Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday July 31 2017, @06:22PM   Printer-friendly
from the What-does-this-button-do? dept.

Ars Technica brings us an update to an earlier story in which a court case was thrown out when a police officer's body cam showed him planting drugs before 'finding' them immediately after. Now prosecutors in Maryland are reviewing other body-cam footage and have already thrown out 34 criminal cases with many more under review:

The Baltimore Police Department's body cams, like many across the nation, capture footage 30 seconds before an officer presses the record button. The footage was turned over to defense attorneys as part of a drug prosecution - and that's when the misdeed was uncovered.

[...] "We are dismissing those cases which relied exclusively on the credibility of these officers," Mosby told a news conference Friday. She said the dismissed cases, some of which have already been prosecuted, involved weapons and drugs.

Lesson learned cops - plant drugs, wait 30 seconds, then turn on the camera!


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday July 31 2017, @09:20PM (14 children)

    by Thexalon (636) on Monday July 31 2017, @09:20PM (#547372)

    capture footage 30 seconds before an officer presses the record button.

    Either:
    1. Have no record button, and just have the camera always recording.
    2. Have the recording start at randomly up to 10 minutes before the officer presses the button.

    Because that last line in the story explains exactly how crooked cops will respond to this. It's sort of like how as soon as recorded audio of police actions started to become evidence in a brutality case, they would start yelling "Stop resisting!" regardless of whether the person in question was resisting arrest.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 31 2017, @09:54PM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 31 2017, @09:54PM (#547386)

    Most of those cameras likely record up to 30 seconds of RAM video footage, and when the record button is pressed, sync it to flash (otherwise they would wear out in a matter of months.) So lengthening the pre-record period has technical constraints that would effect it.

    The ONLY real solution is always recording, with the ability to hit the button for a timed pause. Hit it again if it needs to start recording before the timeout is finished. This allows cops to hit it for bathroom breaks or other momentary things that shouldn't be recorded, while also ensuring they can't easily leave it off, or have it not recording until they turn it on themselves. So long as they are not wifi accessable there is no potential confidentiality breach until it is sbumitted to whatever department handles the recordings, and as a bonus it gives people a reason to give cops a wide berth unless they need their services (because unless you're a facebook whore you probably have SOME consternation about being ubiquitously recorded in public, don't you? If not, maybe we can throw you through a time portal to STASI East Germany :)

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 31 2017, @11:47PM (4 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 31 2017, @11:47PM (#547421) Journal

      Timed pauses would be abused. Just don't give the cop ANY control over the camera. Bathroom break? A camera worn on you chest isn't going to be pointed downward at your anatomy, unless you purposely move it to point down. Let it always record.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:00AM (3 children)

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:00AM (#547463) Journal

        Bathroom break? A camera worn on you chest isn't going to be pointed downward at your anatomy

        What's wrong with the camera capturing someone's junk while peeing?
        Will this cause massive mind-blow to someone?

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 01 2017, @09:40AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 01 2017, @09:40AM (#547575)

          Yeah, republicans and other talibans. Because you know, the allmighty creator of the whole fricking universe is as interested in nothing else than your willy.

        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:30PM (1 child)

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:30PM (#547627) Journal

          Breasts cause massive mindblow to many people. The idea of breastfeeding causes mindblow. Pubic hairs cause it. A vagina, or a penis? Such an image, especially if made public, could cause the cosmos to crumble around us.

          Then again, maybe not.

          • (Score: 4, Funny) by c0lo on Tuesday August 01 2017, @04:23PM

            by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 01 2017, @04:23PM (#547691) Journal

            Breasts cause massive mindblow to many people. The idea of breastfeeding causes mindblow. Pubic hairs cause it. A vagina, or a penis? Such an image, especially if made public, could cause the cosmos to crumble around us.

            Can you imagine a Rio Carnival in Harrison, Arkansas today? Me neither.
            This is why I reckon US need more Latino immigration.

            (grin)

            --
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:06AM (1 child)

      by Immerman (3985) on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:06AM (#547468)

      I can store a multiple-hour movie at considerably better quality than most body cams in a few hundred megabytes, and can get a couple gigabytes of RAM for a few dollars.

      Granted, constantly encoding adequate quality video at such high levels of compression in real time would likely draw considerably more power than for a simple low-compression dump, but we've got lots of slack and are well within the capabilities of a $50 prepaid smartphone with a jumbo battery, in a product that typically sells for prices more in line with something top of the line.

      • (Score: 2) by tonyPick on Tuesday August 01 2017, @02:28PM

        by tonyPick (1237) on Tuesday August 01 2017, @02:28PM (#547656) Homepage Journal

        Granted, constantly encoding adequate quality video at such high levels of compression in real time would likely draw considerably more power than for a simple low-compression dump.

        The components you select for this device would probably include dedicated encoding HW support, e.g an iMx6 on a reference board will live encode/stream 720p at 1Mbps in a 6W envelope [ridgerun.com]. I suspect that's actually more efficient than trying to get the CPU to do something in pure software.

        So, a back of the envelope calculation says that 720p30@1mbps will take about a Meg every 8 seconds, or 7.5 Meg a minute, call it a half gig every hour.

        And so a 60Wh Li pack would give you a nominal 5 hour runtime, with 2.5Gig of memory for storage. (and up to 10hrs/5G in an emergency where you don't worry about deep discharge).

        You could almost certainly do a lot better with a proper HW design (e.g. low power variant of the iMx, better custom board, etc etc) and you'd lose some lifetime for a "good" camera, but this is certainly not a technical problem.

         

    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday August 01 2017, @12:02PM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday August 01 2017, @12:02PM (#547601)

      Yeah, 4GB of RAM runs $30 these days, can't be spending an extra $30 in order to increase the pre-record threshold up to 8 hours.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
  • (Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Tuesday August 01 2017, @12:57AM (3 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 01 2017, @12:57AM (#547460) Journal

    2. Have the recording start at randomly up to 10 minutes before the officer presses the button.

    Yes, easy, a small amount of thiotimoline is all that's needed.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:17AM (2 children)

      by Immerman (3985) on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:17AM (#547472)

      Or you just record everything, constantly, into a 30 minute buffer and then dump it into a permanent file whenever the "Record" button is pushed.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:25AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 01 2017, @01:25AM (#547476)

        But then, this wouldn't be random, would it?
        And randomness seems to be a mandatory feature (grin)

        • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday August 01 2017, @02:23AM

          by Thexalon (636) on Tuesday August 01 2017, @02:23AM (#547488)

          The point of the randomness is that you don't want the officer to know how long they need to stall between starting the encounter and turning on the camera.

          --
          The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday August 01 2017, @08:15PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Tuesday August 01 2017, @08:15PM (#547740)

    Cops' #1 answer: donut glazing on the lens.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]