UK Straps Cameras to Police Helmets
Pastor Dale Morgan
Jul 13, 6:14 PM EDT
*
UK Straps Cameras to Police Helmets*
By RAPHAEL G. SATTER
Associated Press Writer
LONDON (AP) -- Britain is taking its surveillance to a new level,
strapping video cameras to the helmets of its famed bobbies - a move the
government says will cut down on paperwork and help prosecute criminals.
By providing dramatic footage of victims, suspects and witnesses, judges
and jurors will be able to "see and hear the incident through the eyes
and ears of the officer at the scene," Minister of State for Security
Tony McNulty said.
The Home Office said it was allocating $6 million to fund the devices
for Britain's 42 police forces - enough to buy more than 2,000 cameras.
Police already use handheld cameras to monitor crowded events and the
new head-mounted devices, worn around the ear or clipped on to a helmet,
have been used on a trial basis by police in Plymouth, in southwestern
England, since 2005. Similar cameras are used by security guards at
sports venues to hunt for soccer hooligans.
Britain is not the first country to use such cameras, versions of which
have been tested in Denmark. But the national rollout will tighten
Britain's web of video surveillance, already the most extensive in the
world. The country is watched over by a network of some 4 million
closed-circuit cameras, and privacy advocates complain the average
Briton is recorded as many as 300 times a day.
In a report on the Plymouth pilot project published by the Home Office
on Thursday, policemen praised the head-held cameras for deterring bad
behavior and providing excellent evidence against crooks.
They said rowdy youths quickly calmed when they realized they were being
filmed, and those arrested for drunkenness seldom challenged police when
shown videos of their behavior.
Prosecutors credited the cameras with emboldening victims of domestic
violence to press charges against their partners, although the director
of Rights of Women, Ranjit Kaur, said she has not been convinced the
footage alone could help secure a conviction.
The Association of Chief Police Officers, an independent body of senior
police officials in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, gave the
devices a tepid welcome, cautioning that courts might someday expect
everything police said to be backed by video evidence.
"The introduction of personal digital recording equipment for police
officers and staff brings benefits and risks," the association said in a
statement. "We need to guard against creating an expectation that all
police activity ought to be supported by the use of digital recording
technology."
Civil rights campaigner Liberty praised the guidelines for using the
devices included in the Home Office report. Spokeswoman Jen Corlew noted
that police were instructed to inform members of the public they were
being recorded and that the footage not being used in an investigation
had to be erased within a month of its creation.
But Ben Ward, Human Rights Watch's associate Europe director, expressed
concern.
"The privacy questions raised by the plan will turn on whether the
safeguards, including on notification and storage, are uniformly
respected," he said in a telephone interview in London.
The American Civil Liberties Union also expressed concern, predicting
the United States would soon follow Britain's lead and subject Americans
to even more video surveillance.
"Head-mounted cameras are a little bit of a double edged sword when it
comes to civil liberties," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the ACLU's
technology and liberty program in Washington, D.C.
"They record police misconduct, improper interrogations and seem to have
an effect on having police officers kept in line. But this just becomes
another extension of widespread video surveillance," he said in a
telephone interview.
Steinhardt predicted the U.S. would soon give police the same power
since America already has followed the example of Britain, "the world's
innovator when it comes to surveillance and surveillance technology."
Britain's Home Office said the cameras - which have enough memory to
hold 24 hours of video - were not intended to record continuously.
Officers would turn the devices on and off at their discretion, speaking
into the camera after turning it on to explain where, when and why they
were starting it. A second explanation was required before turning the
device off.
The report also cautioned against taking extraneous video when entering
private homes, and said officers should turn cameras off during strip
searches. But it also threatened disciplinary action against officers
who deliberately masked the camera's view or deleted video from the
camera's memory.
The Home Office said it was exploring other uses for the devices,
including fitting them with the ability to send video live to a command
center, or special license-plate recognition software which would enable
police to identify stolen or suspicious vehicles just by looking at them.
---
On the Net:
Home Office: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/