Gardai now wearing personal video recording devices !

3fullback

Ok so I've been watching a lot of the water meter protests on YouTube and have noticed on occasion some type of device clipped onto officers jackets on the opposite side to their radios. I initial thought it might be a video camera, but always said to myself such devices would not be issued to Gardai for another couple of years as we are always 5/10 years behind the NYPD and the met.

However this video http://youtu.be/OLKo8Jztd6c is the first I have seen where the video camera is clearly visible.

Unlike the met and NYPD there is no notice to the effect saying that "CCTV recording taking place". I wonder can such recordings be used in court ?

If anybody has any info on these devices please share !

Timberrrrrrrr

3fullback wrote: »

Ok so I've been watching a lot of the water meter protests on YouTube and have noticed on occasion some type of device clipped onto officers jackets on the opposite side to their radios. I initial thought it might be a video camera, but always said to myself such devices would not be issued to Gardai for another couple of years as we are always 5/10 years behind the NYPD and the met.

However this video http://youtu.be/OLKo8Jztd6c is the first I have seen where the video camera is clearly visible.

Unlike the met and NYPD there is no notice to the effect saying that "CCTV recording taking place". I wonder can such recordings be used in court ?

If anybody has any info on these devices please share !

If they are in a public place they wouldn't need to advertise it would they? Also it gives their perspective of what happened if there is a case bought against them. I find the protesters video's seem to be edited to show only what they want to be shown.

Gatling

Very clever on the Gardai side

laurenhiggins

Is there not a law saying that it couldn't be used in court because the person is unaware of getting recorded.

Because as far as I know if you voice record somebody it can't be used as evidence but maybe video is different

gctest50

3fullback wrote: »

If anybody has any info on these devices

loads

3fullback wrote: »

please share !

no

3fullback

gctest50 wrote: »

loads




no

Cheers for your input hope your application for the CIA goes well for ya !

hfallada

laurenhiggins wrote: »

Is there not a law saying that it couldn't be used in court because the person is unaware of getting recorded.

Because as far as I know if you voice record somebody it can't be used as evidence but maybe video is different

How is it different to the hundreds of Garda CCTV camera all over the city, that dont have any sign saying they are there?

bravestar

laurenhiggins wrote: »

Is there not a law saying that it couldn't be used in court because the person is unaware of getting recorded.

Because as far as I know if you voice record somebody it can't be used as evidence but maybe video is different

If that was the case then various highly edited videos could not be used as evidence of alleged Garda misconduct. Where the recording takes place makes a difference, public place versus private.

BenEadir

laurenhiggins wrote: »

Is there not a law saying that it couldn't be used in court because the person is unaware of getting recorded.

Is that a serious question? Why would anyone create such a law?

By that logic witnesses could not be called if the plaintiff was unaware the witness could see what the plaintiff was doing!

I think bugging a phone without a court order can't be used in court but a recording made by one
of the people actually on the call is admissible even if they didn't make the other person on the call aware they were recording it as they are recording their own call.

Afaik recordings (audio and/or video) made in public places don't require anyone's permission regardless of whether the recording device is openly visible or not.

bennyineire

So going by your logic should RTE inform anyone at televised sporting events such as the All-Ireland that there are been recorded

kerry4sam

bennyineire wrote: »

So going by your logic should RTE inform anyone at televised sporting events such as the All-Ireland that there are been recorded

Damn RTE caught me in Croker for one particular All-Ireland with my Late Loving Dad; sun shining and there I was sunning myself. Received a call from home asking about my sunscreen - at home watching me live

It's a good idea these camers. About time, and I hope it works well for members. Their word has become increadingly difficult to take, so with them having their own personal recording devices, it makes it just a tad easier to re-build trust in them.

Just my opinion,
kerry4sam

Little CuChulainn

Gardaí purchase and wear these of their own accord because the level of false complaints against them is so high. It helps to be able to put another side to the story when the Ombudsman comes knocking. You wouldn't know it from that video but a few seconds before it there had been a big struggle after protesters tried to charge through the Gardaí.

Incidentally, if anyone can recommend a good one I'd appreciate a PM

BenEadir

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Gardaí purchase and wear these of their own accord because the level of false complaints against them is so high.

I don't believe you. I believe they are issued to them as part of their kit these days.

Little CuChulainn

BenEadir wrote: »

I don't believe you. I believe they are issued to them as part of their kit these days.

Whatever floats your boat

timetogo

BenEadir wrote: »

I don't believe you. I believe they are issued to them as part of their kit these days.

Only one guard had a video on his jacket on that video. I couldnt see it on the others.

I think its a good idea. I dont think the battery life would be good enough for a whole shift. So stuff would still be missed.

Zambia

It's almost as if these days if there is no CCTV. Well it never happened

seamus

It's something Which should really be mandatory for all members while in uniform We'd see the number of bs complaints plummet when the scrote knows it's all on camera.

Del2005

Zambia wrote: »

It's almost as if these days if there is no CCTV. Well it never happened

A picture tells a thousand words, a video tells the story.

bravestar

Del2005 wrote: »

A picture tells a thousand words, a video tells the story.

I think you are missing the point. While footage is excellent to have, a lack of it does not mean nothing took place.

Zambia

From the clip I saw of Irish water protesters it looked like the mob were doing all they could to provoke gardai into a response.

They also look like they love the sound of their own voice.

No wonder members want a record
Of events

BenEadir

bravestar wrote: »

I think you are missing the point. While footage is excellent to have, a lack of it does not mean nothing took place.

Correct but having video makes proving what took place a lot easier and will result in more convictions with less effort which improves Gardai/DPP efficiency and that's good for society and taxpayers in general.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

It's something Which should really be mandatory for all members while in uniform We'd see the number of bs complaints plummet when the scrote knows it's all on camera.

Alleged scrote

Potential-Monke

BenEadir wrote: »

I don't believe you. I believe they are issued to them as part of their kit these days.

No, it's not.

BenEadir

Potential-Monke wrote: »

No, it's not.

OK, let me clarify. I believe some Gardai are issued these cameras by the force. I don't believe all Gardai get it as standard issue in case that was inferred by what I said. I also don't believe Gardai are supplying them personally themselves. I also don't think individual Gardai are allowed to bring their own equipment to the job even if they wanted to.

Little CuChulainn

BenEadir wrote: »

OK, let me clarify. I believe some Gardai are issued these cameras by the force. I don't believe all Gardai get it as standard issue in case that was inferred by what I said. I also don't believe Gardai are supplying them personally themselves. I also don't think individual Gardai are allowed to bring their own equipment to the job even if they wanted to.

Well you are being told differently in a forum populated by Gardaí so maybe it's time to change your view.

eyescreamcone

Slightly off topic, but wouldn't it be ironic if the Gardai used water cannon on the protesters 

I think as you enter our large cities there are signs warning you that Garda CCTV is in operation. If the Gardai use fixed or mobile cameras, that's up to them.

I remember being at football matches in the UK and the English Police would walk past the stand with a video camera. Maybe if people see the camera in operation they will be less tempted to misbehave.

Anyway - turn on the water cannon!!!

BenEadir

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Well you are being told differently in a forum populated by Gardaí so maybe it's time to change your view.

How exactly do you know this thread is populated by Gardai? Are you one? Has anyone else here confirmed they are a serving member? If you/they do confirm they are serving Gardai and confirm a) Gardai are permitted to use their own personal equipment if they so wish and b) the force don't issue personal video cameras to some Gardai I will happily accept what you/they say and change my view, no problem.

bravestar

BenEadir wrote: »

How exactly do you know this thread is populated by Gardai? Are you one? Has anyone else here confirmed they are a serving member? If you/they do confirm they are serving Gardai and confirm a) Gardai are permitted to use their own personal equipment if they so wish and b) the force don't issue personal video cameras to some Gardai I will happily accept what you/they say and change my view, no problem.

Facepalm...

kub

BenEadir wrote: »

How exactly do you know this thread is populated by Gardai? Are you one? Has anyone else here confirmed they are a serving member? If you/they do confirm they are serving Gardai and confirm a) Gardai are permitted to use their own personal equipment if they so wish and b) the force don't issue personal video cameras to some Gardai I will happily accept what you/they say and change my view, no problem.

I thought the very title of these threads was a give away, ' Emergency Services'.
Same way that there are plumbers in the plumbing section and electricians in the electrical section.
So yes there are serving Garda members in this forum.

The other fella

seamus wrote: »

It's something Which should really be mandatory for all members while in uniform We'd see the number of bs complaints plummet when the scrote knows it's all on camera.

We would also see the number of legitimate complaints plummet as the Guards would just record what suits them, making it harder for them to be held accountable for their misconduct.

BenEadir

bravestar wrote: »

Facepalm...

QED

BenEadir

kub wrote: »

I thought the very title of these threads was a give away, ' Emergency Services'.
Same way that there are plumbers in the plumbing section and electricians in the electrical section.
So yes there are serving Garda members in this forum.

I've no doubt there are serving Guards here just as there are professional footballers in the Soccer threads but which posters are Guards and which posters are BS artists?

RainyDay

The difference between officially managed and distributed cameras and personal cameras worn by Gardai is huge.

Official cameras would come with official procedures. Images would be retained for fixed amounts of time, under appropriate controls. The Garda who wore the camera would not be able to edit the recorded clip, and choose which bits of the clip to keep and which to destroy.

Personal cameras would be managed by the individual Garda, and would be retained, deleted or edited at their discretion. They would be available to any of their housemates who can work out the Garda's personal laptop password (if any such password in place).

Personal cameras would be a huge concern.

bravestar

RainyDay wrote: »

The difference between officially managed and distributed cameras and personal cameras worn by Gardai is huge.

Official cameras would come with official procedures. Images would be retained for fixed amounts of time, under appropriate controls. The Garda who wore the camera would not be able to edit the recorded clip, and choose which bits of the clip to keep and which to destroy.

Personal cameras would be managed by the individual Garda, and would be retained, deleted or edited at their discretion. They would be available to any of their housemates who can work out the Garda's personal laptop password (if any such password in place).

Personal cameras would be a huge concern.

Seriously?.. I sure hope no gardai wash their uniform at home if they are living in shared accommodation. There's nothing there to stop a housemate dressing up and doing a checkpoint when the garda is out.

timetogo

bravestar wrote: »

Seriously?.. I sure hope no gardai wash their uniform at home if they are living in shared accommodation. There's nothing there to stop a housemate dressing up and doing a checkpoint when the garda is out.

It's a bit different having a look at some pictures / videos on a shared laptop than it is to dress up as a garda and pretend to be one.

I think it's a good idea for them to have cameras but I'd prefer if they were official too. You can see on the protest videos that they're edited to make the protesters look good e.g. just show the bit where a gard is grabbing a protester and conveniently not showing the bit where the protester was performing the actions that meant the gard had to get physical.

A personal camera on a garda could work the same way around. If it's a personal device then certain videos could be deleted by the gard. It's human nature. If the device was official and not capable of being tampering with then maybe the video could be used as evidence by both sides.

RainyDay

bravestar wrote: »

Seriously?.. I sure hope no gardai wash their uniform at home if they are living in shared accommodation. There's nothing there to stop a housemate dressing up and doing a checkpoint when the garda is out.

The key difference is of course that dressing up on someone else's uniform and 'doing a checkpoint' is a very public act. It would be pretty hard to do with a garda car, garda lights and other garda paraphanalia too. But the specifics aren't really important. The general point is more important. Personal videos taken by a garda during the course of their work are not securely controlled. How long will it take before they end up on YouTube? Or You've Been Framed? And who gets to edit?

I'd be very happy to see Gardai get proper cameras for their own safety, and for the material recorded to be safely retained and archived, out of the control of that individual Garda.

Personal cameras are a very different story. Gardai deal with very sensitive and very personal situations, and these should not be recorded for personal use.

bravestar

RainyDay wrote: »

Personal cameras are a very different story. Gardai deal with very sensitive and very personal situations, and these should not be recorded for personal use.

Thanks, you obviously know far more about being a Garda than silly ole me does.

The positives of wearing a camera far out weigh the negatives and regardless of who provides them, they are a good idea. Aside from the usual criminals, the only people I can see disliking it are the "professional" protesters, who won't be able to edit it.

Oh and if it was to used as evidence, it would have to be an unedited master copy on the original recording media. Showing before, during and after the incident if it existed. Gardai don't get to play around with editing software and throw in star wipes wherever they want.

Lastly, do you really think any Garda brings their work home anymore, to do when they are not getting paid for it? Those days are long gone.

timetogo

bravestar wrote: »

Thanks, you obviously know far more about being a Garda than silly ole me does.

I think he does about the issues with personal cameras anyway.

bravestar wrote: »

Aside from the usual criminals, the only people I can see disliking it are the "professional" protesters, who won't be able to edit it.

Maybe it'll make the protesters cop on a bit. I think Gards having a recording device is a great idea. While a personal device is better than nothing, it's not a great solution. Maybe the battery will run out because it's a cheap personal device or the Gard will forget to turn it on. The expense is covered by the Gard I suppose so I'd guess that something that could record HQ for the full length of a shift in darkness and light and be waterproof would be pricey.
It'd be better if these were proper official untamperable devices that had to be turned in and archived at the end of a shift. I think that's the point that you missed.
This is Ireland though so I'd imagine we don't have budget for it or it'll take 20 years to study and cost millions.

bravestar wrote: »

Oh and if it was to used as evidence, it would have to be an unedited master copy on the original recording media. Showing before, during and after the incident if it existed.

Sure. And how do you prove it's an unedited master copy on the original recording media if it's a personal device? It's easy to put video onto these devices and change the date / time of the media.

bravestar wrote: »

Lastly, do you really think any Garda brings their work home anymore, to do when they are not getting paid for it? Those days are long gone.

If its their personal device they can bring it wherever they want or lose it. I take it these devices aren't encrypted so one found device would have a load of interesting video on it.


I think personal cameras on Gards are better than nothing. I also think one Gard uploading a video of an incident to Facebook / Youtube is going to get them banned. All it needs is one idiot.


Edit: Here's one that is apparently worn by other police forces. http://www.vievu.com/vievu-store/vievu-store-le3/

seamus

The other fella wrote: »

We would also see the number of legitimate complaints plummet as the Guards would just record what suits them, making it harder for them to be held accountable for their misconduct.

Mandatory cameras would not operate in this way, as others have pointed out. The devices would be fully logged and encrypted, tampering with the device or switching it off mid-shift would be a disciplinary matter.

Besides, I'm not sure how "legitimate" complaints can plummet if they record what suits them. Lack of a recording does not mean that something did not occur.

RainyDay wrote: »

Personal cameras would be a huge concern.

timetogo wrote: »

If its their personal device they can bring it wherever they want or lose it. I take it these devices aren't encrypted so one found device would have a load of interesting video on it.

I think personal cameras on Gards are better than nothing. I also think one Gard uploading a video of an incident to Facebook / Youtube is going to get them banned. All it needs is one idiot.

Personal cameras are better than nothing provided that they are used properly. Recording what occurs in public, fine. Even if someone else gets that footage, no problem, it's a public recording.

The issue is when a Garda is using one during a protest, and then forgets to turn it off. He accidentally records everything said in the squad car back to the station, everything going on in the station, and everything that happens in private places like when they enter someone's home (ever for benign reasons).

He goes home, plugs it into his laptop, it automatically syncs to the home media server or whatever, and then we suddenly have a big fncking problem because others may have access to that server.

Or even simpler; he has it on while on the beat, chatting along to his partner. Finds Anto, gets in a scuffle arresting Anto and the camera falls off without him noticing. Anto's mate Johnno picks it up and slips it in his pocket, and suddenly he now has all of the operational information the two Garda were talking about for the last half an hour while walking around.

So if personal cameras are used, they have to be used very specifically, which is why in reality they're a bad idea. Handheld video cameras are a better idea, visibility aside it's hard to "accidentally" film stuff you don't intend to.

RainyDay

bravestar wrote: »

The positives of wearing a camera far out weigh the negatives and regardless of who provides them, they are a good idea. Aside from the usual criminals, the only people I can see disliking it are the "professional" protesters, who won't be able to edit it.

TimeToGo and Seamus have covered most of my concerns, but just to answer this particularl point:

I'm not a criminal, usual or otherwise, and I'm not a protester, 'professional' or otherwise. I dislike the idea of Gardai wearing personal cameras.

Timberrrrrrrr

RainyDay wrote: »

TimeToGo and Seamus have covered most of my concerns, but just to answer this particularl point:

I'm not a criminal, usual or otherwise, and I'm not a protester, 'professional' or otherwise. I dislike the idea of Gardai wearing personal cameras.

But you have no problem.l with the thousands of cctv cameras that capture your every move every day of the week?

RainyDay

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

But you have no problem.l with the thousands of cctv cameras that capture your every move every day of the week?

I have various degrees of problems with various of those cameras. However, they are not operated by the force with the statutory role of protecting the citizens. They do not routinely record situations of the most sensitive nature, like child abuse, sexual abuse, domestic violence, violent crimes. They are operated by businesses, under the regulations set out by the Data Protection Commissioner.

Big difference....

If this comes across as an anti-Garda position, you are misinterpreting me. It is completely the opposite. I'd be very happy for Garda to have official cameras, with appropriate controls around how the material is retained.

RainyDay

RainyDay wrote: »

I have various degrees of problems with various of those cameras. However, they are not operated by the force with the statutory role of protecting the citizens. They do not routinely record situations of the most sensitive nature, like child abuse, sexual abuse, domestic violence, violent crimes. They are operated by businesses, under the regulations set out by the Data Protection Commissioner.

Big difference....

If this comes across as an anti-Garda position, you are misinterpreting me. It is completely the opposite. I'd be very happy for Garda to have official cameras, with appropriate controls around how the material is retained.

Data protection rules apply to the Gardaí.

RainyDay

foreign wrote: »

Data protection rules apply to the Gardaí.

Kinda hard to enforce the rules if the devices in question are personal, not declared, not known to senior officers and have no rules or policies around their use.

3fullback

The device in question is near $800 in cost. Would Gardai really invest this much themselves ?

http://www.vievu.com/vievu-store/vievu-store-le3/

RainyDay

3fullback wrote: »

The device in question is near $800 in cost. Would Gardai really invest this much themselves ?

http://www.vievu.com/vievu-store/vievu-store-le3/

There are slightly cheaper versions available;

http://www.dhgate.com/product/mini-spy-button-dv-high-definition-camera/171263194.html#s1-9-1|206396355

Probably not the same quality as the $800 ones, but probably quite usable all the same.

Little CuChulainn

3fullback wrote: »

The device in question is near $800 in cost. Would Gardai really invest this much themselves ?

http://www.vievu.com/vievu-store/vievu-store-le3/

I suppose that depends on how badly they've been targeted by frivolous complaints in the past. Bit I'd imagine they'd go with cheaper versions.

RainyDay

RainyDay wrote: »

Kinda hard to enforce the rules if the devices in question are personal, not declared, not known to senior officers and have no rules or policies around their use.

The Garda is clearly identifiable. I'm guessing the DPC has rules for a person capturing data while working? Probably the same for taxi drivers operating cameras in their cars.

RainyDay

foreign wrote: »

The Garda is clearly identifiable.

But the camera isn't clearly identifiable.

Is the Garda carrying the personal camera going to tell every person that they come into contact with about the camera, and how the person can get access to the relevant material on request? Get real.

irishrgr

Question: Do the Gardaí not have camera's in their cars at least? I don't ever recall seeing them. As you guys know, there are very commonplace over here. In Texas, it's state law that all vehicles used for patrol policing MUST have a video/audio recording device. Ours have the two way system, it's always on, records to a hard drive in the boot that only a supervisor can access. Our SGT can even remote into our camera and see what we see from his/her car. It records:

- when emergency lights/siren are activated
- car goes over 66 MPG
- on any impact to the car/hard braking forces
- officer activation

It also saves the last three minutes of audio/video before the activation (to record actions/conversation before an accident say). On camera faces forward, the other shows the inside (active for all prisoner transports to document all transports in the event of a complaint of abuse). We wear a small transmitter on our belts to capture the audio up to 75ft from the car.

It's brilliant, shows the whole event, jury's love them, especially for drunk driving cases or use of force issues. Hard for the defense to argue with video of the suspect being a dickhead and fighting the police.

Some of our lads have started wearing small video recorders on their uniform (personal purchase) which they activate when away from the car, more protection for officers. SWAT has started wearing Gopro camera on their helmets too. Again, it's all admitted as evidence on the case and it's great protection against allegations of excessive force.

In a public place, there is no requirement to notify of being recorded. I expect as the technology gets cheaper, in a few years body cameras will be as common as patrol car video systems.

donvito99

irishrgr wrote: »

- car goes over 66 MPG

In order to ruthlessly stamp out fuel efficiency. Don't mess with Texas.