ARCHIVE

Archive for the ‘Body Camera’ Category

Increase in Body Worn Cameras

Wednesday, April 15th, 2015

le2-3 Increase in Body Worn CamerasIn the last few years, Primeau Forensics has seen an increase in cases that involve surveillance video including body camera video recordings. This digital video evidence is very important in order of investigators and the Trier of Fact to understand the events as they occurred.

Much of this activity began back in 2013 and helped locate and identify the Boston Marathon Bombers. FBI investigators had to cull through dozens if not hundreds of hours of CCTV video surveillance recordings in order to find and identify the terrorists that were eventually responsible for these acts of violence.

Lately, video as evidence is expanding to include body worn cameras that have been implemented into many police agencies across the United States. President Obama authorized funding for police agencies to purchase this equipment. Currently, there are numerous police agencies around the country that are testing different makes of body cameras and learning how to properly integrate them into their procedures. Many of these agencies have been transparent with their testing and have begun to approve further funding to outfit more officers with cameras.

The Grand Rapids, Michigan Police Department was recently testing two different kinds of body-worn cameras among eight different police officers, who presented their feedback on the camera systems online. The city has now approved the funding for two hundred officers to be outfitted with cameras. The Seattle, Washington Police Department has also been very open about their body camera testing, even releasing some of the footage online for the public to see. To maintain privacy, they blurred the video and removed the audio so no individuals could be identified. A large amount of the public has been pushing for police worn body cameras ever since the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri last August.

The benefit of body worn cameras is that they protect everyone, police officers as well as citizens. Many police agencies are in full support of the cameras because they reduce the questioning of what happened during an altercation. If a disagreement is established against an officer, internal affairs will be able to check the body camera video and see the events as they occurred. Police agencies believe this will be very helpful with training officers and improving the relationship between the public and police.

The biggest issue arising from the increase of body worn cameras is the huge amount of data being created. Not only does this require a very large amount of storage space, but it must be stored securely so that the video evidence cannot be tampered with. Thankfully, many of the companies providing these body worn cameras also include proprietary software that ensures the evidence cannot be modified between the camera and the system. Access to the video will be limited to authorized personnel only to maintain the authenticity and safety of the video evidence.

As a Video Forensic Expert, I see many benefits to this increase in body worn cameras. I have worked on numerous cases in which evidence from a body worn camera greatly helped the investigation and proceeding trial. Police dash cameras have often been used as video evidence for investigations but they often do not show the entire altercation because of their stationary view. Police body worn cameras add a second perspective to be used along with the dash cam which can be invaluable to an investigation. Having the two angles of the event in question allows anyone involved in the case to get a better picture of what happened.

Of course all video recordings submitted as evidence in a civil or criminal litigation must have an established chain of custody that supports the events and provides integrity for the digital video evidence. We encourage you to review our series on How to Properly Record a Police Officer when adding Good Samaritan video recordings to an investigation.

 

Body-Worn Cameras: Life or Death

Tuesday, January 27th, 2015

vievu2-300x286 Body-Worn Cameras: Life or DeathThe more video becomes available the more real life situations enter the courtroom. The quality of body worn cameras as well as surveillance CCTV video is improving to the point that video forensic enhancement is not necessary. In a recent fatal shooting in Flagstaff, Arizona the murder of a police officer was recorded on his very own, department issued body cam. Had his murderer not committed suicide (with the officer’s weapon) he would have, when captured, gone on trial to prove his innocence, possibly with a claim of ‘self defense’ or that the officer attacked him and the gun went off accidentally. If this video was not created hundreds of thousands of dollars would have been spent investigating the circumstances of the officer’s death. None of that expense was incurred, all because of a body camera video.

Primeau Forensics has worked with body camera manufacturer, VIEVU, based in Seattle, Washington, to help their research and development of their body worn cameras, which are primarily sold to more than 4,000 agencies in 16 countries. Primeau Forensics helped them test the field of view (FOV) for their cameras. We researched the various FOV options to learn what degree of a lens was most optimal in body worn camera situations.

President Obama recently proposed a bill to provide funding to police departments for the purchase of body worn cameras. The proposal includes $75 million to help pay for 50,000 of the lapel-mounted cameras, with state and local governments paying half the cost. This proposal occurred shortly after the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri. This is an important and crucial development in forensic video. As a video forensic expert I am thrilled to see body worn camera video help litigators learn more about a series of events that occurred, first hand, saving our judicial system a lot of money investigating cases and, often, ensuring a correct decision in a person’s guilt or innocence.

Body Worn Cameras; More Safe than Dash Cam for Police

Tuesday, December 9th, 2014

837248_83687380-300x200 Body Worn Cameras; More Safe than Dash Cam for PoliceAfter the controversial grand jury announcement in the case of Michael Brown, President Obama has proposed the idea of issuing police departments across the nation with body worn cameras for law enforcement. Between Michael Brown, and the controversy behind the Eric Garner case, citizens are asking: Will body-worn cameras help police as well as the public? In this video forensic expert’s opinion, the answer to that question is a resounding YES!

Video is the least challenged of all digital media forensic evidence. It provides a clear indication of the events as they occurred by allowing the judge and jury to observe the event with their own eyes. Nothing is as revealing as video to clearly show the court exactly what happened.

Had Darren Wilson, the officer involved in the Michael Brown shooting, worn a body worn camera, the case might have had a different outcome. The ability for the jury to see something first person can be invaluable to their decision.

Here’s an example: In the video embedded below, courtesy of ABC News, we see two pieces of evidence: footage of a confrontation taken from the dash-cam, along with evidence taken from the body worn camera. As the first half of the video shows, the police officer in question tackles the suspect for seemingly no reason. The body-cam, however, tells a completely different story.


More ABC US news | ABC World News

What the white Kia in the driveway blocks is the event that takes place at 1:53 of the video, whereas the suspect openly tries to assault the police officer in question. In this instance, had a body worn camera not been issued, the jury may have interpreted this in a completely different way.

Last year, Primeau Forensics had the opportunity to test and review one of these body worn cameras, the VieVu LE2. These cameras would be phenomenal for police forces all over the U.S. It’s 72-degree wide angle lens allows for a wider first person perspective, so that even a suspect standing at a distance from the officer is still being recorded. The near-professional quality of the audio and video ensure a clear understanding of the situation, and the digital signature security ensures that the video footage cannot be tampered with while on the device.

Body worn cameras could completely revolutionize the court system and how it interprets evidence. Video like this can be instrumental to the outcome of a case, as it provides the most realistic representation of what exactly transpired in a given confrontation. As shown above, not even a dash-cam can always show us everything, but having a first person perspective of a given confrontation is pivotal to the jury’s final decision.

For more info on body-worn cameras, check out CEO Ed Primeau’s interview with VIEVU CEO Steve Ward here!

A Video Forensic Expert Looks at the VIEVU Wearable Camera

Friday, April 25th, 2014

Camera-300x300 A Video Forensic Expert Looks at the VIEVU Wearable Camera

Giving the VIEVU LE2 my highest recommendation is easy.

It is, without a doubt, the best wearable personal surveillance camera I have encountered in 25+ years as a video forensics investigator. Developed by police for police, this unit just gets it all right: size, shape, weight, operation, picture quality, sound quality, date & time stamp, capacity, convenient downloading, storage, management, and digital signature security.

Most important of all is getting a video recording of what is said and done at a traffic stop, pedestrian stop, crime scene, or call for assistance. A video that captures the point of view of the officer is invaluable as a record of all an officer’s activities. It protects officers as well as citizens, holds all parties accountable, and can be introduced as an evidentiary recording in a court of law. Put simply, having some kind of recording is always better than having no recording at all. And clearly, I would choose the VIEVU over a fixed vehicle cam or handheld camcorder every time. Unobtrusive, reliable, and easy to operate, I look forward to the time when every police officer in the country wears a VIEVU whenever on duty.

Testifying as an expert witness, I’m most often challenged by the opposition attorneys in two areas: authenticity/chain of custody, and findings. Years of experience help me stay confident about my analysis of and findings from the evidentiary video recording. Issues arising from authenticity and chain of custody can be more challenging. Frequently, I am not the person who retrieves the recording. That means that I must rely upon the record keeping of others to establish an unbroken chain of custody, a paper/digital trail that accounts for every individual who had the recording in his or her possession up until I receive it and thereafter. Any break in the chain, and the evidence can be challenged. VIEVU solves this problem with its VERIPATROL VidLock Security Suite. The software utilizes a FIPS 140-2 (Federal Information Processing Standard) compliant Digital Signature, which guarantees the recording’s authenticity and integrity. This cryptographic standard ensures the authorship of the recording and that it has not been tampered with or edited in any way.

The LE2 records at 640 x 480, standard definition, but with an important difference. Under forensic examination, most standard definition video is actually 640 x 240, because each frame of video is made up of two fields. With standard, interlaced scanning, the odd vertical lines are recorded before the even lines, which produces a visible lag when viewing the full frame. The LE2 employs progressive scanning, where all 480 lines are recorded simultaneously, producing superior vertical resolution. 30 ips (Images Per Second) is always preferable to 30 fps (Frames Per Second). This makes my job easier when performing forensic video analysis. Digital footage captured at 640 x 480p strikes a good balance between file size and resolution. Since most conversations occur at a distance of six feet or less, officers wearing a VIEVU record an ideal, detailed field of view, thanks to the unit’s well chosen, 71°, wide-angle lens.

From a personal perspective, I use the LE2 myself to document evidence retrieval in the field. The camera works perfectly, providing a time stamped video record of the DVR I’m working on and its location. And I’m looking forward to receiving the company’s newest upgrade, the Hi-Def LE3.

For more info on VIEVU and their products, check out CEO Ed Primeau’s interview with VIEVU CEO Steve Ward here!

Video Forensic Expert Edward J Primeau Curriculum Vitae

download-cv