Police cameras: Value depends on side of lens you're on

ROCHESTER, N.Y. — Just below Gates Police Sgt. Matt Pascarella's embroidered yellow name tag is a pager-sized camera clipped to his shirt pocket.

The small camera has become a police-gear staple for Pascarella — like keys to his patrol car and his police radio — and the other 30 town of Gates officers who began using the devices seven years ago, far ahead of the current wave of interest fueled by local and national events such as the shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo.

Police administrators and community leaders across the country — bolstered by the hope that technology can sooth suffering community/police relations and help reduce complaints — are calling for cameras on their officers' shirt pockets, lapels or sunglasses.

They all agree the cameras offer protection.

But just who they are protecting depends on which side of the camera you are on.

When Pascarella slides down his Vievu camera's lens cover it starts recording; events such as traffic stops, domestic violence calls and foot chases. When he slides it up, the camera stops.

Vievu is one of about four or five major brands which have emerged on the market. The cameras range in price from about $250 apiece up to $1,000; monitoring services such as downloading and storing the video adds other costs.

Features vary.

Some record with the push of a button. Others offer a 30-second "prerecord" feature that can recall 30 seconds of footage before the officer turns the camera on. Top end cameras can include a wide angle lens, high resolution full-color video, GPS integration, 32 gigabytes of memory and 17 hours of video capacity.

Some can replace a two-way radio.

Typically, officers grab a camera at the beginning of their shift, and return it to the charging/downloading station afterward. The footage is then saved on a server, either in-house or with an outside company.

Gates bought two of the Vievu cameras in 2007 after a resident who had been charged with resisting arrest accused two officers of excessive force and making racist comments. The defendant was convicted of her crimes and her lawsuit was dismissed, but only after the department was publicly accused of the abuse.

After the incident, one of the accused officers met a vendor from Vievu at a police conference.

"Having been through this very unpleasant experience, he thought 'This would have been a great tool to have when we have people who don't cooperate'," said Gates Police Chief Jim VanBrederode, whose department has since purchased 13 more at a cost of about $800 apiece.

"We saw the value in them seven years ago, it was a no-brainer."

VanBrederode said his office has been fielding calls from other departments for several years, inquiries about how the units work, what they cost, and how their officers feel about them.

This month, town of Greece police will be equipping a "test" group of their officers with 20 Pro-vision cameras they purchased in June through a state Division of Criminal Justice Services grant they obtained after a process that began more than a year ago. Eventually, the department will likely issue each officer a camera of his or her own.

With their pilot program, they are the joining departments such as New York City, Los Angeles and numerous other town, village, city and university departments across the country.

"What we get out of it is in all instances we'll have documentation of the true and accurate facts, unedited and uncensored, so it will protect us in areas of false complaints and allegations against the officers," said Greece Chief Patrick Phelan, who estimated between 10 and 15 officers are on patrol in Greece at a given time.

Rochester has been researching the use of cameras for its roughly 700 sworn patrol officers for more than a year as a way to reduce the number of complaints, particularly in "use of force" arrests, said James Sheppard, who was police chief when the discussion began.

Sheppard said there was data presented from departments which showed that complaints drop as much as 80% when body cameras were used.

The RPD responded to 384,262 calls for service in 2013, for a total of 676,995 responses by officers (a response refers to each individual officer involved in the call for service).

Those calls resulted in 60 citizen complaints of misconduct, according to the Rochester Police Department's Professional Standards Section's 2013 Annual Report. That was down from 77 in 2012 and from 86 in 2011.

Each of those complaints could include multiple allegations, such as a complaint alleging an officer put the handcuffs on too tight, as well as sprayed the suspect with Capstun or was discourteous, according to the report.

Of the complaints in 2013, 14 allegations of misconduct were sustained and 13 individuals were held accountable, most often by a memorandum being placed on their record.

Current RPD officials did not return requests for comment. Mayor Lovely Warren has declined to comment on the use of cameras, other than to say the city is considering it.

City Councilman Adam McFadden said he sent a letter last month to Warren asking for the purchase of body cameras.

"We have been, for about a month, at the council level, looking at the cost of them," McFadden said last month. "The letter just said we need to go in this direction. She said she and the police chief had had that conversation, as well, and they were trying to coordinate that through the police reorganization."

At a community forum last week, City Council President Loretta Scott mentioned McFadden's letter and said they are exploring use of crime forfeiture funds to pay for the cameras.

"I truly believe it will be a reality sooner than later," Scott said.

Mike Mazzeo, president of the RPD officers' union, the Locust Club, said the use of the cameras would have to be negotiated with the city, particularly the way officers would be told to use them.

"There are pros and cons to them, and it's not going to solve all the problems, but certainly there are situations where it could protect our people," Mazzeo said.