Law enforcement weighs pros, cons of body cameras
Isabella County Sheriff Michael Main said his department is considering equipping deputies with body cameras during patrol.
The cameras would allow for the department to have a safety net against any police action citizens deem egregious.
“Those are definitely a top priority,” Main said. “It’s just another tool to help the community build that trust, that we are doing what we’re supposed to be doing.”
There’s been an increase in calls nationally for officers to wear body cameras after several incidents in which unarmed black men were shot and killed by police officers.
The cost for body cameras ranges from $800 to $1,800 per unit, Main said.
The cameras are good for up to 18 months, requiring police departments to make routine purchases.
Cameras can fall or suffer damages while police are on duty, and high temperatures can also cause damage. Servers to store the recordings can also be costly.
Lake Orion junior Ben Lawlor said he would like to see more officers equipped with body cameras.
“I think they need to be held accountable for their actions,” Lawlor said.
Both city and campus police have considered equipping their officers with body cameras, but have cited costs as an obstacle.
“A lot of people think it’s just ‘here’s the camera,’ and it’s done. The reality is there’s a lot of other things to it,” said Officer Jeff Browne of the Mount Pleasant Police Department.
Chief Bill Yeagley of the Central Michigan Police Department said he wants to wait and see what legislation passes that affects body cameras.
“There’s a number of bills that impact the amount of storage, how long you would have to store video and some of the uses of body cameras,” Yeagley said. “In my mind it makes very good sense to let the legal system take its course, to come out and tell us what those requirements would be, then give consideration to that as we consider body cameras.”
Yeagley said new technology often leads to lawsuits that shape how that equipment can be used by law enforcement.
Police also cited Freedom of Information Act requests factor into the cost. Privacy concerns, such as when a police officer enters a private residence, may arise and need to be redacted from the video, Yeagley said.
Main said camera footage can take time to review when requested via FOIA.
“Whether it’s recorded on audio or video, we have to spend time redacting it,” Main said. “Unfortunately, some agencies are getting requests to have 30 days’ worth of video. That’s hundreds of hours of manpower.”
Both Browne and Yeagley said the cameras would be an aid to officers, allowing police to collect more evidence.
“I think officers would welcome them,” Browne said.
Browne said in his own experience using a dashcam recorder, cameras could help officers accused of wrongdoing.
“People make accusations and say different things, but they’re great evidence too,” Browne said. “When you’ve got somebody in the back of the car who’s yelling profanities at you as they’re under arrest and how they’re going to do all these nasty, horrible things to you, and then it comes time for a trial and you can play that video of them.”
