Public Meeting Notice  Law Enforcement Body Camera Task Force Meeting

Law Enforcement Body Camera Task Force Meeting

Date: December 21, 2021

Time: 9:30am - 11:00am

Where: Microsoft Teams (Virtual Meeting)

Call to order & attendance

Chairwoman Angela Davis called the meeting to order at 9:31am, attendance was taken and a quorum established. 

Members Present

Asst. U/S Angela Davis (Chair)

Captain Steven McCarthy (Vice-Chair)

Chief Thomas W. Fowler

Chief Steve Sargent

Deborah Batista

Attorney Emiliano Falcon-Morano

Fred Taylor

Attorney Hillary Farber

Officer Israuel Marrero

Attorney Rose King

Sargent Timothy King

Sheriff Patrick McDermott

Attorney Stephen Carley

Attorney Steven J. Brooks

Tim Mitchell

Officer Kaleigh Marshall

Members Absent

Attorney Alyssa Hackett

DA Michael O’Keefe

Attorney Grace Lee

Officer Carmelo Ayuso

Officer Joseph Santiago

Vote to approve minutes

Chairwoman Davis sought a motion to accept the minutes.  A motion was made, seconded and passed to accept the December 7, 2021 meeting minutes.

Attorney Suleyken Walker informed the Task Force that interim report still needs to be filed.  She has made updates to the report including membership and the work to date and recommended that a vote be taken to accept the updated version. Chairwoman Davis sought a motion to approve the updated interim report. Vice-Chair Steven McCarthy motioned, and Fred Taylor seconded the motion. The Task Force voted to accept the report to be filed.

Camera Demo, Vice Chair McCarthy

Vice-Chair Cpt. McCarthy gave a demonstration of the Body Worn Camera system as well as the dashboard cameras that are currently used on State Police vehicles. Vice-Chair Cpt. McCarthy informed the Task Force the redaction that is shown on the Body Camera footage is part of the automated redaction system. The automated redaction system will redact license plates and faces. He informed the Task Force that there are legal staff that review all footage for the redaction process. Daniel Nakamoto asked if Cpt. McCarthy could further explain the redaction process. Cpt. McCarthy responded reiterating that some of the redaction is automated but there is back-office staff that aids in the redaction process. Sargent Tim King asked what the back-office staff is comprised of. Cpt. McCarthy responded to the question stating that there are attorneys, paralegals, and records technicians that collaboratively work together in the redaction process regarding any request involving camera footage from an officer. Fred Taylor asked for clarification regarding support staff per 75 officers. Cpt. McCarthy clarified that the general recommendation is that for every 75 Officers there is one support staffer to review the body camera footage to ensure redaction is correct. Attorney Hillary Farber directed her question to Cpt. McCarthy asking what the current policy is for officers to review camera footage before the report is written and is it discretionary. Cpt. McCarthy responded that the current policy in place is that officers can review the footage before a report is written. He also stated that for a routine report officers most likely are not reviewing the footage prior to writing the report. Attorney Farber asked Cpt. McCarthy if there were exceptions to that rule. Cpt. McCarthy responded that if there is a critical incident, they will interview the officer prior to the report being made. Attorney Farber then asked if turning over the recording is something that is done for every incident with the report or if the procedure is to wait for a request for the recordings. Cpt. McCarthy stated that it is procedure to wait for a request to be made. Attorney Steven Brooks asked how long the state keeps recordings and when are the recordings erased. Cpt. McCarthy responded that the retention policy for any interaction is to be held for a minimum of three years and if there are no issues raised the recording is deleted. Attorney Brooks then followed up asking what happens if an individual is currently on trial or it is past the three-year mark. Cpt. McCarthy responded stating that if the recording is flagged by the legal team, it is not deleted. Dan Nakamoto stated that from a single incident there can be multiple officer’s reporting resulting in multiple recordings requested for the one incident. Dan also stated that EOPSS is currently working with EOTSS to explore the possibility for local cloud sharing for municipalities. Chief Fowler added that the Chiefs would like to have a discussion around the state regarding the possibility of adding an agency for a central repository for police videos. He added that with the creation of such agency they could be responsible for public information requests and redaction issues. Attorney Emiliano Falcon-Morano asked what the redaction process is and what the parameters of the system are. Cpt. McCarthy responded that it is both automated and manual as the software can make mistakes or doesn’t redact all the information that is needed. Deborah Batista stated that the requirements are to have GPS embedded in the video, she asks if there is a public records request will the public be able to determine that location. Cpt. McCarthy responded that it is a case-by-case basis, and the legal team determines what information will be shared.  The legal team would strip out the GPS data if needed. Cpt. McCarthy also noted that the original format of the video is not altered and is stored for the 3-year requirement, any video that is a public records request does not alter the original state of the recording.

Subcommittee updates, 10:15 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.

Cpt. McCarthy informed the Task Force that the Subcommittee for Training, Supervision and Discipline has unanimously decided to set the issue of Officer’s viewing the recordings aside to focus on the main topics.

Dan Nakamoto informed the Task Force that the Technology and Procurement Subcommittee has a meeting on December 22, 2021 and is ready to review and make recommendations.

Topics not reasonably anticipated/other, 10:30 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.

There were no comments made by members.

Public Comment Section, 10:45 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.

Chair Davis invited members of the public to speak and share their thoughts.  Anne-Marie Grant, was invited to share her questions and thoughts.  She asked if the agenda was published. Chairwoman Davis had the link to the agenda shared in the chat with her, and invited her to also submit her questions and thoughts through the Public Comment portal to ensure that her feedback is seen by all the Task Force members and can be brought to the individual subcommittees for consideration.  Chair Davis also invited her to share her email address so that the committee can ensure she receives the information she requested.

Adjournment, 11:00 a.m.

A motion to adjourn was made by Attorney Steven Brooks, Deborah Batista second the motion. The meeting adjourned at 10:26 a.m..

LAW ENFORCEMENT BODY CAMERA TASK FORCE MEETING

Tuesday, December 21, 2021, 9:30 a.m.

virtually: Click here to join the meeting

AGENDA

1. Call to order & attendance, 9:30 a.m. to 9:35 a.m.
2. Vote to approve minutes, 9:35 a.m. to 9:40 a.m.
3. Camera Demo, Vice Chair McCarthy, 9:40 a.m. to 10:15 a.m.
4. Subcommittee updates, 10:15 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.
5. Topics not reasonably anticipated/other, 10:30 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.
6. Public Comment Section, 10:45 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.
7. Adjournment, 11:00 a.m.

Upcoming Meetings:

Tuesday, January 4, 2022 9:30AM-11:00AM

Tuesday, January 18, 2022 9:30AM-11:00AM

Tuesday, February 1, 2022 9:30AM-11:00AM