police body cameras: what do you see?
But what exactly did these cameras reveal?
Below, you will answer three questions about a simulated interactive video involving a police officer.
This is not a scientific investigation, answer as much as you can.
First of all, tell us some of your points.
Watch the first video now (with no sound)
Take it out of your chest-
Like thousands of police officers across the country, body cameras are installed: Seth W.
Stoke, Professor of Law, University of South Carolina-
The producers of these videos
He said that most people often think that the security of the official is seriously threatened, and it is likely that his life is threatened.
Professor Stoughton, a former police officer, is one of the many who support the need for police to wear cameras like those used here.
He believes that they will strengthen accountability and better educate people about police work.
But they have their limits, he added.
Look at the same interaction from different angles.
It\'s not a fight, is it?
We had the dance music of the pounding dance quiet down, but you see.
The first video came from the police body camera, reflecting what Professor Stoughton said was \"deceptive intensity \".
In this case, the \"struggle\" seems to be more complicated than it actually is, because the camera is mounted on the officer\'s chest and produces herky-
Exaggerate the raw action of what is happening.
Even if the camera was on the officer\'s glasses or hat,
Near the lens can be confusing
It is important to prove the point.
Now, let\'s move on to the next video that involves a common and controversial issue: the suspect who fled the officer.
Professor Stolton said that in many cases, the pursuit of feet is particularly prone to contradictory explanations.
This led him to create the simulation below.
Watch and listen to clips (
This has a sound)
Then try to determine what\'s going on: now watch the same scene shot by a bystander with a smartphone. (
Warning: there is some blasphemy. )
Professor Stolton, who plays the police officer in all of these videos, said neither footage actually shows whether the suspect reached out and took the gun.
Some of you may have noticed this and hope we can follow these lines of thought, but lack of certainty is part of the problem.
Sometimes the police video can\'t answer the most pressing questions.
The Spectator video, however, does clarify some of the other dilemmas.
This shows that the suspect ran away when he saw the officer touching his gun.
This shows that the suspect fell because the police shot him with a Taser gun.
However, the police\'s body camera did not capture these details, revealing another important point: the body camera gave priority to the police officer\'s point of view.
Professor Stoughton explains a psychological phenomenon known as \"camera perspective bias,\" saying: \"When the video allows us to look straight into someone\'s eyes, we tend to adopt something that benefits that person
The narrative also affects the conclusion.
Onlookers and police officers provide a very different view of what happened during the above Chase.
In court, Professor Stoughton said, \"the question in these cases will not be whether the officer is right or not . \".
Instead, the focus will be on whether the conclusions and actions of the officers are reasonable.
If you would like to explain your answer, please let us know in the comments.
Now is the last video, focusing on a fairly common responsibility of state and local police: checking vehicles and drivers at traffic stations or in the community.
These encounters will soon become dangerous.
Last year, an official in Georgia was dragged to the side of a car by a driver trying to escape (
His body camera captured a series of events).
But in recent months, officials in Missouri and Texas, New Jersey and both states have also been criticized for actively treating black drivers during traffic jams.
Now watch the same encounter as the police car dashboard camera.
It doesn\'t add much clarity, does it?
After watching these two videos, most people usually say: \"It looks like he pushed the officer, or fell down because he would be hit by a door,\" Professor Stoughton said. ” Why?
Here\'s a tip: At the beginning of this quiz, those who say they trust the police, 0.
00% said the police were knocked down by the driver or door.
Among those who have expressed distrust or strong distrust of the police, 0.
00% said the police officer was knocked down by either of them. (
These results are updated every few minutes according to the quiz reply. )
Now, the same thing has happened from a bystander\'s smartphone.
So what really happened was: the man jumped out because he was trying to get away from a bee in the car.
All this has nothing to do with the police officer.
This is all because of fear of being stung.
The video also showed that the officer had not been knocked down by the person in the car and had not been knocked down by the door --
He is too far away.
Why would some of us miss these details?
Let\'s take a deeper look at the reaction.
At the beginning, readers who say they have a high degree of trust in the police or tend to trust the police are more likely to think that the police are facing a very threatening or some kind of threat, based on the results of our update.
For those who say they don\'t trust the police or tend to do so, this interaction doesn\'t look so dangerous for the police officers.
People who usually trust the police are a serious threat, and people who usually don\'t trust the police are a serious threat. This confirms Professor Stoughton\'s speech with judges, lawyers and students that what we see in police videos is often what we already believe.
\"Our interpretation of the video is just as influenced by cognitive bias as our interpretation of what we see in life,\" Professor Stoughton said . \".
\"People have different opinions on supervision, and they will continue to disagree with the content displayed in the video.
\"Race can also play a role.
While Professor Stoughton\'s work does not attempt to determine how the driver\'s race affects the audience\'s conclusions, many studies have shown that there is some kind of conscious or unconscious bias in all of us, including law enforcement.
The body camera can have a positive impact.
Complaints against the police dropped by 40 in San Diego.
5%, 46 officers of the \"personal body\" force used declined.
5% according to a 2015 report from the city\'s police department, the police used a body camera.
But as these videos are increasingly used in court to support or question police accounts, Professor Stenton says, one must be careful how to interpret them, keeping in mind the photographer\'s limitations and the audience\'s prejudices.
\"People expect more from human body cameras than the technology can provide,\" Professor Stoughton said . \".
\"They hope this is a broad solution to the police problem --
Community Relations, in fact, it\'s just a tool, like any tool, and the value of what it can do is limited.
With this in mind, looking back at the video and this experiment, have your views on regulatory and video roles changed?
Read responses to other quizzes
Candidates then add their own.
If you would like to learn more about this type of quiz and in-depth coverage on race and ethnicity, please register for our Race/Related newsletter.
Want to try again?