(A.K.A. Non-Original Rants)

–Co-opting good stuff from all over the ‘Net and maybe some original thoughts—ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Flock cameras for thee but not for me

The Washington DC police union is having an apoplectic fit due to the use of Flock cameras by Internal Affairs to keep track of officers under investigation.

In a statement to WJLA, MPD said the grievance involves the use of a Flock camera in an internal affairs misconduct investigation.

“Department’s position is that the use of LPR in the misconduct investigation was appropriate,” an MPD spokesperson said. “This grievance involves a union matter, and it will be resolved through arbitration between MPD and the DC Police Union.”

The union said MPD denied the grievance and declined to investigate the managers accused of misusing the system. The department then issued a teletype restricting department-wide access to the system, according to the union.

The union, apparently unironically, says: “the department has not established enough safeguards to prevent the technology from being misused.”

Hilariously enough, the Washington DC police force has promoted a program for citizens to hook their private cameras into their surveillance system.

If I was a betting woman, I’d bet that the only changes that come out of this situation is that Internal Affairs can’t use Flock to track officers and everything else will stay in place.



6 responses to “Flock cameras for thee but not for me”

  1. Yeah… I don’t think anyone would take that bet. You can’t bet on a “Sure Thing” after all. 😉

    Speaks volumes as to the “Equal protections for all” does it not?

    Like

  2. The real question is: did internal affairs get a warrant for their surveillance?

    Based on this news article, I’d bet the answer is no.

    The grievance instead should have been an arrest warrant for the internal affairs investigative officer(s) for deprivation of rights and the surveillance evidence against the alleged offending officers that was collected during the investigation thrown out as fruit of the poisoned tree.

    Wouldn’t it have been a hoot if the internal affairs officer(s) were arrested during their kangaroo court hearing?

    Like

  3. I’m pretty sure that footage from cameras in public areas would not require a warrant. The “private” footage is property of the cloud servers. Even so, when the tables turn, it’s fun to watch. Makes me think of a line from Pulp Fiction- “You feel that sting?- That’s pride f***in with you.”

    Like

  4. Many years ago Chicago PD had a vendor say they could track officer’s movements in a foot chase. This would be a huge improvement in officer safety.

    The FOP said no way! They knew the same technology could be used to see who was goofing off.

    Like

  5. Snerk… Too funny, in a sad way

    Like

  6. Why would this surprise anyone…

    Like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *