Body camera footage can verify actual compliance with formal policing policies

Evidence

The potential use and benefits of body-worn camera footage are farreaching. Among our team’s fifty recommendations, we noted that the footage could be used in a wide variety of ways, including as an educational tool to help train officers and as a means of self-reflection and self-improvement through routine review of officers’ own footage (see Eberhardt, 2016, chapter 6). The footage could also be used to evaluate the impact of agency policies and determine the actual rate of compliance with those policies. For example, in Oakland, officers are required to inform members of the public of their right to refuse a consent search. Command staff could potentially audit the footage to determine whether officers are complying by informing citizens of their rights. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 433

Categorization

• DEFINE: Illustrates a compliance-auditing use of footage—verifying that stated policy (informing citizens of refusal rights) actually occurs in practice, echoing the professed-vs-actual gap.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 433