So when should body cam footage be released? CSPD seems to think never. What say you?
They didn't have body cams, but as a result I believe HPD made it a requirement that undercover cops had to wear body cams when doing warrants.maroon barchetta said:
Do they have the Harding Street raid on there?
CS78 said:
How could releasing the video interfere with the investigation?
Stupe said:
Anywhere there is illegal stuff going on, there is the threat of violence. These people were selling a lot of it and they were doing it near a school.
What if someone tried to rip them off one day and they started shooting that close to a school? Would it matter if was "just weed"?
That, quite honestly, sounds like rationalization to me. They can easily edit it to include only the relevant portions, which would be from the time they first knock on the door to the point where the individual got shot.Brian Alg said:CS78 said:
How could releasing the video interfere with the investigation?
In the brief the city attorney sent to the AG: "The information contains the officers' discussions regarding details of the crime and investigative strategies that are crucial to investigating of the cases and filing proper criminal charges."
You don't say.Quote:
I've never done any SWAT or other warrant service type stuff
And you know this how?Quote:
but once they bang on the door and announce themselves, they're not discussing any of that stuff. They shouldn't be discussing anything. They should be listening for a response or any other activity from inside the residence.
You could confront their exception claim by requesting all portions of records that do not interfere with investigation and prosecution of crime as excepted in 552.108.Brian Alg said:CS78 said:
How could releasing the video interfere with the investigation?
In the brief the city attorney sent to the AG: "The information contains the officers' discussions regarding details of the crime and investigative strategies that are crucial to investigating of the cases and filing proper criminal charges."
I was in the Army infantry for 10 years, with a year of that supervising MOUT training at the team, squad, and platoon level. I'm plenty familiar with entry ops and I've done "Enter Building/Clear Room" more than enough.Stupe said:And you know this how?Quote:
but once they bang on the door and announce themselves, they're not discussing any of that stuff. They shouldn't be discussing anything. They should be listening for a response or any other activity from inside the residence.
I'm not trying to be sarcastic with this question. How do you know what is said during these kinds of scenes when you are just sitting safely at a scanner?
Not to implicate the police as they generally do the right thing, but without the body cam info then you really only have their word for what happened. No matter who says it, none of us should blindly believe anyone. Even police officers should be accountable-and willingly-to the public they serve. On the surface going by what they have said, all appears fine. There have been instances in the past where the complete story was not given initially. When someone is killed, there should be no question that the body cam footage should be made available.Rapier108 said:
Guess you didn't listen to the press conference earlier today.
Agree, these discussions could easily be muted. They really only need to show the initial entry and the threat they faced forcing the result.Stucco said:You could confront their exception claim by requesting all portions of records that do not interfere with investigation and prosecution of crime as excepted in 552.108.Brian Alg said:CS78 said:
How could releasing the video interfere with the investigation?
In the brief the city attorney sent to the AG: "The information contains the officers' discussions regarding details of the crime and investigative strategies that are crucial to investigating of the cases and filing proper criminal charges."
The attorney would have been better off saying nothing. That is bull.Brian Alg said:CS78 said:
How could releasing the video interfere with the investigation?
In the brief the city attorney sent to the AG: "The information contains the officers' discussions regarding details of the crime and investigative strategies that are crucial to investigating of the cases and filing proper criminal charges."
Bunk Moreland said:
Interesting that releasing a video of police executing a search warrant at a residence that resulted in the death of a person who was not charged or related to the investigation at all could interfere with the investigation.
Another Doug said:
Holy ****, the Texas Rangers led the investigation into Chuck Norris's son. Did not expect that!