[darawk]

Giving someone discretion over when to monitor themselves causing an increase in violence seems pretty obvious to me.

If I have to choose prior to an encounter "do I want this camera on?" and I choose "no", I have just reminded myself that I can act with impunity. I have just called to my own attention all the things I can get away with because no one will see it. Not only that, but I have also made a small conscious choice to defend myself from scrutiny. Which to me, seems like a small psychological commitment towards doing something bad.

[lrem]

That's why some jurisdictions implement "guilty until proven innocent" against their police force, making turning off the camera (or "not noticing it just broke") and proceeding to beat someone up a rather bad idea.

[mtgx]

There should at least be a bias against the officer's word from the judge and the jury if he intentionally stopped the camera from filming before a police action.

As it is, cops already get the benefit of the doubt almost all the time and when they don't deserve it.

[Eridrus]

Do you have a source for this? I'm curious where they managed to institute this

[lrem]

My Ukrainian friend claimed it's the case with the new police force. They are extremely careful about turning those cams on before approaching anyone, even when they're helping an old lady through the street. I can't read the language to get primary sources myself, googling for English texts gave me only stories on how the judiciary system (not replaced) there is practically at war with the police (effectively rebuilt from ground after the last revolution).

Sadly, I can't see any western country doing it yet. Damn, in my home country there was a case of assault against police officer. A video got public showing the officer walking up to the guy, throwing him on the ground and proceeding to kick him. I believe the judge still took the cop's word.

[kilotaras]

The thing in Ukraine also has ridiculously tough responsibility for body injuries.

I can't comment on specific laws concerning police, but can on self-defense. Basically if someone tries to rob you and you break robbers arm you can be hold criminally liable.

This comes as a Soviet legacy, there's some push to change the laws in question.

[dogma1138]

Not if every case in which it does would be scrutinized even more than usual.

Body cams are good but they like any other camera fail often at capturing the context, they work and fail at the same time since even the slightest sign of hostility and lack of cooperation can and is used by the police as justification.

The problem is way beyond what cameras can do, if you train your police to be bouncers rather than social workers you'll get violence.

[scotty79]

It's the same effect that mirror has, only opposite. Mirror reminds you "you are visible" when turning camera off tells you "you are invisible".