How significant is this report that claims the public feels police officers are "more interested in being woke than solving crimes"?

[JellySaurus]

Home Secretary should reform failing police forces - think tank https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-627323366^

Very pleased to see this statement, and the BBC reporting it, but is it going to make a difference?

I agree, it must be recording or how else can it go back 30 seconds? That's literally like time travel.

I assume it's like a home CCTV camera I've got. It's always recording but after a certain amount of time (something like 48 hours or so), it just records over itself and the earlier footage disappears.

Agree with PP. How the hell can something:
"Not on at all times ... start 30 seconds prior to activation."

Are you telling us that you are using tech devices with built in precognition technology? Even though it's not on, it knows 30 seconds before an incident that it needs to switch itself on, so that 30 seconds later, you can activate it?

I mean, seriously? Your bodycam is not active all the time. But you're telling us that any time you activate your tech - it's already gone and anticipated and recorded, of its own accord, before you actually activated it?

That is wondrous tech indeed. And troubling.

Who/What is deciding to switch your gear on, 30 seconds before you activate it?

I used to use noise monitoring equipment that was constantly measuring noise levels and sound frequencies but would record audio. You pressed a button and it'd record 5 mins or whatever it was set for. As it was always on it could be set to have a buffer of up to 5 min, but usually 30 secs. When you pressed the button to record, it'd also save the buffer. Essentially recording the next few minutes but also 'remembering' the previous short period.

Perhaps the body cameras have a similar set up? I don't see how that would work with limited battery life though. I would think the system would always have to be on. Maybe they have two 'on' settings? A standing by and an actually on.

As I said - that's the score .

The camera is "on" but not always recording.
When the record button is pressed it captures the 30 seconds prior u til it is switched off . The footage is then downloaded to a database where it's kept for a set number of days depending on what you label it as .

This technology is in use . Felix isn't making this up . We use body worn cameras and ours is exactly the same .

I did explain why this is in my orev post .

It's a kind of failsafe . Often you only press the record button from when you get to a job but if the wheel comes off evidentially the preceding 30 seconds can show why and what happened.

I think the confusion is between 'limited battery life' '2-3 hours' and 'always on', unless you meant limited memory?

It cannot be "always on" and also "not on at all times".
That is a contradiction. Both statements cannot be true at the same time. It is either one or the other. So - which is true?

Well ours are the latest technology but they're always on just not always recording.

To record we have to hit the button but it definitely does rewind 30 seconds when you hit record .
Promise. Not bullshitting.

I think what Felix meant was if it's permanently recording the battery life would wear down quickly.

It's
Sort on on a stand by mode - but only records when you hit the record button. I've no idea how it records the preceding 30 seconds but it does .

Let's not get into pedantics again tho ? It's not really of any relevance to the thread . It's just the technology we work with now - body worn cameras are relatively new in my force . Been in a couple of years now I think . We were one of the last forces to utilise them so we got the latest ones available. They are quite useful because the camera never lies .

"The camera is "on" but not always recording."

So your camera is "on" but not always recording.

But referring to previous police staff posts on here, your camera seems to know, independently of you having any input, it knows how to start capturing An Incident, 30 seconds before any incident and before you start activating it??

Could you perhaps ask the tech people at your work about how this precognitive wonder works, and then pass the info on to us, cos I'm really fascinated by this, now!

I'm sure I could ask and I'm also sure I'd get puzzled looks ! I've no idea how it works tbh . It just does !

It's just in like a standby mode - until the record button is pressed, then records the preceding 30 seconds - it must have a memory of some sort .....even in stand by . It's funny we don't question these things actually! It could I'm sure land is in a heap of bother if for Instance you were having a good bitch about your Sgt right before you hit record .....🙈.

It only starts the 30 second thing WHEN you hit record ....I do t think it's permanently recording . It's an i retesting point actually- I'm not sure how it does it .....our techno boss will know I'm isure we just never get access to them ....I will actually ask when I next see one - but they are like rocking horse shit ....

This is from the met website on body worn video

When the camera is turned on it will start capturing a rolling 60 second loop of video but no audio. This 60 seconds of video is not saved by the camera unless the officer activates the camera to record. When the camera is activated to record that previous 60 seconds of video is included in the recording.

I don't know how it works - the met captures 60 seconds prior to activating- ours only captures 30 seconds.

But ours does record audio and visual.

How and why have you never questioned how your equipment knows how to record the 30 seconds before you press record? Precognition software?!

Is it always on? Or isn't it?

You're the one using this equipment. Surely, for your own peace of mind and conscience, you should be knowing exactly how and when it works, when it is on, when it is off, what it does. You're the one wearing this technology.

Did they not give you thorough staff training on this when the technology was introduced? And its ongoing technological development. Are you still not getting any ongoing professional development training in the use of the tech that you're actually wearing every day at work and using on yourself and on all the people you encounter - some of whom are ordinary, innocent members of the public going about their business?

It's not routine that we would press the record button unless something is kicking off - or at say a domestic when the first thing people say to you is important.
We did get training on it yes - but we didn't get in depth information on how the technology works . I guess it's just seen as another tool in the job - and tbh - the people delivering the training are often other police officers who probably couldn't answer the very in depth technical questions. I know it must seem like we don't have an enquiring mind - but honestly we get so much new information on such a regular basis- unused to ask all sorts of questions but I guess sometimes we just see it as a new tool in the job . Like when we get issues a new torch- you don't really think to ask how it works - it just does .

I know many of my colleagues were extremely sceptical and wary of body worn video . And it actually does create a lot more work - but - it's how technology is moving and can be useful- not just for police - for victims . The first thing they say is recorded- so often say with domestics- the victim will often backtrack when things calm down and they've had chance to think . Now with body worn video if someone says as they open the door with blood pouring from their nose that their partner did that - it's recorded. Often with domestics the victim will later say it was all a mistake to try and protect their partner- if their first disclosure is caught on camera - it give police more power to their elbow to protect that victim - even if they do t want police help . With the likes of that scenario- a lot of police time is wasted because we still have to arrest the suspect and take the job to the cps- without the cooperation of a willing victim it often gets thrown out - but if there's body worn evidence where the victim initially said "my husband hit me " then it can be taken into account to try and stop it happening again. As police we walk a very difficult path sometimes- we might know for instance a woman is getting beaten to a pulp regularly by her partner but she won't talk to us for fear of getting him into trouble. But often the first words out of someone's mouth on arrival is the truth - even if they back peddle later . I have every sympathy with women ( and men ) in that position- I really do . It never angered me when victims retract their statement because they've smoothed things over (till next time ) and I always saw it as part of the job . The daft an officer has spent 8 hours getting a file ready for cps - i understand that often the pressure to go through with a complaint against someone you love is just too much - but the body worn video doesn't lie . It helps to safeguard victims of domestic violence in that way . Even if they don't want to give a statement or prosecute. It's a really fine line between interfering in peoples lives and preventing them from getting murdered eventually. That's just one way body worn video is used . Its useful more often than not . Bit creates tons more work .

Please do read that - and do t just leap on me for not asking how it technically works.

I can ask . I probably won't find out . It's just another tool of the job .
Like handcuffs.
Like torches .
We get taught how to use them - we do t always know exactly how they were manufactured or the technical workings .

I wonder. Police services are paying money for professional training, time, resources and mandatory propaganda from Stonewall, Mermaids etc.

Why weren't you police officers actually trained in how your bodycam works? I mean, that's quite an important one, since you're using it in your daily work, but you have admitted that you don't know how it works.

Yet when someone contacts you and complains that a person was unkind to a transwoman and said "he", or untoward towards a paedophile - you coppers are right there, investigating this terrible crime, no bodycam needed!

Someone's house gets burgled? Not interested. Here's an insurance number.

Woman gets raped? Rape is so seldom properly investigated and prosecuted, that rape is currently functionally decriminalised in the UK.

Misgender? Wrath of hell plus flying monkey police officers.

I can't say that that is my experience.

I'm not saying it isn't yours .

I've really never had any input from stonewall or mermaids .

I do wonder how many of the 44 forces across England and Wales have had those inputs ? Is there any way to find out ?
Could it be asked using the freedom of information act ?

And fwiw - I totally agree with you .

This should not be happening.

And I also agree rape is massively under reported because it's not prosecuted successfully.

This was - used to be - my area of expertise. I worked with rape crisis . I worked with an eminent psychologist with rape crisis . I had massive respect for her and she taught me so much .

Unfortunately I burnt out . I couldn't work those jobs anymore because I felt a failure and it affected me personally.

I use an Axon bodycam at work (not police). It's a type popular with many police forces.

There is a switch on the top. When this is switched on, the camera will record and discard 30s of video (but not audio) on a rolling basis. As soon as you double tap the round button on the front, it squeaks and glows red. The camera saves that 30s of footage to memory and starts properly recording both video and audio. It will squeak again every two minutes as a reminder that it's still live (remember too that the button keeps glowing red), until the wearer presses and holds the button to stop the recording, the camera reverting to the rolling 30s.

Presumably keeping the rolling 30s of footage in some kind of RAM is more energy efficient than just saving absolutely everything to the long-term memory (not having an audio recording will be more efficient for a start). It's definitely more data efficient.

Retaining the 30s from before you press the button is useful because usually you only press the button just after everything goes wrong.

I'd there is anything you think I can do - as a police officer- tell me . I will .

But I haven't been stonewalled or mermaided....I wonder if my force is unique in that ? Or is it just the met subscribing to this ideology?