Body cameras, police taping and use of force: sweeping policing bill clears the Connecticut Senate [Courant]

Hartford Courant

In response to incidents in Ferguson, Mo., North Charleston, S.C. and Baltimore that left unarmed black men dead after an interaction with a police officer, the Senate early Tuesday unanimously approved a far-reaching bill that seeks to increase police accountability, bolster the ranks of minority officers and build trust between police and the communities they protect.

The measure safeguards the public’s right to videotape police, sets up a new system for investigating cases of police use of lethal force and encourages — but does not mandate — police body cameras for municipal departments.

“What those situations have uncovered is that there is somewhat of a problem between police departments and some of the communities they serve,” said Sen Eric Coleman, the co-chairman of the legislature’s powerful judiciary committee and a key architect of the measure.

“One of the objectives of the bill is to take some steps to try and improve the relationships between police and the community,” Coleman said. “The other thing the bill tries to do is recognize that police have a very difficult job and they are entrusted with a very broad authority and discretion and part of that authority includes the license to kill. What we seek to do in connection with this bill is to minimize the inappropriate uses of any type of force, but particularly deadly force.”

Senate President Martin Looney said the bill is one of the most important pieces of legislation to come before the legislature this year. “There are so many sections of this bill that deal with a number of issues that have come up over the last several years,” he said. “And they are all dealt with forthrightly.”

Several prominent national groups, such as the NAACP and the American Civil Liberties Union, have advocated for a greater use of police body cameras. President Obama recently announced a federal initiative that would expand use of the devices.

More than a dozen Connecticut cities and towns already equip at least some of their officers with body cameras.

But several police groups in Connecticut spoke out against mandating their use. “It should be up to individual departments, not legislated,” Patrick Gaynor, president of AFSCME Council 15, Connecticut Council of Police Unions, told lawmakers in March. “Departments should be using as they deem necessary, not with every police officer, but potentially in instances where there is a concern…Not all police officers in any municipality should be required to pay the
price because of the actions of a few.”

The bill as adopted by the Senate strikes the right balance, said Sen. Kevin Witkos, a Republican from Canton and a retired police officer. The measure does not mandate local departments use body cameras, but it does encourage them. (State police would be required to use the devices.)

“This represents a truly collaborative effort,” Witkos said. “This legislation is about being proactive, improving public safety, implementing important cultural training and awareness, and giving police officers across the state an option to engage with new, useful technology.”

The Senate began debate on the bill at 2:12 a.m.; a vote came around 4. The measure pulls together a number of provisions that have been talked about at the Capitol for several years but were given a new sense of urgency after Ferguson. Among them:

*New training requirements for police in use of force, cultural sensitivity and bias-free policing.

*The development of programs to foster recruitment of minority officers through development of programs such as the Police Athletic League and Police Explorers. “The important point is to put police officers in a position where they are mentoring, supporting or coaching young people from the community they serve,” Coleman said. “Hopefully [a] byproduct of such interactions will be that these young people may themselves be encouraged to pursue a career in law enforcement.”

*New protocols in the aftermath of an incident involving police use of lethal force, including a provision that a state’s attorney from a different jurisdiction investigate such incidents to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.

*A new rule that would prevent police officers who have been found guilty of malfeasance from working as an officer in the state.

*Incentives for police departments to install body cameras by having the state pay the cost of the equipment as well as the cost of storing the data collected on the cameras.

*A provision that explicitly states that citizens have a right to videotape police in a public place, as long as the taping does not interfere with an ongoing investigation, compromise public safety or violate the privacy of a crime victim.

The measure was the product of extensive bipartisan discussions. “I think this is a great step forward,” said Sen. Len Fasano, the chamber’s Republican leader. “I’m proud that our state said…’let’s be proactive.”’

Added Sen. John Kissel, R-Enfield: “We’re blessed in Connecticut that we have not experienced some of the shootings that concern so many folks…I think this bill is a good effort to try to get ahead of the curve.”
Sen. Gary Winfield, an African-American lawmaker from New Haven, said he doesn’t even step outside of his house to bring out the trash without carrying identification. It is a lesson that was instilled upon him as a young boy. “I was always taught…that at least when you’re carrying your ID, you have something saying who you are,” he said. Having identification offered a measure of protection, “and that protection was from the police, unfortunately.”

The bill now awaits action in the House of Representatives; the legislature adjourns at midnight on Wednesday.