Implicate or Exonerate? The Impact of Police Body-Worn Cameras on the Adjudication of Drug and Alcohol Cases

Abstract

Drug and alcohol offences represent a significant portion of police work. Officers commonly rely on subjective indicators of intoxication, and prosecutors depend on officer evidence collection, written reports, and testimony at trial. Police body-worn cameras (BWCs) have diffused widely in policing partly due to their perceived evidentiary value, but the extent to which BWCs affect the adjudication of such offences remains unanswered. The current study explores this question with 7,000 misdemeanour cases from Tempe (Arizona), filed from 2014 to 2017. The Tempe Police Department deployed BWCs from November 2015 to May 2016. Results indicate that BWCs had no impact on guilty outcomes, but cameras were associated with significantly shorter time to adjudication. We discuss the important policy implications of these thought-provoking findings.

Seeing is believing: the impact of body-worn cameras on court outcomes, a cluster-randomized controlled trial in Miami Beach

“…Regarding crimes committed against police officers, we also note mixed evidence of a higher proportion of BWC cases being declined prosecution. Such a finding, when taken in light of the significantly greater odds of combined convictions and adjudication withheld outcomes for these charges, would seem to be consistent with the proposition that BWCs can lead to fewer but stronger prosecutions (see Groff et al, 2018;Grossmith et al, 2015;White et al, 2019). If true, this would suggest that BWCs have the ability to provide objective evidence that is beneficial to all parties involved in a criminal case.…”

“…Additionally, we failed to identify a significant impact of BWCs on the outcomes of drug/alcohol charges. Such offenses often require police officers to identify subjective signs of intoxication (see White et al, 2019) or may even involve allegations of fabricated evidence (see Fan, 2017), thus providing theoretical rationale to believe that BWCs would prove useful during prosecution. However, our statistically nonsignificant findings for these charges are consistent with those of White et al (2019).…”

“…Such offenses often require police officers to identify subjective signs of intoxication (see White et al, 2019) or may even involve allegations of fabricated evidence (see Fan, 2017), thus providing theoretical rationale to believe that BWCs would prove useful during prosecution. However, our statistically nonsignificant findings for these charges are consistent with those of White et al (2019). It is perhaps possible that BWCs can provide evidence of intoxication but not provide evidence of drug/alcohol possession, or vice versa.…”

“…Yet, several methodologically rigorous studies have failed to find any effect of BWCs on court outcomes. Tracking the dispositions of misdemeanor drug and alcohol cases following a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in Tempe (AZ), White et al (2019) noted no significant differences in guilty outcomes between BWC cases and control cases. Similarly, Yokum et al (2017) found no significant differences in charges prosecuted, guilty pleas, or guilty verdicts between aggregate BWC cases and control cases following a RCT implemented with the Washington (DC) Metropolitan Police Department.…”

“…One potential explanation for these inconsistent results is that the effect of BWC video on court outcomes varies significantly by crime type. In domestic violence cases, for instance, BWC footage might better capture victim statements and visible injury (Morrow et al, 2016;Westera & Powell, 2017), while in drug/alcohol cases, such footage might better capture the actions and demeanor of the suspect (see Groff et al, 2018;White et al, 2019), when compared to written reports or officer testimony alone. Other types of cases, such as crimes committed against police officers (i.e., assault and/ or battery of an officer, resisting arrest, etc.…”