NJ State Trooper Feels The Best Part About The Required Dashcam Is The OFF Button

from the welcome-to-new-jersey,-here's-your-complimentary-beating dept

Wed, Feb 6th 2013 8:26am — Tim Cushing

We've seen plenty of stories here dealing with law enforcement's general displeasure with having their actions captured on camera by citizens (with one rare, exemplary exception). An odd stance to take, considering most law enforcement officers are recording a majority of their interactions with the public -- except when it's more convenient not to. Scott Greenfield runs down the details of another case where a state trooper's camera was used selectively to "throw out" incriminating evidence.

The virtue of having a video of police encounters has been proven over and over, whether because it belies the allegations of a crime or proves them. But then, sometimes the guy with his finger on the dashcam's "on" button may not want evidence of what is about to happen. Via NJ.com:
Allen Bass, 50, sued Trooper Gerald Dellagicoma and others in 2009, claiming they punched and kicked him multiple times, causing him to urinate on himself, after he complied with their commands to get off his bicycle at Ellis Avenue and Clinton Avenue in Irvington a year earlier.

[Bass] was riding his bike July 10, 2008, in Irvington when Dellagicoma and other troopers who were on patrol in the area got out of their patrol cars and ordered him to stop. Bass claimed he laid on the ground chest-down and spread his arms and legs.

Troopers allegedly then punched and kicked him before arresting him. Bass was charged with drug possession, resisting arrest by flight and resisting arrest by force, court documents show.

Ultimately, the charges against Bass were dropped because the officers failed to show up in court. That, in and of itself, doesn't necessarily indicate any sort of irresponsibility or maliciousness on behalf of the troopers involved. But one of State Trooper Dellagicoma's actions during the incident certainly does.

Court documents show Dellagicoma, who joined the force in 2001, failed to activate his patrol car camera and was suspended without pay for 30 days, but only served 15 days of that suspension.

And this wasn't an isolated incident.

Records show Dellagicoma was reprimanded several times prior to the incident for the same infraction.

In fact, Dellagicoma is named in another federal civil suit for basically the same actions:

In another federal civil lawsuit, Salah Williams of Newark, an African-American, claims he was a victim of racial profiling, excessive force and malicious prosecution when Dellagicoma allegedly assaulted, maced, arrested and charged him for no reason while walking near his store in the city... Similar to the Bass case, Dellagicoma also failed to activate his patrol car camera and appear in court, resulting in the dismissal of the charges against Williams.

This is a big problem. As Greenfield points out, New Jersey State Troopers are required to record every interaction with the public.

What makes this special is that in New Jersey, there is a requirement that arose from the racial profiling scandal that rocked the Turnpike, that all encounters with State Troopers be videotaped. The state was kind enough to put cameras in cruisers. Never again would a trooper be falsely accused of profiling a driver just because he was black. (This is known as the "black plus" theory of profiling.)

The bigger problem is the handling of those who choose to grant themselves exceptions to this requirement. The offense is treated as a minor infraction, punishable by a written reprimand or a short suspension -- neither of which are severe enough to make troopers like Dellagicoma reconsider hitting the OFF switch when it suits them.

The only way an incentive system works is to make the cost of noncompliance greater than the cost of compliance. Apparently, a written reprimand and a few days suspension doesn't cut it. And when it happens repeatedly, it is clearly failing to serve as a deterrent. That's not good enough.

The efficacy of video depends on its actually being used, in every instance and including the entire encounter. Anything less reduces it to a game, where the police make the rules, and the rules will not be good for the other side.

Citizens aren't going to be on hand to record all of these interactions, although each passing day provides more and more documentation captured by the public, many of whom put themselves in harm's way to secure this footage. And it's a sign that the system is pretty screwed up if "recording the police" often equates to "putting yourself in harm's way."

This single incident cost New Jersey taxpayers $50,000 and did more damage to the already-questionable reputation of NJ state troopers. All it cost Dellagicoma was a single paycheck, leaving him free to "fail to activate" his camera again and again as the situation suits him.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: evidence, new jersey, police, recording

60 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ninja (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:32am

Banks have been bailed out and got only a wrist slap for fucking up with the financial system.

Sounds familiar?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silverscarcat (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:39am

Re:
They got a wrist slap?

I thought they were just told to not do it again.

And the politicians wondered why OWS took off like it did.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris-Mouse (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:40am

Given the current state of recording technology and the requirement for the police to record their interactions with the public, why is there an "off" button on the camera system at all?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:42am

Why the heck is there an off switch?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul Brinker, 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:46am

I would suspect the battery runs out at some point, if there was no off button then the cop would just run the battery out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
pcdec, 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:52am

Mabey trooper Dellagicoma is just forgetful. He forgets to show up at court. He forgets to turn on the camera. He apparently also forgot that he can't just do whatever the hell he wants.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:53am

Re:
It's connected to the patrol car which is always charging it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kevin H (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:58am

Re: Re:
Wrist slap being the proportionally small fine they received compared to the damage they caused.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BeaverJuicer (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:58am

Re:
Wouldn't the smart thing be to hook the camera into the car battery, so as to prevent such a problem?

I suspect it is more likely that the Police Union demanded it to prevent recording of "private matters" that happen on the job. On occasion, we all have to make phone calls home, etc while at work. Even the police, while on the job, have the right to some form of privacy during those situations.

I recommend giving them a button to "redact" the footage by flicking a switch. Similar to commercial skipping technology in DVR's. Don't erase it, but mark it so that any normal monitoring of said footage would be "skipped" unless there was specific reason to go back and view it - such as a claim of excessive force.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kevin H (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:59am

Re:
He forgot the basic rights of the population he swore to protect. Sounds like a case of selective amnesia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 8:59am

Re: Re:
Yes, a wrist slap sounds mighty harsh. Are you sure it wasn't just a hand shake?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Aaron Von Gauss (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:01am

Re:
Agreed. I can't think of a single reason myself why a regular marked patrol car's dash camera would need an off button. It's far more likely to help the officer in the long run than capture an awkward moment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:08am

OK now. Did he fail to turn it on, or did he actually turn it off?

There's a difference. If he actively turned it off, he should be fired on the first offense. If he failed to turn it on, that MIGHT mean it was an accident, and a suspension and reprimand might be in order.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Argonel (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:13am

Make suspensions matter
If each incident where he "forgets" to turn on the camera resulted in a mandatory 30 day unpaid suspension it might matter to the trooper. Of course the other half of that should be that troopers on suspension cannot trade on their membership in the state patrol for jobs. I.E. no moonlighting as a security guard or bouncer while on suspension. I'm not sure if acting as a stripper should count as taking advantage of their position as a trooper or not. If it actually hurts him in the wallet he may change his ways or he will have to start living out of his squad car.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mr. Applegate, 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:23am

Re:
Most of the police cameras I have seen are actually turned on by activating the lights / siren, and then run until turned off or a set amount of time after the lights sirens have been turned off.

With current technology I would think they should have cameras running during the entire shift and the video stored for 30 days before overwriting. The technology exists, is cheap, and could even include a 'cop cam' worn by the officer connected via RF.

In fact, if the car is a take home car it should record off duty use too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Andrew Norton (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:23am

Indeed. There needs to be serious reform of punishments to both law enforcement, and politicians.

I noted down some suggestions a months ago - http://falkvinge.net/2013/01/08/how-the-police-and-politicians-can-regain-the-public-trust/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:24am

Re:
He forgot he doesn't work for the UFC
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:27am

Re:
We should just lay off all politicians until after the economy improves. We can't afford them right now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Atkray (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:38am

Re: Re:
We can't do that they are the only ones who can fix the economy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chosen Reject (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:42am

Re: Make suspensions matter
Suspensions are worthless. I just read a story today about an officer in Seattle (Shandy Cobane) who was caught on video saying he would "kick the (expletive) Mexican piss out of you" to a Latino man and then proceeded to kick him for no reason. He was given 30 days of no-pay, but then allowed to do overtime to make it up. Just recently he was rewarded by being put on a more prestigious unit, even though the public was told he would be demoted to patrol duty. The police chief said he wanted to fire him right after the incident, but a few months later when people were starting to forget about the story, he decided against it.

There is no punishment for police that isn't eventually rectified by the people supposedly punishing them. They wait for the story to blow over, and then make it all good again. Police look out for other police long before they look out for the public. It's why all cops get a deserved bad rap. They don't need to be bad themselves, they just need to harbor the bad ones and pretend that they are still good.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:42am

this is like giving a credit card to a shopaholic and saying 'you can go to the store, but you're not allowed to buy'! give me strength!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:45am

Re: Re: Re:
It is "fixed" just how they like it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:48am

Re: Re: Re:
and a wink...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jay (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 9:59am

Re: Re:
It makes me wonder... Why do we give officers so much power if they can't use it responsibly?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:01am

Re:
No, it honestly doesn't sound anything like this at all really.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kevin H (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:03am

Re: Re: Re:
A problem I feel we have in this nation is that we romanticize and elevate the police beyond your standard citizen. This leads them to have feelings that they are better than most and are not required to play by the rules like the rest of us are expected too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:03am

Re: Re: Re:
Can't tell if serious. I really hope not...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kevin H (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:03am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
and a tug.. I mean pat on the back.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:05am

Re: Re:
Why store for 30 days, it should be a period of years. I'm not sure how many hours of video can be recorded on a 1 TB hard drive, but it's enough that they should be able to NEVER delete the footage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:12am

All it cost?
All it cost Dellagicoma was a single paycheck, leaving him free to "fail to activate" his camera again and again as the situation suits him.

I don't know about you, but losing even one paycheck would be enough to change my behavior pretty quick.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:16am

The cop needs an off switch...as in OFF the force, OFF the taxpayer's money, and OFF the streets.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mr. Applegate, 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:25am

Re: Re: Re:
I am thinking more along the lines of a 'black box' in an airplane. There really isn't any need to keep hours and hours of footage that, in most cases no one cares about.

The number of hours depends on the storage method, resolution... However, police cars will not have the compression ratios that store cameras have because there is simply too much motion in the frame. This means it will take more space to store. Also you don't want to use traditional hard drives in a car (especially not high capacity drives) the jarring and motion will result in premature failure.

30 days is enough time that requests could be made to hold onto the data, but not so much time that it would greatly increase the cost of the technology. Most security video is kept 7 or 30 days. (Yes there are many exceptions).

Now it might be a good idea that any actions taken by the officer in relation to charges be kept until that case has made it's way through the court system. So for instance if a citation is issued, or arrest made that video is transferred to the court system and preserved until the case has reached it's end.

But let's face it, most of the time the video is not going to contain anything of value, and as such there is no need to keep it forever.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
bob, 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:29am

Re: batteries running out
I'm guessing they wired the camera into the cars electrical system. there's plenty of battery.
I don't know how much tape there is, but I would say it makes sense to make sure a tape can cover 2 shifts, and if there was any issue, the tape is turned in as part o the evidence at the end of shift, otherwise it is reused.
haha. tape..
hdd nowadays.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:30am

Re:
New automatic assumptions- If the camera is turned off the officer is A)beating the suspect, B)soliciting a bribe, C) getting serviced... Nothing good comes with turning off the camera.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 10:42am

Re: Re:
Or require them to make personal calls outside away from the vehicle if they need privacy. I don't have such privacy in my workplace unless I leave the building.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 11:06am

Just store 7 days or so worth of data in the car and have it auto upload wirelessly to a server once they get back to the police station.

The camera and storage should also be hardwired and locked so the officer can not disable or delete anything.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 6 Feb 2013 @ 11:08am

Re:
They need to be able to turn off the camera to beat suspects in private...I mean to protect the privacy of people not suspected of being beaten...or I mean a crime.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kevin H (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 11:18am

Re: Re:
They use the "if you have nothing to hide then why does it matter" on us. Holding them to the same line of reasoning should be expected.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 6 Feb 2013 @ 11:19am

Re: All it cost?
You probably have the self-control to not kick and punch people laying on the ground about to be arrested.

I'm sure you have a behavior or three that you wouldn't be able to stop if it cost you a paycheck.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 6 Feb 2013 @ 11:20am

Re:
Unfortunately, they leave that switch in the hands of the individual officers as well.

Perhaps if he were caught trying to solicit underage children they would ask him to retire with a full pension and we wouldn't have to deal with him anymore.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 6 Feb 2013 @ 11:21am

Re:
Quit advocating child pornography, molestation, and terrorism!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rob, 6 Feb 2013 @ 11:26am

Re: Re:
It's far more likely to help the officer in the long run than capture an awkward moment.

But if the guy controlling the on/off switch is the same guy who's planning whether or not to create an . . . "awkward moment" . . . then it's the best of both worlds, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 11:34am

Re: Re: batteries running out
HDD nowadays?
Flash drives, much more shock resistant.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 12:04pm

Re: Re: Re:
Well, when the 'fine' was just a reduction in the 'bailout' is it even a slap?

We were going to give you 10 bazillion dollars since you are too big to fail, but now we have to 'fine' you to show that we are 'hard on crime'.

You will only receive 9.999999999 bazillion dollars in your bailout.

"Yes, maam, may I please have another?"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 12:43pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I agree. Personally, I think that criminal misbehavior by a police officer (on or off duty) should be automatically punished with a much greater level of severity than the same crime committed by an ordinary citizen. Cops are given extraordinary powers. They need to be held to an equally extraordinary standard of conduct.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 12:45pm

Re: Re: batteries running out
Why don't all police cars livestream?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 2:12pm

Re: Re:
Then you aren't paying close enough attention.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 2:31pm

Re: Re:
Unless you have children.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bergman (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 2:31pm

Re: Re:
That's a wrist slap. They slapped one poor guy's wrist. Just one wrist. How many wrists in the entire corporation? Tens of thousands.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 2:52pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Too big to fail? Who is that? Aren't corporations people too?
I've yet to meet a man too big to fail.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btr1701 (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 3:11pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
> Too big to fail? Who is that? Aren't
> corporations people too? I've yet to meet
> a man too big to fail.

Chris Christie ought to use that as his next campaign slogan-- "I'm too big to fail!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btr1701 (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 3:14pm

Re:
> why is there an "off" button on the camera
> system at all?

If there was no 'off' button, they'd just work around it. You'd end up having a 'randomly' placed coffee cup on the dashboard that just happens to block the view of the camera.

Or the cruiser will just happen to end up stopped so that the camera is pointing off to the side instead of at the car in front of the cruiser.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btr1701 (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 3:17pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
> Personally, I think that criminal misbehavior
> by a police officer (on or off duty) should be
> automatically punished with a much greater level
> of severity than the same crime committed by an
> ordinary citizen.

You'd run into some 14th Amendment/Equal Protection issues with that plan.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 4:05pm

Re:
As disgusting as the idea is, considering the 'punishment' he's faced so far for his actions, his apparent belief that he can in fact do whatever he wants seems to be spot on.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 4:18pm

Providing motivation
Want to give cops motivation to keep the cameras rolling while on the job? Make it so that if the camera is turned off, any statements/claims the police officer make are automatically considered false, while any statements/claims the suspect make are automatically considered true, as long as said statements are even remotely feasible.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thomas (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 5:51pm

Just goes to show..
that the states always side with the cops. The cops firmly believe that they are above the law and should be able to do whatever they d*** well please. They always say "if you have nothing to hide..", but they firmly believe that doesn't apply to them. The "internal affairs" departments exist solely to absolve cops of misbehavior and/or recommend mild punishment for criminal action. Plus the police unions are even more firm that cops do no wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Feb 2013 @ 6:15pm

3 strikes and you're out. Let em turn it off if they want to, then drum em off the force if they can't keep their finger off the off button.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 6 Feb 2013 @ 6:25pm

Re:
Okay, after reading that list, I want all of those put into law, those simple changes/additions to the law would go a long way to clearing out police corruption and actually punishing those that abuse their position and power.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
monkyyy, 7 Feb 2013 @ 8:45am

Re: Re: Re:
but but, if we had universal rights there wouldnt be any political power to abuse
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2014 @ 3:57am

The reason state trooper was there is that Irvington NJ police itself is under long term supervision for corruption. Both do patrols, and SP has permanent "temporary" station in the city. It seems that city is dumping ground for SP.

Irvington is bordering Newark, and area in question is typical urban ghetto.
[ link to this | view in thread ]