Town Square

Post a New Topic

Law requiring release of police body cam footage within 45 days now in effect

Original post made on Jul 4, 2019

A law requiring law enforcement agencies to release body camera footage within 45 days of a "critical incident" took effect on Monday, establishing the first statewide standards for the public release of such video recordings.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, July 3, 2019, 6:05 PM

Comments (3)

Like this comment
Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Jul 4, 2019 at 8:03 am

Grumpy is a registered user.

"Clear and convincing" is a standard legal term not needing a unique definition. See Wikipedia.

Web Link

The term "substantially interfere" sounds like it's designed to be tested by a judge in each case after the police make a determination, which I believe is pretty typical. Since judges also issue warrants, the police know where to find judges and how to talk to them.

I think this article could have tried to be more balanced and talk to people in support of body cameras (besides the legislator) for their beliefs as well. I'm sure there's a real argument to be made here for and against--for example, privacy of the people involved--but no one bothered, and now because of that, I didn't get enough information to have an informed opinion after reading it and feel somewhat disinclined to agree because of the odd bias in the argument the article makes. :(


6 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jul 4, 2019 at 11:24 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

I was hopeful until I read the last sentence: “The law also allows agencies to request 30-day extensions to the 45-day deadline for up to one year.” When it takes a year to get a decision from the DA, families are unable to access the same information the DA has.

This also is bothersome: "clear and convincing evidence that disclosure would substantially interfere with the investigation." Reminds me of the catchphrase: “I was in fear for my life”, which can protect officers, but not the people in cases of police abuse.

Not surprised CPOA fought this, even with the possible weaknesses. It’s a step in the right direction for a community knowing about the behavior of those who are meant to protect us. Additionally, Pleasanton needs civilian oversight, be that the city council or some other model, that we do not have now.

@Jeremy Walsh, do we know if this is retroactive?


2 people like this
Posted by Jaded........
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 5, 2019 at 3:49 pm

".........possibly expose law enforcement agencies to increased liability".

As in: if the video evidence helps prove they've done something wrong?

Oh my.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

All your news. All in one place. Every day.

Differentiating Grief from Clinical Depression
By Chandrama Anderson | 2 comments | 2,463 views

Seeing God move supernaturally in Brazil
By Tim Hunt | 32 comments | 1,002 views