PDA

View Full Version : Seattle police may dump plans for body cams, citing records requests




aGameOfThrones
11-21-2014, 05:07 PM
Curtis Cronn
Police in Seattle are just weeks away from implementing pilot program in which 12 officers will test different types of body cameras. It's a first step in a plan to put body cameras on the department's more than 1,000 officers by the year 2016.

Now that plan may get put on ice, due in part to an overly broad public records requests. The Seattle Times reported this morning that an anonymous man, known only by the email address policevideorequests@gmail.com, has made an official request for "details on every 911 dispatch on which officers are sent; all the written reports they produce; and details of each computer search generated by officers when they run a person’s name, or check a license plate or address."

The requestor also wants all video from patrol car cameras currently in use, and plans to request video from body cams once they are implemented. He has requested the information "every day, in spreadsheet form."

Police are examining whether the request can be fulfilled, and what kind of fees to charge, if any, said Seattle Police Department COO Mike Wagers.

“This would just shut down so many other aspects of our operation, responding to a request of this nature," said Wagers.

The newspaper got in touch with the anonymous requestor via email, who said he's a computer programmer in his 20s, living with his parents in Seattle. He said he wanted to expose the potential privacy problems of body cameras.

“I think what we need is some sort of balance between transparency and privacy,” the requestor said.

The man, who runs a YouTube channel of police video and audio, also spoke to Reuters, stating his belief that "state law is simply too liberal when it comes to privacy."

He said he's filed similar requests throughout Washington state, including a request for all surveillance video held by the Seattle Public Library.

The story highlights the tension between a desire for transparency and the challenge of sifting through vast quantities of data and documents that can now be stored.

Washington state law doesn't provide any means for public agencies to reject requests as overbroad and the police video request isn't the only big one the city has dealt with. Seattle chief technology officer Michael Mattmiller said the city recently got a request for all email sent and received by city employees.

Mattmiller estimated that request would cost $110 million in salary money and would take 1,376 years for one full-time employee to fulfill.

The newspaper also quoted Seattle attorney Michele Earl-Hubbard, who specializes in public records requests. She said the city was trying to use the body camera request as a "poster child" to persuade legislators to change the law. Delivering information in installments, and charging copying fees for each release of data, can ensure that time isn't wasted on frivolous requests, she added.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/11/seattle-police-may-dump-plans-for-body-cams-citing-records-requests/







Seattle PD cuts a deal with mass-video requestor, institutes “hack-a-thon”

A computer programmer whose massive public records request threatened Seattle's plan to put body cameras on its police officers has made peace with the police department.

Today's Seattle Times reports that Seattle Police Department COO Mike Wagers has invited the man into police headquarters to meet with him and tech staff to discuss how he could receive video regularly. As a condition of the meeting, he has dropped the public records request.

"I’m hoping he can help us with the larger systemic issue—how can we release as much video as possible and redact what we need to redact so we can be transparent?” Wagers told the newspaper. “What do we have to lose? We have nothing to hide. There are no secrets.”

In his original request, the man, who uses the online handle "policevideorequests," had asked for "details on every 911 dispatch on which officers are sent; all the written reports they produce; and details of each computer search generated by officers when they run a person’s name, or check a license plate or address." He said his intention was to point out privacy problems with current public records laws.

The request gave police second thoughts about their plans to start a pilot program putting body cameras on 12 police officers. In the long term, Seattle hopes to put body cameras on more than 1,000 police by 2016. It's one of several cities that are considering equipping police with body cameras following protests in Ferguson, Missouri.

Wagers said the new plan is to release some redacted video to the requestor and other local "techies" and then have them return on December 19 for a "hack-a-thon," where they can present their ideas to the cops. Wagers said he and Seattle police chief Kathleen O'Toole have been talking for months about ways for Seattle locals with technical knowledge to help the department.

"I’ll get all the right people around the table and we’ll have a discussion," Wagers said. "We live in a tech hub; there’s got to be a lot of talented techies out there to help us."

The anonymous 20-year-old programmer said he isn't being hired by the police, but the police have invited him to help them put videos online, without audio.


http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/11/seattle-pd-cuts-a-deal-with-mass-video-requestor-institutes-hack-a-thon/


..

brushfire
11-21-2014, 05:10 PM
Never stopped the NSA from recording everyone.

phill4paul
11-21-2014, 05:19 PM
Every audio/video file, including 911 calls, should be public realm. Every one. It's payed for. It should be uploaded to an accessible site. What do they have to fear?

limequat
11-21-2014, 05:47 PM
Every audio/video file, including 911 calls, should be public realm. Every one. It's payed for. It should be uploaded to an accessible site. What do they have to fear?

Furthermore, with the technology we have, it should be automatic with live feeds. What is officer 52 doing right now? Let's have a look.
Video should be presented in every court case.

ghengis86
11-21-2014, 06:08 PM
What about video from serving a normal, daytime search warrant in a person's home? What if nothing is found and officers were above reproach in their conduct? Is there any breach of privacy would that video be released to the public?

What if a businesses securit system goes off and the responding officers check all critical points around and in the building, including the security system components?

What if a guy gets a speeding ticket and has a carload of hookers and sex toys?

I can entertain the possibility that more cameras under .gov control - regardless of the benefit of keeping pigs honest - could pose some challenges.

GPS and audio recording might be another option, though video is compelling court evidence

Occam's Banana
11-21-2014, 06:52 PM
"I’m hoping he can help us with the larger systemic issue—how can we release as much video as possible and redact what we need to redact so we can be transparent?” Wagers told the newspaper. “What ████████████? We have ██████████. There are no █████.”

RFT (Redacted For Transparency).

FindLiberty
11-21-2014, 10:02 PM
Bodycams might somehow collide
with the laws of particle physics:

Observing a thing changes it!

ghengis86
11-21-2014, 10:22 PM
Bodycams might somehow collide
with the laws of particle physics:

Observing a thing changes it!

Heisenberg Uncertainty Priciple for the win!

RonPaulIsGreat
11-21-2014, 10:40 PM
Well, it shouldn't be to difficult, if they have a classifier mechanism in place. Why would it, Just dump all Public accessible e-mails (not pertaining to active investigations), every day to a public server with who, when, to whoever received it, if known in relation to an crime or issue, tag it as such, if not leave blank. Even better yet, allow busy bodies to make "public" tags on the material, it may actually help them research an old case or something in 2020. Same with Video. Hard drives are cheap as hell now, storing all the video isn't a problem. for a city that cost would not be a huge expense. 99% of the videos would get looked at a few times and never again. Hell, they could just upload the videos to youtube for FREE!