Watch police body cam video from Sgt. Christopher Redmond of the Gill Police Department, who has worn a body camera while on the job for about a year. Watch video
GILL — For close to a year, Sgt. Christopher Redmond of the Gill Police Department has worn a body camera while on the job.
This makes Redmond, one of two full-time officers in Gill, ahead of the curve among most police in the state when it comes to the issue of police wearing body cameras. What is theory and conjecture for most cops in Massachusetts is been-there / done-that for Redmond.
The camera, a Pro-Vision BodyCam, is a little smaller than a cell phone and clips onto the front of his uniform in the center of his chest, roughly even with his shirt pocket.
It records a 170-degree field of view with what he described as similar to personal sports video cameras.
He calls it a good tool for police work – but not great. It's by no means foolproof, and its use on the job poses nearly as many questions as it provides solutions.
"It's not a panacea," he said. "The technology is not there yet."
Redmond got his camera shortly after last summer's rioting in Ferguson, Missouri after a police officer fatally shot an unarmed black man following an altercation. The shooting and resulting controversy made body cameras on cops a front-burner issue across the country.
It was at that time that Redmond, a self-proclaimed "techie," saw one at a police trade show. He thought he wanted to try one out and he was able to get one at a reduced rate.
Police body cameras in Mass.: A simple idea that's hard to enact »
In the aftermath of that incident as well as other similar incidents, including the recent death of a suspect in custody of Baltimore police and the fatal shooting of a black driver by a white University of Cincinnati police officer during a traffic stop, there have been many calls to have police wear body cameras as a way of increasing accountability.
Redmond said everyone – the police, prosecutors and public – speak in favor of the idea of cops with cameras, but once you began to drill down into their uses, several sticking points appear.
Not the least among them is an absence of any guidelines from the state on how to use them for evidence collection, as well as Massachusetts' anti-wiretapping law. As a result, he said he does not use his camera nearly as much as he could.
Mostly he uses it for what he calls "documentary mode," or shooting footage at the scenes of car accidents and fires. Footage from one house fire where he captured the spread of flames was used by the state Fire Marshal's office to help determine the cause.
He turns it off whenever he enters someone's home or when he has to interview someone in the field. And on those occasions when he is filming and someone walks into view, he always cautions them they are being recorded. This is done to comply with the anti-wiretapping law, he said,
He said he restricts his own use because at the moment, there are no written policies, either for the Gill police or statewide, that define how police are to treat body cam video as evidence. Also, if he shoots footage inside someone's house, could someone else file a request for footage under the Freedom of Information act?
"There's no guidelines yet for rolling them out for actual legal use," he said.
If it's going to be used as evidence, it would have to be cataloged and stored someplace secure where no one could tamper with it or even delete it, he said. The department would also have to hold onto it for a long time, until the end of a trial, which would mean new, secure servers with ample memory. And that would mean money.
The Gill Police Department has two full-time officers and six to seven part-time officers.
And whenever the Highway Department in the adjoining building fires up its generator, the police station's lights flicker and all the computers reset.
Rather than devoting time and energy to draft policies for how body cams may be used in Gill, the department is waiting for the Legislature, the Executive Office of Public Safety and the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police to draft guidelines for use in Massachusetts.
"We don't have the resources to "reinvent the wheel," Redmond said. "So we're kind of waiting to see what rules are developed. Everything tends to move slow, even with hot-button issues like this."
Aside from the legal and ethical ramifications, Redmond said the technology also has its limitations. The camera is simple to use but not exactly foolproof, he said.
There have been times when he thought he has had it on, but it wasn't. There are times when he wanted to turn it on but forgot to. And there have been times when he thought he captured some great video only to find out later on that the lens had been covered over by his raincoat.
"The thing you got to realize is, one, it's equipment which can be prone to failure, and, two, you have operator error," he said.
When cops respond to an emergency, a lot of things go through their minds, he said. "Being a videographer is last on the list," he said.
The camera is clipped onto his shirt in the center of his chest even with his shirt pocket. If he clipped it any lower, like on his belt, there's a chance it would be too low to see into a car in a traffic stop. But because the camera is inches below his nose, often the only sounds he picks up, particularly in stressful situation, are his own breathing noises.
And it goes without saying that the camera is fixed onto his shirt to look straight ahead, while Redmond's neck allows him to look from side to side.
"Just because you're wearing a camera, it doesn't mean it sees what you see," he said.
He supposes one solution would be to walk like a robot.
"You may try, but in reality, you forget you're wearing it," he said.
Also, the battery on his camera is not capable of going a full eight-hour shift, which means he has to turn it on and off repeatedly. He says if he turned it on and left it on, it would be dead in about two hours. But even if it were able to do a full shift, then what?
Are police body cameras effective? Surveys say yes, generally »
"Are you going to store all that data even though it's useless, just because you recorded it?" he asked. "Are you going to run 30 gigabytes a day whether nothing happens or not, but still be responsible for maintaining all of that?"
While body cameras have won the support of people both inside and outside of law enforcement from President Obama on down, he said the cameras will do little to restore a community's trust in police if that trust is already gone.
"They are not a magic bullet to fix everything," he said.
"I worry that if you have a camera malfunction, or the camera is not pointing in the right direction, or you have operator area," he said. "What do you do if you turn it on and the battery is dead? You don't have the option of waiting to charge it and you don't have the option of not addressing the call."
In the event that happens, he envisions that someone is sure to charge that the officer purposely did not turn the camera on, he said.
Redmond said that if someone has so little trust in what the police are doing, a little camera clipped on his chest is not going to change anything.
"I think the expectations needs to be reasonable," he said. " Unfortunately in our instantaneous society, there's always a rush to judgment on things."