court

TaserCam

http://www.taser.com/products/on-officer-video/taser-cam

Courtesy: Taser

Courtesy: Taser

"The TASER CAM™ law enforcement video recorder offers increased accountability - not just for police officers, but for the people they arrest. Without video, it can be the officer's word against the suspect's word. Now with the TASER CAM recorder, every potential TASER X26 deployment can be documented with full audio and camera video."

Censoring with Glass - Yes, Video Has Its Limitation Too

This morning while speaking with MG Michael we talked about the limitations of wearables.

Those who argue that they wear their video recorders 24x7 need to start qualifying their statements.

There were the embarrassing Google StreetView lessons learnt when Google first began its mission- people caught in the field-of-view from a public road using their "outside dunny (toilet)" while reading their newspaper, people caught drunk to oblivion on the front of their home lawn, bus drivers "peeing" by the side-walk 'behind' a bus while thinking no one was watching and much more... Here are some examples to trigger your memories. And here is how to get yourself removed if you found yourself in a compromising photo.

Source: Her.ie http://her.ie/story/nsfw-the-awkward-moment-when-google-street-view-catches-you-in-a-compromising-position-598014  Caption reads: The good news is that Google has since blurred out the image, so there’s no chance of the couple being identified by their pants.

Source: Her.ie http://her.ie/story/nsfw-the-awkward-moment-when-google-street-view-catches-you-in-a-compromising-position-598014

Caption reads: The good news is that Google has since blurred out the image, so there’s no chance of the couple being identified by their pants.

Now, it's really important to note that Google don't just use cars, they also have other form factors recording- e.g. bicycles, as depicted below.

Courtesy: New York Daily News

Courtesy: New York Daily News

Here are some 2009 images from Australia!

Courtesy: Google

Courtesy: Google

The images above are conservative as opposed to some I have chosen NOT to embed into this blogpost for fear of further privacy breach to the individuals concerned.

*

As I've said in a previous post on this site, introducing Digital Glass means that we are to some extent going beyond Google StreetCars, Google StreetBicycles and the like. We are wardriving on foot now with Digital Glass, sousveilling the streets now with mobile drones; these drones just happen to be voluntary human subjects wearing one or more cameras.

But what happens when people use the toilet and the record button is on their digital glass? What happens when people go to bed? Do they take off their glass? What happens when someone is disciplining their child about an incident- are they recording the wrongdoings of the child as they try to make them understand why their actions were inappropriate? What happens when people are having an argument, and things that should never be uttered come into the fore disclosing very personal details or behaviour that was irrational in speech? What happens when you learn the news that someone has died, and feel like your whole world has collapsed around you? What happens when you are visiting a sick person in hospital who is terminally ill, and they are reduced to skin and bones? Visiting a friend in jail? The list goes on and on. Surely the camera MUST be turned off.

In our discussion this morning, MG Michael deliberated on such events, that are of a highly personal and intimate nature. He has written previously about the need for privacy in such moments in life. This does not mean, as we have written in numerous articles, that one seeks for cameras to be turned off because they are doing something wrong or wish to commit a crime but because some things are just "no-go" zones for outside viewing.

Don't be fooled- cameras on people WILL not reduce crimes! Criminals will just get better at corruption, in its manual or digital form. The more digital the corruption, the greater the potential that the stakes are higher and the corruption is of a more sinister and gross form. And I'm not just talking corporate fraud here.

So "point of eye" (PoE) as Professor Steve Mann rightly calls it, inspired some additional thoughts in MG Michael about censorship, exclusion, deletion, information representation, which are all core concepts of the limitation of living in an uberveillance society. In fact, PoE can be the manner in which one decides to censor their field of view.

Consider the following simple scenario. A male goes to the toilet. As he goes about his business he does not look down while wearing a digital camera but he looks straight ahead. This is selective recording, in a way, a type of censorship. Even worse, while the male goes to wash his hands, he takes a look into the mirror, and the reflection records someone else going to the toilet with their crown jewels in full view.

By nature, our own PoE will capture ourselves in the best light, but the other person either deliberately or accidentally in the worst light. Of course, all this will depend on prior relationships. If they are family, likely we will record them in the best light, if they are friends much the same, if they are strangers we might be indifferent...

Taking the scenario further, body worn video recorders that will soon be worn by some police and citizens alike, may/may not take footage of a given incident, depending on the lifeworld of the wearer. The incident may be 100% in their field of view, but because their "point of eye" neglects to record it by the turn of their head, the evidence is not gathered and stored for further inspection. You see, digital glass does not have a 360 degree camera view, it is not a headband that has embedded cameras at the back of our head, side, looking up and down etc. The camera is STILL in the control of the wearer, and he or she can decide what they wish to gather or exclude. This has huge implications, and till now, has not been addressed by any other academic researcher to our knowledge.

Make no mistake, while this technology may limit the extent of complaints against police regarding brutality, the limitations of video will always exist. The PoE is in the control of the beholder who comes endowed with his/her own lifeworld- it is their subjective reality. This has a great impact on evidence gathering/direct evidence in a court of law, in how police will manage prosecutions and complaint handling, and how crowdsourcing will becoming increasingly important in the field of policing to corroborate stories. We will not be complacent in the future with just ONE field of view, but multiple, and even then we will never have omniscience.

Courtesy: JesusDiaz Gizmodo

Courtesy: JesusDiaz Gizmodo

Shooting Back

"The City of Boston has agreed to pay Simon Glik $170,000 in damages and legal fees to settle a civil rights lawsuit. Glik was arrested in 2007 on Boston Common for using his cell phone to record the arrest of another man. Police then arrested Glik, too, and charged him under the strict Massachusetts wiretapping statute. They eventually dropped the charges, but with the help of the Massachusetts ACLU, Glik filed a civil lawsuit against the city for false arrest."

Read more here.

Read about another case (Alvarez) here.

"Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez, who staked out the extreme position that openly recording police officers in public placed while they perform their duties is unprotected by the First Amendment, may have done more to hurt her case than to help it. The Seventh Circuit noted that Alvarez's position was based on a misreading of Potts v. City of Lafayette, and a misapplication of the "willing speaker" principle."

Compare proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on the Social Implications of National Security here.

Courtesy: Karen Blumberg

Courtesy: Karen Blumberg

The 'Vagus' Effect

"The Mayor of Las Vegas is making a serious plea to Prince Harry now that he's back from Afghanistan -- COME BACK TO VEGAS, ASAP!!!"
But TMZ spoke with Mayor Carolyn G. Goodman ... who thinks Harry deserves a Vegas do-over ... "We’re absolutely excited he’s home," Goodman says ... adding, "Prince Harry is always welcome in Las Vegas. When he was here everyone was talking about it. We welcome him back with open arms.”

Read more: http://www.tmz.com/category/prince-harry-vegas-pictures/#ixzz2N3d20T6D

Courtesy: TMZ

Courtesy: TMZ

In "that" interview delivered by Prince Harry when he stated that "I probably let myself down", he attacked the press for invading his privacy... but should he really have attacked "the other"? I've dubbed this the "Vagus Effect" .

"The vagus nerve is the longest cranial nerve. It contains motor and sensory fibers and, because it passes through the neck and thorax to the abdomen, has the widest distribution in the body. It contains somatic and visceral afferent fibers, as well as general and special visceral efferent fibers."

Source: http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1875813-overview

With body worn video (BWV) recording devices a publicly available good for purchase, it won't take people long to figure out that they can make large sums of money by recording others and then blackmailing them over their behaviour. The real crunch will come when disputes over "being recorded" end up in court, or individuals are refused entry for wearing BWV.

Dashcams and Accidents

When I went to ISTAS12 in Singapore almost every other taxi I entered had a dashcam. Here is why.

"The most horrifying car crash ever caught on film? Dash camera captures moment Ferrari hits taxi at high speed killing three. Both drivers and a passenger died in the high-speed smash in Singapore."

Courtesy: YouTube

Courtesy: YouTube

"Police gave no official estimate as to how fast the Ferrari was moving, but the extremely high speed of the collision is plain to see from the video."

Source here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2147513/Dash-camera-captures-horrific-fatal-crash-rare-Ferrari-hurtles-taxi.htm

In Russia dashcams have also proliferated in protecting oneself while on the road. Note- dashcams will NOT save your life, but they might make life after an accident easier as you might have primary evidence in clearing yourself of being "at fault".

See this story.

Courtesy: DOD Product

Courtesy: DOD Product

"It’s not all the fault of the elements, though. Corruption is rampant in the Russian Federation, and that’s led most motorists to take matters into their own hands. It’s not uncommon for a driver to be pulled over by the notorious Russian Highway Patrol (GAI) and harassed into paying a bribe. Dash cams afford at least a little protection from baseless accusations.
Lax law enforcement has also made is easier for organized crime to make millions from insurance scams. It’s a straightforward racket — crashes can be staged, or already damaged cars presented as evidence of a crash that never even occurred. The perpetrators can certainly produce witnesses that corroborate their version of events."" 

The following video is of a real-life event. Thankfully no one was seriously injured to my knowledge which is the only reason I am presenting the recording here.

Video Forensic Expert

Transient

A blogpost on the future of body worn video by a video forensic expert. 

"Our right to privacy is nonexistent in public. No longer can we assume we are having a private conversation if we are outside our home. Is this good or bad news?"
"I suspect that one day in the future our government will pass legislation on video recorded evidence that will be presented in the court room. In the mean time, good and bad guys will continue to purchase these body worn cameras and use them to record conversations that document activity verbally and visually. That way there is little doubt as to what was discussed or what went on during the audio and video recorded conversation."

More here.

Reveal Media

Body worn video cameras for the police? Is this the answer?

Soon, we will all be walking around with cameras strapped to our bodies in response to being under constant surveillance in public, although initially the cameras will only be turned on when police have been dispatched to an event?

Is this really the solution? No... but the question is whether or not we will have a choice.

Allegedly video doesn't lie... actually information manipulation will be rife. The tampering of evidence will be difficult to prove- for or against. And what about those black spots?

... What's coming next?

Embedded cameras?