Garda getting body cams

Kermit.de.frog · 31-10-2019 2:47pm

Boggles wrote: »

Police in the US certainly have discretion of when to activate the camera or not, it's guidelines though not federal law AFAIK.

I have never heard of a police officer been fired for not activating their camera or switching it off for that sole violation.

It does happen.

This officer was fired for blocking the mic while having stopped an old friend (@ 1:00). Disabling audio first reason for dismissal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fg7DM8-GOI

Now i'm not aware of the actual laws state or federal surrounding it but they are not allowed to inhibit the filming.

4068ac1elhodqr · 31-10-2019 2:48pm

mountai wrote: »

Sooner the better . Also should have ID cards and most importantly a full DNA bank for everyone .

DNA is a bit much, ID (photo) cards certainly.

One reason folks are in trucks and rowing boats from mainland EU to britian is their lack of requirements for photoID to be carried at all times. E.g. If you are an illegal migrant you'd have an easier time there than in France if working illegally in nailbars of carwashes, just say your name is Jim-Billy-Joe-John or somesuch if asked.

blanch152 · 31-10-2019 2:50pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Nope. Trouble with DNA is insurance companies treating people differently for example. Info being sold etc.

Private sector organisations. I don't trust them with my personal information.

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do we trust our DNA info to the Garda/Pulse system? They can't organise breath tests.

Yes, criminals can be quickly identified with DNA. That is a benefit to the public that outweighs the privacy issues.

31-10-2019 2:53pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Most Gardai seem to do the minimum in my experience. The entire force needs restructuring and reform which in fairness to the new Commissioner, he seems to be trying to do.

Until the general level of professionalism rises in the force I wouldn't trust the rank and file with firearms

we will have to disagree on most of this.
you do realise there are thousands of 'rank and file' gardai who carry firarms?

Always Tired · 31-10-2019 2:59pm

If there were body cams on the gardai there would be a lot more cops being exposed for abuse then there would be 'scrotes', trust me.

There are still plenty of barracks around the country that have no CCTV in them, and the gardai are known to take full advantage of that when they want to.

Gatling · 31-10-2019 3:03pm

bubblypop wrote: »

uniformed members cannot carry firearms.

That's easily changed all it takes is a training and certification course and every guard could be issued a razer .

It's quite simple

suicide_circus · 31-10-2019 3:03pm

if they can be switched on and off at will then they certainly lose some credibility

Duane Dibbley · 31-10-2019 3:07pm

Excellent idea if they cant be turned off.

31-10-2019 3:07pm

Gatling wrote: »

That's easily changed all it takes is a training and certification course and every guard could be issued a razer .

It's quite simple

presuming you mean tazer- yes all members could be trained & issued with a tazer so long as they do away with the unarmed part of AGS, and i don't think there is an appetite to turn AGS into an armed force.

Gatling · 31-10-2019 3:08pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

if they can be switched on and off at will then they certainly lose some credibility

I'm sure we will be told privacy comes into it ,

There wouldn't be a need to record every on duty guard 24/7

Gatling · 31-10-2019 3:10pm

bubblypop wrote: »

presuming you mean tazer- yes all members could be trained & issued with a tazer .

They wouldn't have to get rid of the unarmed forces just give them the tools to defend themselves and others ,

We've over 2500 officers carrying firearms daily

SchrodingersCat · 31-10-2019 3:11pm

I suspect that the argument that Gardai should wear cameras just to combat Gardai brutality/corruption is naive. These cameras will be used more for finding evidence against the people that they are pointed at: i.e. me and you, the citizens. Worse, these cameras are operated by the Gardai. It is easy to imagine a Garda "forgetting to charge the camera" before heading out on an an arrest or to a protest, for example. This selective evidence gathering by the Gardai means that evidence will weigh more against the citizens.

I can see why governments would push for these cameras. We currently have CCTV on street corners. With Garda cams we will have more even closer to the people pointing at them and now being able to record audio too. With technological developments like facial and voice recognition this could become a big issue for civil liberties.

There are pros and cons to the Gardai wearing cameras. Its a good topic for us to debate. Personally, I am starting to think that the cons to society outweigh the pros having previously held the opposite view.

BarryD2 · 31-10-2019 3:12pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

if they can be switched on and off at will then they certainly lose some credibility

Agree, heard the Garda rep on earlier suggesting they'd choose when to activate the cameras 'according to protocol'. Think these are essential nowadays, protocols are obviously needed as no point in personal recordings of normal station routine jobs. But anytime the Garda leaves the station on duty, they should be obliged to activate them.

As for the ICCL people on RTE earlier, they were for the birds and speaking well outside their remit, when pontificating on value.

31-10-2019 3:14pm

Gatling wrote: »

They wouldn't have to get rid of the unarmed forces just give them the tools to defend themselves and others ,

We've over 2500 officers carrying firearms daily

Tazers are firearms in this country, therefore the only way to allow uniformed members to carry them is;
1. allow AGS to become an armed force
2. change the legislation, so that Tazers are not defined as firearms.

there are already members qualified to carry tazers, members who carry firearms

Kermit.de.frog · 31-10-2019 3:19pm

SchrodingersCat wrote: »

I suspect that the argument that Gardai should wear cameras just to combat Gardai brutality/corruption is naive. These cameras will be used more for finding evidence against the people that they are pointed at: i.e. me and you, the citizens. Worse, these cameras are operated by the Gardai. It is easy to imagine a Garda "forgetting to charge the camera" before heading out on an an arrest or to a protest, for example. This selective evidence gathering by the Gardai means that evidence will weigh more against the citizens.

It's very simple. The cameras have to be on while gardai are on patrol.

That can presumably be simply legislated for as i'm sure it will be.

Everyone can see if a garda didn't turn on a camera or inhibited filming intentionally. Garda then disciplined or dismissed.

I don't see why people have to make up every facile argument under the sun to stop progress like this that is clearly in everyones interests.

Berserker · 31-10-2019 3:21pm

weldoninhio wrote: »

Some goon from the ICCL was just on Adrian Kennedy there. Absolute mouth breather. Doesn't want to be filmed walking down the street apparently. Must not have heard of CCTV.

Must never leave their house if that is the case.

riffmongous wrote: »

Should be a great idea for everyone's benefit but would I trust the Gardai with them.... Not so sure anymore.

Why would you not trust them?

Gatling wrote: »

They wouldn't have to get rid of the unarmed forces just give them the tools to defend themselves and others ,

We've over 2500 officers carrying firearms daily

Is that true? Apart from the ARU & special branch, who else carries a firearm?

seamus · 31-10-2019 3:22pm

I am a bit bemused at the ICCL's reaction here.

Certainly if it was just Gardai wandering around holding a camera all day and that's it, then there's an issue.

There are several key elements that need to be in place in order to get the correct balance. The ICCL raised as a concern the fact that there is no international standard in this regard. That's valid.

But rather than say, "Hold on, let's agree on how these cameras are supposed to function and how to safeguard personal rights", they've gone for a blanket, "No, shouldn't be done".

Their objections to them are incredibly flimsy;

- The fact they've worked well in other countries is no evidence that they'll work well in Ireland. Um...
- "a person may decide not to take part in a protest if they know Gardaí will be wearing the technology, or they may restrict what they say or with whom they associate for fear of being recorded." Oh no, people might actually have to control their behaviour in public.

It's really weird. I would have assumed that the ICCL would be all on for introducing some level of accountability on the day-to-day work of Gardai, but instead they've gone with the narrative that body cams constitute mass surveillance.

SchrodingersCat wrote: »

I suspect that the argument that Gardai should wear cameras just to combat Gardai brutality/corruption is naive. These cameras will be used more for finding evidence against the people that they are pointed at: i.e. me and you, the citizens. Worse, these cameras are operated by the Gardai. It is easy to imagine a Garda "forgetting to charge the camera" before heading out on an an arrest or to a protest, for example. This selective evidence gathering by the Gardai means that evidence will weigh more against the citizens.

This is not generally how they work. Or at least how they should work. A garda takes a camera at the start of their shift from a pool. The camera is charged, the details of who took which camera are logged. The camera remains on for the duration of the shift, and is checked back in at the end. It is plugged into the system, the data is downloaded to a secure system.

The Garda does not at any time have access to modify the data on the camera, to start or stop the camera, and the footage can only be reviewed through a central system where all accesses are logged. In the central system, video cannot be edited except to extract timestamped excerpts for evidentiary purposes. An individual charged with a crime has the right to obtain all relevant footage for use in court.

That's how it should work. As I say above, the ICCL has a valid concern that there is no international best practice. But that doesn't mean we can't create one.

The ICCL is also concerned that footage that favours the defendent will be "lost", but seem to have missed the fact that this has the effect of damaging the prosecution's case. "Oh the camera got damaged" or, "There was a malfunction" is looked upon dimly by courts and juries and usually works in the defendent's favour.

Kermit.de.frog · 31-10-2019 3:23pm

seamus wrote: »

I am a bit bemused at the ICCL's reaction here.

Certainly if it was just Gardai wandering around holding a camera all day and that's it, then there's an issue.

They don't hold it. It will be attached to the front of their uniform.

31-10-2019 3:23pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's very simple. The cameras have to be on while gardai are on patrol.

That can presumably be simply legislated for as i'm sure it will be.

Everyone can see if a garda didn't turn on a camera or inhibited filming intentionally. Garda then disciplined or dismissed.

I don't see why people have to make up every facile argument under the sun to stop progress like this that is clearly in everyones interests.

that won't happen Im afraid.
firstly, the guard is entitled to some privacy. how about toilet breaks etc?
or private conversations between colleagues?
there will have to be protocols put in place about when and where the cameras should be turned on.

Gatling · 31-10-2019 3:25pm

bubblypop wrote: »

1. allow AGS to become an armed force
2. change the legislation, so that Tazers are not defined as firearms.

No not true and they don't need to change any legislation( what reason )

Kermit.de.frog · 31-10-2019 3:25pm

bubblypop wrote: »

that won't happen Im afraid.
firstly, the guard is entitled to some privacy. how about toilet breaks etc?
or private conversations between colleagues?
there will have to be protocols put in place about when and where the cameras should be turned on.

Yes, thus I said on patrol.

Police forces around the world are using body cams no problem now. They have no issue following orders and making sure the cameras are on when they should be.

Why should Ireland be any different?

riffmongous · 31-10-2019 3:26pm

Berserker wrote: »

Why would you not trust them?

Take your pick from any of the recent Gardai scandals

Gatling · 31-10-2019 3:27pm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

They don't hold it. It will be attached to the front of their uniform.

It's likely they will use a simple push button to record set up and record live when required Vs 24/7 recording

_Kaiser_ · 31-10-2019 3:34pm

bubblypop wrote: »

we will have to disagree on most of this.
you do realise there are thousands of 'rank and file' gardai who carry firarms?

By rank and file I was more referring to the standard uniformed Garda, not detectives or the ARU etc

As for the standards generally - come on now! Penalty point/breathalyser scandal that ultimately resulted in them rebranding the entire Traffic Corps fleet (not fooled by the way), regular reports in the media of missing evidence, harassment, and of course the McCabe saga and how they treated one of their own.

Yes there are decent hard working Gardai who take the job and the responsibility and consequences it has on people's lives seriously, but there are also too many members that fit into the above categories too and for whom the badge is an ego trip more than anything else.

In my view to be honest, only a complete RUC/PSNI dismantling and restructuring will give us the competent professional police force badly needed in this country with violent gang crime and the stuff happening in Cavan becoming more frequent.

But as I said previously, the current Commissioner (an outsider who was badly needed) seems to be holding the chancers to account (I think a few have even been fired as opposed to the usual token suspension and then transfer when the focus shifts elsewhere) and trying to drag the force forward to where it needs to be.

blanch152 · 31-10-2019 3:37pm

SchrodingersCat wrote: »

I suspect that the argument that Gardai should wear cameras just to combat Gardai brutality/corruption is naive. These cameras will be used more for finding evidence against the people that they are pointed at: i.e. me and you, the citizens. Worse, these cameras are operated by the Gardai. It is easy to imagine a Garda "forgetting to charge the camera" before heading out on an an arrest or to a protest, for example. This selective evidence gathering by the Gardai means that evidence will weigh more against the citizens.

I can see why governments would push for these cameras. We currently have CCTV on street corners. With Garda cams we will have more even closer to the people pointing at them and now being able to record audio too. With technological developments like facial and voice recognition this could become a big issue for civil liberties.

There are pros and cons to the Gardai wearing cameras. Its a good topic for us to debate. Personally, I am starting to think that the cons to society outweigh the pros having previously held the opposite view.

How is the example of the gardai gathering evidence about a crime a con to society?

seamus · 31-10-2019 3:41pm

blanch152 wrote: »

How is the example of the gardai gathering evidence about a crime a con to society?

It is kind of strange that people are concerned about Gardai gathering video footage to use in court.

At the moment, Gardai have two eyes and a memory, and that is basically considered as good as evidence in court.

Video footage is far from infallible, but it's a ****load better than some Garda's notes and his memory from the middle of a shift when he might be hungover from the night before.

Surely people should be welcoming this improvement?

blanch152 · 31-10-2019 3:44pm

seamus wrote: »

It is kind of strange that people are concerned about Gardai gathering video footage to use in court.

At the moment, Gardai have two eyes and a memory, and that is basically considered as good as evidence in court.

Video footage is far from infallible, but it's a ****load better than some Garda's notes and his memory from the middle of a shift when he might be hungover from the night before.

Surely people should be welcoming this improvement?

Yes, of course.

Take the Tallaght Burton case for example. If the accounts of the events put forward by the defence are to be taken as true, then the case would never have gone to court if there was garda video evidence as the evidence would clearly have shown that Paul Murphy et al were merely ordinary everyday citizens meekly going about a peaceful protest.

Surely that is to be welcomed?

Kermit.de.frog · 31-10-2019 3:45pm

seamus wrote: »

It is kind of strange that people are concerned about Gardai gathering video footage to use in court.

At the moment, Gardai have two eyes and a memory, and that is basically considered as good as evidence in court.

Video footage is far from infallible, but it's a ****load better than some Garda's notes and his memory from the middle of a shift when he might be hungover from the night before.

Surely people should be welcoming this improvement?

Also it gives all gardai no option but to act more professionally given the footage may be used in court and at other times depending on circumstances.

I see no downside to a more competent, equipped, scrutinised, professional force

31-10-2019 4:05pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

In my view to be honest, only a complete RUC/PSNI dismantling and restructuring will give us the competent professional police force badly needed in this country with violent gang crime and the stuff happening in Cavan becoming more frequent.

But as I said previously, the current Commissioner (an outsider who was badly needed) seems to be holding the chancers to account (I think a few have even been fired as opposed to the usual token suspension and then transfer when the focus shifts elsewhere) and trying to drag the force forward to where it needs to be.

I really don't know why the PSNI are held up as some police force to aspire to!
I can only imagine that it is by people who don't have many dealings with them!
If you think you don't see many Gardai, you will see a lot less if they are turned into the PSNI, which does seem to be happening.

anyway, for another thread i guess.
There will have to be protocols put in place for the cameras to work, but hopefully it does, for the good of all of us.

James Brown · 31-10-2019 4:23pm

seamus wrote: »

It is kind of strange that people are concerned about Gardai gathering video footage to use in court.

At the moment, Gardai have two eyes and a memory, and that is basically considered as good as evidence in court.

Video footage is far from infallible, but it's a ****load better than some Garda's notes and his memory from the middle of a shift when he might be hungover from the night before.

Surely people should be welcoming this improvement?

Saved Paul Murphy from false Garda testimony alright.

Garda getting body cams

Comments