Washington, D.C., police began wearing body cameras in a new pilot program that started October 1. They will test five camera modes in all seven police districts, in school security and special operations divisions.

Some will mount to a D.C. police officer’s collar or to the front of the officer’s shirt. Another model will be mounted to an eyeglass frame. But all will be ready to record the movements of 165 police officers as they interact with the public every day.

To help increase public trust between police officers and the city residents they are sworn to protect, District officers will begin wearing on-body cameras next week as they work. Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier hopes to expand the pilot program to each of her department’s thousands of patrol officers in the coming years.

Many complaints, she said, include multiple witness accounts that must be collected and reconciled by department personnel. “Now we’ll have a video,” Lanier said. “This gives us that independent, unbiased witness. . . . This will make our officers safer. It will make our department more transparent. It will reduce the amount of time supervisors have to spend investigating allegations.

Under departmental policy described by Lanier on Wednesday, officers will be required to turn on the camera as soon as they receive a call for service or other request for assistance and will leave the camera rolling until they finish the call. Video that is not retained for a criminal or administrative investigation will be deleted after 90 days, Lanier said.

Questions remain about malfunctions as police have the ability to turn the devices on and off when they choose. This renders the devices useless for oversight when they can “malfunction” at will.

In Albuquerque, New Mexico a police officer has a history of malfunctioning cameras. In one instance he killed a 19-year old woman.

Their use has also sparked privacy concerns.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and the Los Angeles Police Department, along with police in New York, Chicago and Washington, have launched pilot programs to test cameras for wider deployment.

But equipping police with such devices also raises new and unsettled issues over privacy at a time when many Americans have been critical of the kind of powerful government surveillance measures that technology has made possible.

For many departments, questions remain about when officers should be allowed to turn off such cameras — especially in cases involving domestic violence or rape victims — and the extent to which video could be made public.

Video from dashboard cameras in police cars, a more widely used technology, has long been exploited for entertainment purposes. Internet users have posted dash-cam videos of arrests of naked women to YouTube, and TMZ sometimes obtains police videos of athletes and celebrities during minor or embarrassing traffic stops, turning officers into unwitting paparazzi.

Officers wearing body cameras could extend that public eye into living rooms or bedrooms, should a call require them to enter a private home.

A recent federal survey of 63 law enforcement agencies using body cameras said nearly a third of the agencies had no written policy on the devices. (It is not known how many agencies overall currently use body cameras.)

For that reason, experts and privacy advocates have encouraged departments to adopt policies that include allowing victims and reluctant witnesses to be filmed only with their consent.

The newly released federal report also suggests that departments should clearly outline policies for how long they will keep video recordings before deletion; 60- or 90-day holding periods are common, unless the video is used as criminal evidence or has been flagged in a complaint.

Should police wear body cameras? Absolutely. Should they have the ability to turn them off? Not a chance. If you want the program to be effective, the control of footage should never be in the hands of the police. Anyone involved in being recorded should also have the ability to request a copy of the footage for a low and reasonable fee.

Other police departments that have begun wearing body cameras this month include New York City.

A new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) shows the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) uses its Secure Flight Program to give many government employees special treatment.

In addition to members of Congress and federal judges, millions of employees of the Department of Defense, Homeland Security, and intelligence agencies are automatically being considered low risk. As a result, they’re able to use the less invasive and more convenient Pre-Check line at the airport.

As the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has pointed out, this program creates something of a caste system in which government employees get special privileges, while civilians placed in the high or unknown risk categories can’t even find out the rationale for their categorization. “Ultimately,” the ACLU argues, “when we start rewarding or punishing people because of who they are, as opposed to what they’ve done, we drift farther from the principles at the heart of our Constitution.”

There’s no need to complain when you get the perks no one else does. Read the report below.

Download (PDF, 3.37MB)

Daniel Boykin, 33, of Meigs Drive in Murfreesboro, has been charged with unlawful photography, aggravated burglary, wiretapping, unlawful telephone recording and two computer crimes.

WKRN News 2

Police say Boykin was infatuated with the victim, whom he allegedly recorded while she was on her phone in the restroom. That’s why he’s been charged with unlawful telephone recording and wiretapping.

Detectives also say Boykin went into the victim’s Nashville home on multiple occasions and took data from her computers and electronic devices.

There is no evidence any public restroom facilities were targeted by Boykin.

No need to worry, Boykin doesn’t look at everyone, only women he’s infatuated with.

According to the TSA, Boykin resigned before he could be terminated when the investigation began.

In a statement released to News 2 Tuesday, TSA officials stated, “This individual is no longer employed by the agency. TSA holds its employees to the highest ethical standards and has zero tolerance for misconduct in the workplace.”

They also noted that Boykin worked in an administrative role and had no interaction with the general public, and that the restroom involved in the investigation was only open to TSA officials.

Well, don’t we all feel better now?

The incredible story of how a 16-year-old high school sophomore from the Bronx ended up spending nearly three years locked up at the Rikers jail in New York City after he says he was falsely accused of stealing a backpack. Kalief Browder never pleaded guilty and was never convicted. Browder maintained his innocence and requested a trial, but was only offered plea deals while the trial was repeatedly delayed.

Near the end of his time in jail, the judge offered to sentence him to time served if he entered a guilty plea, and warned him he could face 15 years in prison if he was convicted. But Browder still refused to accept the deal, and was only released when the case was dismissed. During this time, Browder spent nearly 800 days in solitary confinement, a juvenile imprisonment practice that the New York Department of Corrections has now banned.

We are joined by reporter and author Jennifer Gonnerman, who recounts Browder’s story in the current issue of The New Yorker. We also speak with Browder’s current attorney, Paul Prestia, who has filed a lawsuit against the City of New York, the New York City Police Department, the Bronx District Attorney, and the Department of Corrections, on Browder’s behalf.

More at Democracy Now.

While there is no uniform standard in America for tabulating the incidence of crime against ATM users, the U.S. Department of Justice has estimated that such attacks occur at a proportion as low as 1 in 3.5 million transactions.

At this rate, the average American is in greater danger of being hit by a bus while crossing the street to get to an ATM than of being accosted while using it.

ATM transaction data, on the other hand, has proven far more difficult to protect — as we’ve seen in recent ATM skimming events that have netted millions of dollars within minutes for determined thieves.

To help consumers to help themselves, Diebold has created an infographic that ATM deployers can use to teach customers about ATM fraud. The information can be distributed as a flyer, mailer or email, posted online or at a machine — even displayed on the ATM screen itself.

ATM Skimming - Modern-Day Bank Robbery [infographic]
ATM Skimming – Modern-Day Bank Robbery [infographic]
Compliments of ATMmarketplace.com

© 2016 Loss of Privacy Powered by WordPress using the Jishnu theme.