East Lancashire 999 police to wear body cameras

The mini cameras fitted to the officer's uniform will record vital evidence

The mini cameras fitted to the officer's uniform will record vital evidence

First published in News
Last updated
Burnley and Pendle Citizen: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

POLICE are to be kitted out with video cameras attached to their uniforms when they respond to 999 calls.

The devices are designed to capture evidence at crime scenes, including ongoing incidents, which can then be used in court.

MORE TOP STORIES:

They are also intended to promote public reassurance and improve officer’s safety.

Lancashire Constabulary said the devices would be used across the whole force area after a successful pilot scheme.

It follows the introduction of the devices in other parts of the country this year, including London’s Metropolitan Police in May.

Police said video footage was much more effective in securing convictions than verbal accounts, which can be challenged in court.

But a director of civil liberties charity Big Brother Watch said there were concerns over privacy where officers were filming in public.

Insp Mark Baines said: “Police forces across the country have already embraced body-worn cameras and have identified the potential benefits of their use.

“Here in East Lancashire I hope that the wider use of the cameras will promote public reassurance, capture best evidence, prevent harm and deter people from committing crime and anti-social behaviour.

“The cameras can be used to capture evidence of criminal behaviour that can help to ‘set the scene’ for a court at a later date and reduce reliance on victim evidence, particularly those who may be vulnerable and reluctant to attend court.

“By capturing this evidence, officers should be able to spend less time writing statements and completing paperwork at the station, which in turn will allow them to spend more time patrolling and responding to incidents in the community.”

The force has already piloted the scheme using cameras during a small number of operations, and there are a number of ongoing cases where evidence obtained from the cameras has proved crucial.

Now 150 cameras have been distributed to immediate response teams, who react to emergency calls.

Uniformed officers will be specially trained to wear the cameras and strict guidelines will be in place to ensure the devices are used correctly, police said.

The cameras will not be permanently switched on and the public will be informed that they are being recorded.

At the end of an officer’s shift, all recordings will be uploaded to a secure server and wiped from the camera.

The images will be deleted after 30 days unless they are required for evidential purposes.

Chairwoman of the Lancashire Police Federation Rachel Baines welcomed the move.

She said: “I think this is really positive and gives a lot of added protection for the public and the officer.

“Using these cameras means the best possible evidence can be achieved.

“Where there are privacy concerns, officers will have to use their discretion when activating the cameras.”

Emma Carr, director of Big Brother Watch, said people must be made aware they are being filmed.

She said: “No-one should be subjected to this sort of surveillance by Lancashire Constabulary without being fully aware it is taking place and how they can access a copy for themselves.

“If these cameras are implemented properly, particularly with regard to whether officers are able to access the memory cards or tamper with the footage in another way, there is potential for this to improve accountability of the force.”

The use of the cameras is to be reviewed after three months with the potential of more cameras being used across the county.

Body cameras plan for armed police

Comments (21)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:09am Wed 3 Sep 14

woolywords says...

Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today.
...
Note to Big Brother Watch..
These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent.
The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies!
Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today. ... Note to Big Brother Watch.. These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent. The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies! woolywords
  • Score: -11

8:40am Wed 3 Sep 14

rudis_dad says...

woolywords wrote:
Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today.
...
Note to Big Brother Watch..
These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent.
The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies!
Totally agree, but just because they're digital doesn't mean that the footage can't be retained or altered!
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today. ... Note to Big Brother Watch.. These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent. The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies![/p][/quote]Totally agree, but just because they're digital doesn't mean that the footage can't be retained or altered! rudis_dad
  • Score: 3

8:43am Wed 3 Sep 14

Crispy Bacon says...

woolywords wrote:
Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today.
...
Note to Big Brother Watch..
These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent.
The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies!
Rubbish. it's lazy, authoritarian and another step on the inexorable road to an even worse police state than the one we already suffer from. It takes away initiative, common sense and is 'policing-by-numbers
'. They have recently shown how unfit they are so when they don't actually have to get out of their mobile offices and really walk or - God forbid - run, they're going to get even lazier and fatter. Which will lead to a more indolent and lazy police force which will lead to more cameras and even more indolence and....an increasing circle of incompetence goes on and on and on and on....
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today. ... Note to Big Brother Watch.. These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent. The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies![/p][/quote]Rubbish. it's lazy, authoritarian and another step on the inexorable road to an even worse police state than the one we already suffer from. It takes away initiative, common sense and is 'policing-by-numbers '. They have recently shown how unfit they are so when they don't actually have to get out of their mobile offices and really walk or - God forbid - run, they're going to get even lazier and fatter. Which will lead to a more indolent and lazy police force which will lead to more cameras and even more indolence and....an increasing circle of incompetence goes on and on and on and on.... Crispy Bacon
  • Score: 0

9:15am Wed 3 Sep 14

HelmshoreMan2010 says...

I think it's a good idea, if it makes one person think twice about attacking an on duty officer then how is it not worth it?

I know I couldn't do that job but if I did I would feel a lot safer with a camera acting as a deterrent.
I think it's a good idea, if it makes one person think twice about attacking an on duty officer then how is it not worth it? I know I couldn't do that job but if I did I would feel a lot safer with a camera acting as a deterrent. HelmshoreMan2010
  • Score: -7

9:17am Wed 3 Sep 14

Rovers.1875 says...

Crispy Bacon wrote:
woolywords wrote:
Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today.
...
Note to Big Brother Watch..
These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent.
The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies!
Rubbish. it's lazy, authoritarian and another step on the inexorable road to an even worse police state than the one we already suffer from. It takes away initiative, common sense and is 'policing-by-numbers

'. They have recently shown how unfit they are so when they don't actually have to get out of their mobile offices and really walk or - God forbid - run, they're going to get even lazier and fatter. Which will lead to a more indolent and lazy police force which will lead to more cameras and even more indolence and....an increasing circle of incompetence goes on and on and on and on....
I see where you are going there, but I think you have slightly exaggerated, with officers getting fat etc, it's a good idea which will help the police officers do a better job in the long term by spending more time on the streets doing proper police work!

What I strongly disagree with though, is officers deciding as and when the cameras are turned on!! With the small amount of data being used across the officers cameras and how easy that would be to store (and also have a suitable backup solution), it just doesn't make sense to let them decide when to record!!

So, an officer can say what he likes to someone, but then when they respond he can decide to record, which may make them look bad for saying something in response? An officer or officers can use unnecessary force to restrain someone, but decide (obviously) that they don't need to record that? etc etc....

Selective recording is not the way forward, it needs to be evenly balanced where both the officer and the public benefit from an excellent tool for this line of work!
[quote][p][bold]Crispy Bacon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today. ... Note to Big Brother Watch.. These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent. The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies![/p][/quote]Rubbish. it's lazy, authoritarian and another step on the inexorable road to an even worse police state than the one we already suffer from. It takes away initiative, common sense and is 'policing-by-numbers '. They have recently shown how unfit they are so when they don't actually have to get out of their mobile offices and really walk or - God forbid - run, they're going to get even lazier and fatter. Which will lead to a more indolent and lazy police force which will lead to more cameras and even more indolence and....an increasing circle of incompetence goes on and on and on and on....[/p][/quote]I see where you are going there, but I think you have slightly exaggerated, with officers getting fat etc, it's a good idea which will help the police officers do a better job in the long term by spending more time on the streets doing proper police work! What I strongly disagree with though, is officers deciding as and when the cameras are turned on!! With the small amount of data being used across the officers cameras and how easy that would be to store (and also have a suitable backup solution), it just doesn't make sense to let them decide when to record!! So, an officer can say what he likes to someone, but then when they respond he can decide to record, which may make them look bad for saying something in response? An officer or officers can use unnecessary force to restrain someone, but decide (obviously) that they don't need to record that? etc etc.... Selective recording is not the way forward, it needs to be evenly balanced where both the officer and the public benefit from an excellent tool for this line of work! Rovers.1875
  • Score: 12

10:00am Wed 3 Sep 14

HelmshoreMan2010 says...

Well I've never been voted down for wishing the police are safe before, what a bunch of sick hate filled paranoid individuals you all clearly are :)
Well I've never been voted down for wishing the police are safe before, what a bunch of sick hate filled paranoid individuals you all clearly are :) HelmshoreMan2010
  • Score: -9

10:50am Wed 3 Sep 14

Manuel Hung says...

Crispy Bacon wrote:
woolywords wrote:
Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today.
...
Note to Big Brother Watch..
These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent.
The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies!
Rubbish. it's lazy, authoritarian and another step on the inexorable road to an even worse police state than the one we already suffer from. It takes away initiative, common sense and is 'policing-by-numbers

'. They have recently shown how unfit they are so when they don't actually have to get out of their mobile offices and really walk or - God forbid - run, they're going to get even lazier and fatter. Which will lead to a more indolent and lazy police force which will lead to more cameras and even more indolence and....an increasing circle of incompetence goes on and on and on and on....
Why would it take away initiative and common sense?

The whole world suddenly appears when ever something is going on, filming it all on their iPhones anyway so this won't make any difference.

What it may do is reduce the number of malicious complaints or speed up any investigation if they have done anything wrong. It may even reduce the amount of time they spend in Court and not on the streets.

Hardly a Police state?
[quote][p][bold]Crispy Bacon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today. ... Note to Big Brother Watch.. These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent. The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies![/p][/quote]Rubbish. it's lazy, authoritarian and another step on the inexorable road to an even worse police state than the one we already suffer from. It takes away initiative, common sense and is 'policing-by-numbers '. They have recently shown how unfit they are so when they don't actually have to get out of their mobile offices and really walk or - God forbid - run, they're going to get even lazier and fatter. Which will lead to a more indolent and lazy police force which will lead to more cameras and even more indolence and....an increasing circle of incompetence goes on and on and on and on....[/p][/quote]Why would it take away initiative and common sense? The whole world suddenly appears when ever something is going on, filming it all on their iPhones anyway so this won't make any difference. What it may do is reduce the number of malicious complaints or speed up any investigation if they have done anything wrong. It may even reduce the amount of time they spend in Court and not on the streets. Hardly a Police state? Manuel Hung
  • Score: 7

10:57am Wed 3 Sep 14

woolywords says...

HelmshoreMan2010 wrote:
Well I've never been voted down for wishing the police are safe before, what a bunch of sick hate filled paranoid individuals you all clearly are :)
I pay no attention whatsoever to the votes, as I understand from an LT insider, that some are using multiple accounts, to manipulate the vote.

Illegitimi non carborundum!
[quote][p][bold]HelmshoreMan2010[/bold] wrote: Well I've never been voted down for wishing the police are safe before, what a bunch of sick hate filled paranoid individuals you all clearly are :)[/p][/quote]I pay no attention whatsoever to the votes, as I understand from an LT insider, that some are using multiple accounts, to manipulate the vote. Illegitimi non carborundum! woolywords
  • Score: -24

11:59am Wed 3 Sep 14

darwenTower says...

What do people who object to these cameras want?

The courts barely care about prosecuting as it it, especially where there is no solid proof as to what happened.

The other option is the police or the offender having their word taken despite there being no evidence.

I just want to see scrotes punished. End of.
What do people who object to these cameras want? The courts barely care about prosecuting as it it, especially where there is no solid proof as to what happened. The other option is the police or the offender having their word taken despite there being no evidence. I just want to see scrotes punished. End of. darwenTower
  • Score: 11

12:13pm Wed 3 Sep 14

woolywords says...

You have to wonder where these people with such hatred of cameras go shopping or socialising, as they, the cameras, are everywhere now. And not all of them are in responsible hands, as shown by the vast numbers of private CCTV images that are uploaded to sites like YouTube, daily.
These cameras are for the protection of the police and the public that they encounter, so instead of sniping with negative votes, why not state your objections?
You have to wonder where these people with such hatred of cameras go shopping or socialising, as they, the cameras, are everywhere now. And not all of them are in responsible hands, as shown by the vast numbers of private CCTV images that are uploaded to sites like YouTube, daily. These cameras are for the protection of the police and the public that they encounter, so instead of sniping with negative votes, why not state your objections? woolywords
  • Score: -7

12:21pm Wed 3 Sep 14

woolywords says...

Oh, I forgot to mention..
Do they raise objections to images of their homes being available on Google Earth or Street View, where it's possible to peek in the back yard or in through the windows without being on the street?
Do they shout about it's against their Human Rights to a private life and an invasion of privacy?
Thought not...
Oh, I forgot to mention.. Do they raise objections to images of their homes being available on Google Earth or Street View, where it's possible to peek in the back yard or in through the windows without being on the street? Do they shout about it's against their Human Rights to a private life and an invasion of privacy? Thought not... woolywords
  • Score: -6

12:55pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Dreams Yarn On says...

This is a great idea. My only concern is that the officer has to activate the camera. It should be active during the entire shift not just so they are fully accountable but also so nothing 'crucial' is missed from the recording of any incident.
This is a great idea. My only concern is that the officer has to activate the camera. It should be active during the entire shift not just so they are fully accountable but also so nothing 'crucial' is missed from the recording of any incident. Dreams Yarn On
  • Score: 6

1:04pm Wed 3 Sep 14

HelmshoreBoy says...

HelmshoreMan2010 wrote:
Well I've never been voted down for wishing the police are safe before, what a bunch of sick hate filled paranoid individuals you all clearly are :)
I couldn't have put it better myself. If you notice, its the usual bile spewing, vomit inducing individuals, with little to offer society other crass comments.

They obviously have a shady past or something to hide1

Good idea!
[quote][p][bold]HelmshoreMan2010[/bold] wrote: Well I've never been voted down for wishing the police are safe before, what a bunch of sick hate filled paranoid individuals you all clearly are :)[/p][/quote]I couldn't have put it better myself. If you notice, its the usual bile spewing, vomit inducing individuals, with little to offer society other crass comments. They obviously have a shady past or something to hide1 Good idea! HelmshoreBoy
  • Score: 2

4:23pm Wed 3 Sep 14

wulver says...

rudis_dad wrote:
woolywords wrote:
Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today.
...
Note to Big Brother Watch..
These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent.
The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies!
Totally agree, but just because they're digital doesn't mean that the footage can't be retained or altered!
totally agree with ya when ya say its about time , it will also show if the police get too heavy handed as they do from time to time when the adrenalin starts pumping...
[quote][p][bold]rudis_dad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: Brilliant idea and long overdue. This will end all those disagreements over whom said what. Not to mention the subtle body language that people use. Roll it out, across the force, today. ... Note to Big Brother Watch.. These are digital video cameras, where no film is used, so people aren't being filmed. It's these kinds of simple errors, that digital imagery will prevent. The unblinking eye of the camera, never lies![/p][/quote]Totally agree, but just because they're digital doesn't mean that the footage can't be retained or altered![/p][/quote]totally agree with ya when ya say its about time , it will also show if the police get too heavy handed as they do from time to time when the adrenalin starts pumping... wulver
  • Score: -4

4:27pm Wed 3 Sep 14

Chuck-Norris says...

Good stuff - I feel an increase in guilty pleas coming on - no more lying scrotes producing 'rent a witnesses'
Good stuff - I feel an increase in guilty pleas coming on - no more lying scrotes producing 'rent a witnesses' Chuck-Norris
  • Score: 6

6:17pm Wed 3 Sep 14

greenscreener says...

What's the privacy issue in being filmed in public ?

If you want privacy do whatever you are doing in private.
What's the privacy issue in being filmed in public ? If you want privacy do whatever you are doing in private. greenscreener
  • Score: 2

7:11pm Wed 3 Sep 14

shytalk says...

Taxi driver+policewoman+v
ibrator+camera Help me out here people with a title please
Taxi driver+policewoman+v ibrator+camera Help me out here people with a title please shytalk
  • Score: 0

7:46am Thu 4 Sep 14

timeforcommonsense says...

I often wonder about the people who p*** and moan about cctv and more police, making a police state blah blah blah. If it means quicker convictions and less scrotes acting like arses or driving like tossers then go for it, the more the merrier. If you're concerned about being CAUGHT on camera, stop doing whatever it is you shouldn't be doing.
I often wonder about the people who p*** and moan about cctv and more police, making a police state blah blah blah. If it means quicker convictions and less scrotes acting like arses or driving like tossers then go for it, the more the merrier. If you're concerned about being CAUGHT on camera, stop doing whatever it is you shouldn't be doing. timeforcommonsense
  • Score: 3

8:04am Thu 4 Sep 14

A Darener says...

Perhaps we should all wear cameras as we go about our business. Guilty until proved innocent?
Perhaps we should all wear cameras as we go about our business. Guilty until proved innocent? A Darener
  • Score: 0

10:56am Thu 4 Sep 14

timeforcommonsense says...

CCTV has been used to solve numerous serious crimes, it is a proven asset. Only people with a guilty conscience could ever oppose its use.
CCTV has been used to solve numerous serious crimes, it is a proven asset. Only people with a guilty conscience could ever oppose its use. timeforcommonsense
  • Score: 4

4:52am Fri 5 Sep 14

Arrykhan says...

Chuck-Norris wrote:
Good stuff - I feel an increase in guilty pleas coming on - no more lying scrotes producing 'rent a witnesses'
Yes! And no more Lying out of their back teeth by the police
[quote][p][bold]Chuck-Norris[/bold] wrote: Good stuff - I feel an increase in guilty pleas coming on - no more lying scrotes producing 'rent a witnesses'[/p][/quote]Yes! And no more Lying out of their back teeth by the police Arrykhan
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree