Cop Arrested, Fired After Wife Captures His Abusive Actions On His Own Body Camera
from the accidental-sting-operation dept
This is one of the strangest "but for video" cases ever. We know many cops are hesitant to clip body-worn cameras on themselves for a variety of reasons. The official statements always express concern about privacy, as though people interacting with public servants somehow believe these interactions are private. Others show concern for police officers' privacy, as though the public is really hoping to FOIA footage of officers sitting in the break room or using the restroom.
Deep down, everyone knows the cameras are a tool of accountability, albeit one that's far from perfect. Body camera footage frequently goes "missing" when force is deployed questionably. And it's completely possible to make the footage subjective with strategic body positioning and constant yelling of exonerative phrases like "Stop resisting!"
So, it's accountability in its infancy, run through a layer of law enforcement-friendly filters (footage is controlled by police officers and often sheltered from FOIA requests). But it's much better than what we had before, where all action had to take place in front of stationary dashboard cameras.
Still, there are plenty of bugs -- both those inherent to the system and those created by law enforcement resistance -- to be worked out. We've seen cops damned by their captured footage and we've seen officers exonerated by footage that contradicts arrestees' complaints.
What we haven't seen before is a camera being activated by someone other than the cop in possession of it. And we definitely haven't seen any situations where the footage captures off-duty violence. This is a new one, and it's likely to lead to another "privacy" discussion by the time it's all sorted out. (via PoliceMisconduct.net)
A North Charleston Police officer was arrested for assaulting his wife Sunday after police say the incident was captured on his body camera. Hanahan Police say the officer, Nicholas Palumbo was arrested early Sunday morning.
According to an incident report, Palumbo's wife told him she wanted a divorce. The report states Palumbo became very irate and pushed his wife to the ground in their kitchen. Police say after the altercation started Palumbo's wife went into the bedroom and turned on his body camera.
According to the report, Palumbo came into the room, pinned his wife to the bed and threatened to strike her in the head with his fist while shaking her. His wife told investigators she was in great fear for her safety and the safety of her children. The report states she did not know where her husband had gone and was afraid he would return home and cause physical harm to her.
I'm not sure which part is more amazing: the forethought of the abused spouse to activate the camera or the fact that the footage was actually viewed by someone at the police department.
We know officers protect officers first. Perhaps being the wife of an officer grants you more attention and respect than a random civilian with a list of allegations. Whatever the case is, the department viewed the footage and arrested the officer. Even more surprising, the officer was immediately fired. I guess this decision was made easier by his bail requirements, which forbade him from possessing guns or ammo -- something every on-duty cop generally has on them or easy access to.
It's a petard-hoisting of sorts and definitely an anomaly in the pantheon of body-worn cameras. No doubt other cops with the same domestic issues will be keeping a closer eye on their issued gear during their off-duty hours. And there will definitely be challenges to the evidence, should this go to trial.
Arguments will be made about surreptitious recordings being used to fire a police officer, but those shouldn't get too far. South Carolina is a one party consent state when it comes to recordings. The fact that it was recorded in a private home (rather than in a public area) makes it a bit more complicated, but the recording should be treated no differently than the spouse's oral testimony. The recording just makes it a lot tougher to challenge the spouse's domestic abuse allegations.
Whatever happens, it's one for the "but for video" record books: body worn camera as the prosecution's star witness in a domestic assault case.
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: body cameras, evidence, police
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
should really read "that the footage was actually viewed by someone at the police department that didn't immediately bury it"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Hopefully the wife can get a protective order before her abusive spouse re-accommodates her.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Perhaps she didn't give them a choice? "Arrest his ass or I put this footage on you tube and call you assholes out by name" would have done the trick. Especially if she explained right off the bat that the copy they were looking at was the same copy her lawyer received.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More to it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More to it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More to it?
It really seems unusual for such evidence collected under such unusual circumstances to lead to such results so fast without an actual involved interest exceeding common decency.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Domestic Violence and Cops...
While this might lead to some thoughts about privacy and body cameras it might also just be dismissed as "he was hitting his wife".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Domestic Violence and Cops...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Domestic Violence and Cops...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Domestic Violence and Cops...
One of the things I've learned from those conversations is that domestic violence in the families of police officers is epidemic. Nobody is sure what the numbers really are, because so many of the cases get denied, buried, or lost...but everyone is sure that it's much worse than police will admit.
Another thing I've learned is that cops involved in DV won't hesitate to abuse their police powers -- on or off duty. They'll harass, intimidate, stalk, vandalize, steal, assault -- anything they can get away with, and that's nearly everything. One of the longtime staff told me that they worry about cops far more than drug dealers or pimps.
Cops will defend each others' families -- but not from other cops.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Domestic Violence and Cops...
See: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cops-beat-wives-girlfriends-double-national-rate-receive-promotions /
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We Got Cameras, Too.
So the police have control of their own video cameras and are trying to hide what they do behind protective laws: oooo-kay, be that way. We'll record you guys ourselves with apps that send the image into the cloud so it can't be deleted easily.
Accountability can be obtained when you are of the mindset that someone is out to get you, and really, most Americans aren't quite there yet. Most of us are happy with the way society treats us on sight and feel too safe to start thinking about surveillance being our friend. That's why so many black people being killed by the police are being caught on camera by other black people: they are in that place where they know someone is out to get them and they are using their phones. That's why we get so many wacky Russian dash-cam antics on youtube, because every Russian knows their police will abuse them and steal from them if they can get away with it. They all have cameras, surveillance working *for* instead of *against* them for once.
Abused wives, take note. Use that camera for more than texting your friend that you accidentally bumped into a door, so don't be upset when you see my shiner. Get the punch in the face on camera instead, and good luck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We Got Cameras, Too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The discussion about consent is bogus here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Owed civility
That you are apparently unaware of this is a sad commentary on your early and continuing socialization, and I strongly urge you to seek and obtain professional therapy to correct your deficiency in this area.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Owed civility
Congrats Mike, you win at the internet!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Owed civility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Hi, Palumbo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]