I have supported the purchase and use of police body cameras under the simple concept that they would help protect both law enforcement and ordinary citizens. However, a recent editorial in the San Jose Mercury News detailed an attempt by police unions and Assembly Democrats to, essentially, shield police from any adverse evidence gathered by the cameras. The editorial is journalism at its best, but the details, extensively quoted here, are nauseating.
According to the Mercury, AB 66 “would make it almost impossible for Californians to view recordings that may show law enforcement abuses.” Adding insult to injury the bill was passed out of the committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection, “with only Democratic support.” The only consumers they are protecting are the powerful police unions.
Some of the crippling provisions are, allowing “great discretion for when officers turn on cameras [and] not requiring preservation of recordings.” It would also “allow officers to review videos before making a statement or writing a report about a shooting in which they’re involved.” Worst of all the videos would be shielded from public disclosure under the Public Records Act; that is unacceptable.
If those tilted provisions are enacted there is no need for body cameras because the fundamental balance that is their reason for being would no longer exist. In that case we might as well save the cost, those paying the bill would receive no protection.
Once again the stench of political sellout rolls out of Sacramento poisoning the air of California.