you eat your lunch, use the bathroom, taking a call from your spouse on the phone?

 

It's not "convenient" when you forget to turn it on, it's an accident. The cameras are still fairly new, so sometimes you forget to kick it on in a high stress encounter.

 

Fair enough.

 

As to the bolded, I never said it was "conveinient", but in situations like this when it isn't, you can understand why some may feel it wasn't just an accident, can't you?

Fair enough.

 

As to the bolded, I never said it was "conveinient", but in situations like this when it isn't, you can understand why some may feel it wasn't just an accident, can't you?

 

There's always gonna be conspiracy theorist. If it was on, the same people would claim its doctored or not a clear enough picture. Heck when your moving very fast with those moments they're so pixilated that you can't see. And if you do shoot someone, you won't be able to see anything other than the back of the gun and the officers arms cause the cameras are in the middle of your chest.