The recent shooting of Keith Lamont Scott in Charlotte and the uncertainty over whether he had a gun in his hands has thrown the issue of police bodycams into the forefront. By tragic coincidence it comes as a new law takes effect making police camera footage exempt from public record laws. A person shown in such a video can view the recording but not copy it. The law, approved by N.C. lawmakers, kicked in on Saturday.
Now, law enforcement agencies can only release the videos to the public after a judge grants permission. Or individuals and news organizations can ask the court to order police to release the videos. The back and forth over the wisdom of the law, signed into law by Gov. Pat McCrory in July, has become a bit dizzying.
Newspapers statewide have heavily criticized the law. According to a new Elon poll released on Tuesday, most state residents agree with us. According to Elon’s survey, 58 percent of those surveyed believe police videos should be available for public view.
And then there are the politicians. Charlotte Mayor Jennifer Roberts wrote an op-ed piece for The Charlotte Observer saying the lack of transparency about the police recordings was unacceptable. But it was the mayor and Charlotte’s police chief who blocked the release of recordings until Sept. 24, when some of the body and dashboard camera footage was released. The chief had declined to release the footage earlier, saying it was inconclusive — and indeed it was. Then last week state Senate Leader Phil Berger called on Roberts to release all police videos related to the shooting.
He casts the law, which he supported, as a move toward transparency. That’s hardly the case, though, and a bit of Orewellian doublespeak. The law specifically says recordings made by law enforcement agencies are not public records. Even law enforcement officials would be forced to get a court order before they could publicly release videos. This hardly seems conducive to openness and in fact defeats one of the purposes served by the cameras, protection for both police and those with home police interact.
Charlotte’s police videos may not have settled the questions surrounding the shooting. But the lack of transparency did feed the notion that the city had something to hide during the long nights of protest.
Supporters of the law often cite privacy concerns for the officers and those with whom the officers interact.
As other newspaper editorials across North Carolina have pointed out, the devices are paid for with public funds — even if they come from a government grant — and operated by public employees. How legislators can justify that the recordings are not public record is a sign that they have no intention on being transparent.
Which is not really a surprise, coming from government.
Parts of this editorial were originally published by the Burlington Times-News.