Earlier quoted context omitted.
I want two more important steps: 4. The video is archived for at least 90 days, with 360 being preferable. 5. The video is immediately encrypted when it is stored and should only be accessible by the district attorneys office.
> should only be accessible by the district attorneys office. Why the need for such a high level of secrecy? From outside of the US, the picture I get of the police force and the bodies that control them is they have a tendency to try and keep things secret. I would have though a more open system would instil a much higher level of public confidence in that policing system.
There really is a case to be made in keeping the video private; however, police often have to process your private information and the officers have privacy considerations themselves. I really wrote that with this in mind, as I think it's a strong hedge against the "officer privacy" argument. You _will_ constantly record on duty, and that information _will_ be kept private hopefully giving us the best of both worlds.
There's also an evidentiary and performance monitoring considerations. I don't want police to have access to their own video when making sworn statements, research has shown that this can bias and alter these statements which are incredibly important when establishing frame of mind in a courtroom. I also don't want police captains to have the ability to spy on their staff and use the cameras as a backdoor way to monitor the performance or judgement of officers on the street.
To that final point, you _want_ officers to be able to look the other way in certain circumstances.. they aren't a group that should be blindly applying the letter of the law, in my opinion, by keeping the video private you serve to protect this important discretionary relationship between officers and the public.