POLICE chiefs in Hampshire have proposed a move into the 21st century by updating their technology.

As previously reported, officers across the county could be trailblazers for a “revolutionary” system using body-worn video (BMV) cameras to interview suspects at crime scenes.

Hampshire’s chief constable Andy Marsh, who is also the national policing lead for body-worn video, said the change could lead to “cheaper justice”.

The interview process is set to go on a trial period and it comes as police forces face reduced budgets in chancellor George Osborne’s upcoming spending review.

If the trial is successful, interviews would only take place for low-level crimes like anti-social behaviour and shoplifting but the technology will have to be tested and the current laws of police practice updated before the system is officially introduced.

A Hampshire police spokesman confirmed that the Home Office has authorised the trial but it has not been revealed where it will take place.

Now we have asked the chairman of the Hampshire Police Federation, John Apter and Dan Nesbitt from Big Brother Watch to go head-to-head and argue their case for the technology.

Mr Apter has previously said that he thinks the BWV debate could bring the police force into the 21st century but Mr Nesbitt is calling for more information and clear guidelines for how the footage will be used.

Daily Echo: John Apter (left) and Dan Nesbit

  • FOR: John Apter, Chairman of the Hampshire Police Federation supports the use of Body Worn Video cameras.

He says: “THIS is about transparency, that’s for the public and the media to see the transparency of policing but also to give an element of protection for the officers.

Sadly, there are times when officers have been accused of things, serious matters which have later been shown to be false and malicious. The use of BWV gives protection against such allegations which can be very damaging.

We have seen shocking examples of BWV evidence where our officers have been attacked and the video has helped in the prosecution of the case, often assisting in offenders pleading guilty to their crimes as their irrefutable behaviour is there for all to see.

This highlights the reality of policing in a way which has never been seen before. So whilst BWV can’t prevent officers being assaulted it certainly helps in bringing swift justice for those who commit the assault.

The footage is also good for officers at the scenes of incidents like domestic violence where you see in high definition the impact that violence can have which is very often never seen by the public or by the judiciary system, it’s a way for the court to look inside that room.

For far too long policing has been stuck in the dark ages because it’s always trying to catch up on using up to date technology. BWV is a great use of simple and accessible technology which if used properly, and with the support of government in changing legislation, will allow BWV to be used in innovative ways which will be better for the wider criminal justice system.

Some people might say ‘what about the officers who get caught doing something bad’, well actually if they did do something which breaches misconduct or criminal law then they should be held accountable and justice will apply to them as well, it goes both ways.

The public and the media have already seen a glimpse of how the BWV footage helps and the public see the realities of policing which I think will bring more support.

There’s lots of reasons to be positive about this. It is providing officers with that extra level of support, making sure we get the best possible evidence and give the public an insight into what officers are faced with on a daily basis.

This is the police getting up with the times, we must use the technology we have to its full potential and if used appropriately it could help reshape the future of policing.”

  • AGAINST: Dan Nesbitt from Big Brother Watch (pictured right, above) is concerned with how protected the public will be if this new form of policing goes ahead.

“BODY Worn Cameras represent a unique opportunity to both improve transparency and accountability within the police, whilst also cutting the level of aggression officers receive from members of the public. However, as with all new technologies, it is vital that the cameras are deployed responsibly and in a way that takes into account civil liberties and privacy.

As an organisation, Big Brother Watch are concerned that there could be risks posed to the public with these cameras and questions need to be answered if the police seriously plan for it to go ahead.

At the moment, we’re recommending that members of the public must be informed when they are being filmed by officers.

Law enforcement agencies already have a myriad of ways to keep people under surveillance covertly. This cannot simply be one more.

Furthermore, studies show that these cameras actively reduce the number of times members of the public are abusive towards officers. Simply put: if they don’t know they are being filmed there will be no change in a person’s behaviour.

The second recommendation is that when the footage is taken off the camera it must be stored securely – this is a big concern for us that we have already highlighted with police chiefs. Recent incidents such as the TalkTalk hack have shown the danger that hackers can pose to personal information.

It is vital proper safeguards are in place to protect the information when it is stored.

Access to this footage must also be strictly limited. Between January, 2009 and October, 2013 police forces recorded more than 2,000 breaches of data protection.

The data police officers deal with is extremely sensitive, and the information recorded by these cameras will be no different. It is vital that only officers that have a real operational need are allowed to access the footage.

Members of the public must be told how they can get a copy of the footage. If the police are storing a person’s information then they should be allowed to see it. A copy should be provided if the individual wants one for their records. This is important if the footage is to be used in a court case.

The idea behind Body Worn Cameras is a good one and all the evidence, from both the UK and abroad, shows that it can be an important tool in fighting crime and improving transparency. It is also understandable that in an age of squeezed police budgets new and innovative ideas will be tested to reduce the burden on officers.

We ask that it is done in an open and transparent way that ensures protection of a citizen's rights and privacy."