The more I read about this case, the more I realize how valuable body-worn cameras (BWC) are
as long as they are turned on. LE brass should be adding more regulations regarding BWC; that they must turn on their cameras, no excuses. If they fail to follow that requirement after the initial warning they get dinged a day's pay. If they are repeat offenders then some other penalty is applied, a reduction in rank or dismissal.
After reading the fictionalized version of this traffic stop, it makes you realize how many civilians have probably been railroaded by corrupt police officers when there was no photographic evidence of the arrest. They don't even have to be corrupt, just lazy and enamored of their own importance in the community hierarchy. I don't believe in a lot cases it's a planned event; it just seems like the overarching theory is that some LE officers just lose their cool when an individual doesn't follow their commands to the letter.
I've read a lot of pros and cons regarding the wearing of BWCs. The cons have to do with the expense or the perception that the general public don't like the idea they are being filmed and that the images can be used further by police departments for facial recognition and storing of data of peripheral individuals during an arrest. However, when 92% of the general public overwhelmingly think BWCs are a positive both for the police and the citizenry then I think it's a no-brainer. Here's the link to that report.
Should law enforcement agents wear body cameras? Learn the pros and cons of the debate.
www.procon.org