Iowa's body camera rules fall short of national standards

Policies that govern the use of body cameras worn by Iowa police officers and sheriff deputies fall short of nationally recommended standards, particularly in the areas of transparency and accountability, a Des Moines Register review shows.

Eight Iowa law enforcement agencies provided The Des Moines Register their body camera policies, while officials from seven other agencies gave details that likely will be included in policies they are developing.

The Register found that, in general:

• The public has not had input into developing body camera policies. Des Moines and Cedar Rapids police chiefs said policies will be shared with community groups after the final drafts are completed. 
• Only two of the eight agencies that provided policies posted the documents on their websites. 
• Officers are not required to tell people with whom they come into contact that they are being recorded. 
• Most policies either allow officers to review recordings before writing a report or do not address the issue.
• Most policies have no criteria on the steps that must be taken when a body camera is not activated. 

DATABASE: Review body camera policies at 8 Iowa law enforcement agencies

Board will ask for study of body camera standards

“We believe that police body cameras are an important tool for police accountability,” said Jeremy Rosen, executive director of the ACLU of Iowa. “We’re concerned though about the lack of uniformity in policies, which is why we like that some state legislatures are setting some standards.”

It’s not known how many of Iowa’s more than 350 law enforcement agencies use body cameras. What is known, however, is that a growing number of agencies in the state, as well as across the nation, are equipping officers with cameras as a way to increase accountability and allay concerns about officer misconduct.

But only 12 states have passed legislation regarding public access to body camera footage, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, a nonprofit organization in Washington, D.C. Legislation has been proposed in 19 other states.

Two bills introduced in the Iowa Legislature in 2015 failed to make it out of committee.

'It's a Wild West out there'

In November, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a policy and lobbying organization for U.S. rights groups, released a scorecard rating policies of 25 law enforcement agencies. None of the agencies were in Iowa. The group found that the policies failed to make law enforcement agencies transparent or accountable.

“Body cameras have been viewed as a quick-fix solution for police accountability,” said Scott Simpson, the group’s spokesman. “But the way a lot of policies have been written, that’s not happening …

"In many ways, it’s a Wild West out there, with everyone doing something different.”

The wide-ranging standards established so far by Iowa agencies demonstrate why it’s important to set statewide criteria, Rosen said.

“Our message to the Legislature is this: You can’t wait five years, and then roll out a policy,” Rosen said. Policies are being written across Iowa, making it “important for the Legislature to weigh in and set a good statewide policy for everyone.”

A lack of public input

Police officers in Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Davenport, Dubuque and Waterloo all will likely be equipped with body cameras in 2016.

Some officers, including those in Clive and Burlington, have worn cameras for a year or more. Officers in Urbandale and Waukee began wearing them in 2015.

Leaders in several law enforcement agencies used model polices from organizations such as The  International Association of Chiefs  of Police, Police Executive Research Forum and the ACLU.

The organizations all recommended involving the community in policy development and posting policies on department websites, key steps in obtaining public support for use of the devices.

Yet, of the eight departments that provided policies to the Register, only Johnston and Iowa City posted their documents online.

Moreover, none of the departments have involved the public in developing the policies.

Most law enforcement agency policies cover routine issues that don't interest the public, advocacy group members say. But when and where body cameras are activated and who gets to view the footage concern the public, they say.

“Having public engagement about what your community wants recorded and to have access to goes a long way in improving relationships between police and the communities they serve,” Simpson said.

This past year, several central Iowa law enforcement leaders established minimum standards for body camera policies. None, though, included the public in the process.

“I was hired as the police chief — it’s my responsibility to write the policies,” Urbandale Police Chief Ross McCarty said.

Said Capt. Joe Leibold of the Waterloo Police Department, which is writing a policy: “We haven’t had anyone jumping up and down and wanting to give us input.”

Cedar Rapids Chief Wayne Jerman  is forming a community advisory committee that will begin meeting in 2016. One of its tasks will be to review the department’s policy on body cameras, he said.

Police chiefs in Des Moines and Cedar Rapids said they will share their policies after final revisions are completed.

Des Moines’ policy, a seven-page document on its third draft, will be shared with rights groups such as the NAACP and neighborhood organizations, Chief Dana Wingert said.

“It’s one thing to throw a policy out there and have people read it or not understand it or become instantly critical of it,” Wingert said. “It’s another thing to present it to them and explain, face-to-face, the thought and consideration that went into it and the reasons behind some of the decisions.”

Recorded without their knowledge

Iowa law allows recordings in public without second-party consent. Consequently, Iowa law enforcement officials interviewed by the Register say they are not requiring officers to inform citizens that they are being recorded.

That stance is counter to recommendations from the police chiefs’ association and other groups. In the model policy posted on the chiefs’ association website, it states: “Whenever possible, officers should inform individuals that they are being recorded.”

Simpson said: “Having that transparency helps keep relations between the police and the community they are policing more amicable.”

The ACLU has recommended that law officers who wear body cameras have a sticker or pin on their uniform chest pocket that states that a video camera is being operated.

Law enforcement officers say that in many instances, it’s not necessary to inform people a recording is taking place. Exceptions include when police enter a residence or are interviewing crime victims, particularly in a hospital.

“I don’t think it’s going to be a mystery to anybody that they are being recorded,” Wingert said. “In this day and age, that expectation that you’re being recorded is pretty well understood by the general public.”

Cedar Rapids’ Jerman and Wingert both said that if officers stopped to tell someone a recording is occurring, disagreements could occur over the camera.

“Instead of working toward a resolution, now we’re involved in banter back and forth,” Wingert said.

Nearly all of the policies reviewed by the Register lay out the circumstances under which body cameras will be turned on. Four of the eight limit an officer’s discretion on whether to record an encounter with the public.

Wingert said debate is occurring within his department on recording in health care facilities. Several policies the department has reviewed state that officers “shall not” record in a health care facility, he said, adding that he’s not convinced that’s appropriate.

Des Moines officers frequently are called to a facility to help commit a person to a mental health institution, he said.

“I think it’s more difficult to defend the ‘shall not’ than it is to look at that footage and say this is why we had to take someone to ground,” Wingert said.

Writing reports from video

Nearly all of the policies reviewed by the Register allow officers to review footage from body cameras as they write their reports. The national rights groups disagree with that position.

“We don’t want reports to reflect what cameras see but what the experience of the officer was,” Simpson said. “It’s important to have the independent viewpoint of the police officer.”

Urbandale’s McCarty said for regular reports, his officers are allowed to review the video, which helps in preparing accurate reports.

“The cameras may capture something that the officer didn’t see or didn’t remember,” McCarty said.

The only times when his officers aren’t allowed to review the footage is when they’ve discharged their weapon or used force in a situation. In those circumstances, the officer’s supervisor would determine whether the footage can be reviewed, he said.

Releasing video to the public

All but one of the policies reviewed by the Register fail to address the release of footage through the state’s public records’ law: Urbandale’s policy said recordings are subject to Freedom of Information requests.

The public release of footage from body cameras has been heavily debated in Iowa since January, when a Burlington police officer shot and killed an unarmed woman during a call regarding a domestic dispute.

Only 12 seconds of video from the officer’s body camera has been released to the public, despite calls from the town’s mayor and the woman’s parents to release all of the footage.

Judge to decide Burlington police shooting video case

Burlington’s policy on body cameras does not address the release of footage through public records requests.

“Much of the concern nationally about releasing body-camera video involves privacy concerns,” said Randy Evans, executive director of the Iowa Freedom of Information Council. “In the Burlington case, the only person’s privacy that is being protected is the police officer’s. … The video is an important perspective on what occurred or what didn’t occur.”

A video on the Waukee Police Department's website states that footage from body cameras "will remain private" unless it is needed in a court case or a citizen questions an officer's conduct.

Wingert said Des Moines’ policy will include a section on complying with the state’s open-records law.

“We could throw up ridiculous road blocks all day long if we wanted to,” Wingert said. “But at the end of the day, we have to be honest with ourselves and honest with media in terms of those requests. Eventually, those cases are closed and it’s over.

“If we need to release that (footage), we need to release it.”