• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Video Appears To Show Baltimore Police Planting Drugs At A Crime Scene

E

Elaugaufein

Member
(back of envelope)

Its (and this is generously large) ~500 mb / hour for quality that looks good on portable console screens etc. Depending on what you're looking detail wise and color depth wise you could probably drop that a bit.

It does depend on on what kind of field of view you want though, if you want to capture a larger area around the camera you need to increase the resolution or you'll lose detail of course.

So assuming cops work 8 hour shifts you'd need ~4 GB / cop per day, ~12 GB storage available if you assume cops swap cameras on shift and it only gets dumped and cleared at day's end. That's pretty doable since it's like a 16 GB microSD card. This is probably prohibitively large to automatically back up over cellular and you don't want the sporadic access of Wi-fi unfortunately.

The problem is that you'd need about a terrabyte of space per year per copy to store things, I assume you'd want at least a year. That's doable too but it starts to get pretty expensive if you're dealing with something like NYC which has 34000 cops. The cost is fine per officer but you'd start running into physical storage issues and retrieving data in a reasonable time.

There's also access and restrictions there of. You can't make it directly publicly available in case it defames someone or violates their rights. So you need an independent authority to archive, organise and appropriately redact stuff (obviously you don't want the police to be able to edit or delete this stuff themselves in this case).

Like none of that should be beyond the reach of most state governments though. It's large and complex but not more so than lots of other systems.

ETA - HD is obviously significantly larger. Prohibitively so for long term storage. You coukd probably do HD for like a week or so alongside the lower quality archive stuff , it should be possible to archive it for anything likely to be disputed , like arrests or searches or shootings.
 
N

NoName999

Member
But was the cop a black Muslim.

I feel he needs to be in order to have a conversation about police reform.

Because if he's white, then why are you guys cop haters?

</moderate>
 
I

Ixzion

Member
Nerfgun said:
I wish they'd stop using that idiom the wrong way anyhow.

"A few bad apples spoils the barrel"

which is what everyone has been trying to tell them for years

anyways clearly the "OFF" button on those body cams should actually be "HIGH QUALITY MODE"
Click to expand...

This! Bad apples spoil the ENTIRE bunch. If they allow any cop to go free when caught doing this, they're all equally guilty.
 
A

ApharmdX

Banned
Elaugaufein said:
(back of envelope)

Its (and this is generously large) ~500 mb / hour for quality that looks good on portable console screens etc. Depending on what you're looking detail wise and color depth wise you could probably drop that a bit.

It does depend on on what kind of field of view you want though, if you want to capture a larger area around the camera you need to increase the resolution or you'll lose detail of course.

So assuming cops work 8 hour shifts you'd need ~4 GB / cop per day, ~12 GB storage available if you assume cops swap cameras on shift and it only gets dumped and cleared at day's end. That's pretty doable since it's like a 16 GB microSD card. This is probably prohibitively large to automatically back up over cellular and you don't want the sporadic access of Wi-fi unfortunately.

The problem is that you'd need about a terrabyte of space per year per copy to store things, I assume you'd want at least a year. That's doable too but it starts to get pretty expensive if you're dealing with something like NYC which has 34000 cops. The cost is fine per officer but you'd start running into physical storage issues and retrieving data in a reasonable time.

There's also access and restrictions there of. You can't make it directly publicly available in case it defames someone or violates their rights. So you need an independent authority to archive, organise and appropriately redact stuff (obviously you don't want the police to be able to edit or delete this stuff themselves in this case).

Like none of that should be beyond the reach of most state governments though. It's large and complex but not more so than lots of other systems.

ETA - HD is obviously significantly larger. Prohibitively so for long term storage. You coukd probably do HD for like a week or so alongside the lower quality archive stuff , it should be possible to archive it for anything likely to be disputed , like arrests or searches or shootings.
Click to expand...

It works a little differently than this in practice, at least in my experience. Storage isn't an issue so much (your SD number is a little bit low I think, HD is obviously much higher). The body cam vendor uses a major cloud storage vendor on their backend and they buy in vast bulk. So you can do 1080p, if you like and can afford it. Retention times vary by incident type. Keeping track of it all, labeling and cataloging, redaction and controlled release, it's a major undertaking. I think that, in addition to the political/policy issues, kind of slows the spread of police body cams. There are vendors that sell the entire system as a package but it still requires a lot of manpower to administer, training, and so on.

So you need an independent authority to archive, organise and appropriately redact stuff (obviously you don't want the police to be able to edit or delete this stuff themselves in this case).
Click to expand...

Not every law enforcement agency handles their body cam footage like this. I think that the use of an independent authority isn't actually that common.
 
D

Dreams-Visions

Member
ApharmdX said:
Agency where I work uses the same vendor as Baltimore PD for body cameras. They deployed theirs in 2016 I believe, not sure which model. There are two in widespread use from this vendor. One is standard def, 8GB storage. The other model, which is likely the one Baltimore uses, is high-def (1080p/720p) and has 64GB storage.

They are spec'ced with more storage than you'd think because some departments do 12 hour shifts, and a cop could respond to a call 5 minutes before his shift is up that ties him up for additional time.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. ty for the insight. I'm impressed there are HD options at all. Couldn't have been inexpensive.
 
K

Kaako

Felium Defensor
Countless lives/families ruined and destroyed due to these corrupt and disgusting sacks of shit. Fuck all corrupt cops and the entire police union; easily one of the biggest criminal organizations/gang in the United States currently.
 
J

JBourne

maybe tomorrow it rains
Those drugs would've really taken the edge off during this stressful time, shame you dropped them.


Fuck this guy, and fuck the two cops with him.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
ApharmdX said:
It works a little differently than this in practice, at least in my experience. Storage isn't an issue so much (your SD number is a little bit low I think, HD is obviously much higher). The body cam vendor uses a major cloud storage vendor on their backend and they buy in vast bulk. So you can do 1080p, if you like and can afford it. Retention times vary by incident type. Keeping track of it all, labeling and cataloging, redaction and controlled release, it's a major undertaking. I think that, in addition to the political/policy issues, kind of slows the spread of police body cams. There are vendors that sell the entire system as a package but it still requires a lot of manpower to administer, training, and so on.



Not every law enforcement agency handles their body cam footage like this. I think that the use of an independent authority isn't actually that common.
Click to expand...

My numbers are for quality below SD yeah, it's about half SD resolution IIRC. I assumed this didn't need SD detail, since the poster said limited colour and okay detail.

And yeah, most don't but if you're going to do this properly it really should be. It solves the problem of footage disappearing / being tampered with or accusations there of.
 
W

water_wendi

Water is not wet!
What "appears?" He "does."

i also like how the police say that the video provides a "perspective of the events" like objective reality is just a point of view.
 
Z

zeemumu

Member
They'd make great Stand Users
320
 
S

SlickShoesRUCrazy

Member
every person this fucker arrested should be released if in prison still and should have their records wiped in regards to anything related to this cop. All 3 of them really.
 
B

BlueTsunami

there is joy in sucking dick
S

SomTervo

Member
Damaniel said:
Storage is cheap, and the lives of victims of police brutality shouldn't be worth less than a few more hard drives in a rack somewhere. They could even come up with a plan to archive footage for a limited time (6 months or a year, perhaps). It's all just excuses designed to allow them to continue to operate without full accountability.
Click to expand...

Isn't the storage on the person?

So like they'd physically have to be carrying hard drives around.

Still, increasing it to 2-5 minutes would be a start.
 
G

Galactic Barret

Member
The worst part, the absolute worst part, is that the prosecutor had the tape proving his innocence but still tried to offer the man a plea deal.

The public defender's office confirmed to BuzzFeed News that the prosecutor had offered a plea deal to their client while the damning video evidence was in their possession. However, it is unclear whether attorneys for the prosecution viewed the video before offering a plea deal.
Click to expand...

Like, 'Lets see if we can squeeze something out of this bogus arrest, can't go home empty-handed!'.

Justice doesn't really exist. The entire system is corrupted by money.
 
G

Gaius Cassius

Member
*Sigh* Well, i guess this just cements the fact that Baltimore PD will never be as good as the one portrayed on The Wire. Although I figured as much after that whole fiasco where they broke that black guys neck in a Police van a couple years back.

Real life version of Lance Reddick's Daniels needs to show up and clean that force up.
 
F

F34R

Member
ApharmdX said:
It works a little differently than this in practice, at least in my experience. Storage isn't an issue so much (your SD number is a little bit low I think, HD is obviously much higher). The body cam vendor uses a major cloud storage vendor on their backend and they buy in vast bulk. So you can do 1080p, if you like and can afford it. Retention times vary by incident type. Keeping track of it all, labeling and cataloging, redaction and controlled release, it's a major undertaking. I think that, in addition to the political/policy issues, kind of slows the spread of police body cams. There are vendors that sell the entire system as a package but it still requires a lot of manpower to administer, training, and so on.



Not every law enforcement agency handles their body cam footage like this. I think that the use of an independent authority isn't actually that common.
Click to expand...

The "red tape" aspect is baffling at times. My department, small city... before anything had to go through our city attorney for policy, blah blah.. we were given the dang cams. Told in a memo to turn them on when performing your duties, put the footage on the computer at the station before leaving after your shift is over. Pretty simple. We didn't have to turn it on during lunch, bathroom, and simply patrolling.

That was 7 years ago. Now, there's too much red tape involved in something that should be simple to do.
 
?

____

Member
Galactic Barret said:
The worst part, the absolute worst part, is that the prosecutor had the tape proving his innocence but still tried to offer the man a plea deal.

Like, 'Lets see if we can squeeze something out of this bogus arrest, can't go home empty-handed!'.

Justice doesn't really exist. The entire system is corrupted by money.
Click to expand...

More than just money, my good man.

But real talk: is anyone really surprised?
 
S

sturgboski

Member
Oh they were just recreating the discovery. I guess the NJ cop was doing the same BEFORE the pull over occurred.

Fuck that noise. Thank God they can now steal from everyone again while "inspecting." And people wonder why folks look down on cops and also get upset when folks want to do things like paint a blue line between yellow lines in the road. The whole "a few bad apples" is bullshit as they all lie and protect each other. Maybe if actions had real consequences, that there weren't such cover ups, etc the cops wouldnt need to shoot first because they fear for their life.

Also fuck the juries and hero worship.
 
M

Micael

Member
A fixed security camera at 1080p 3mbps 15fps gives a pretty reasonable quality (depending on lenses and so on), and to function for 8 hours a day for 365 days would occupy around 4TB, so that would be around 140 petabytes for 35k officers assuming each one did 8 hours a day for 365 days a year, on amazon according to the charts I can see it costs around 2.8 million per petabyte for 3 years, so roughly 1 million per year, but this cost goes way way down on other services, like to half or less, so we are talking about somewhere between 47 million to 140 million per year on storage, this assuming single petabyte ranges, truth be told we are talking about a government and sizes much bigger than a single petabyte, so we can easily lower this cost down way further.

Goes without saying you do need systems to archive it, retrieve, maintain and so on and so forth, which will add significant costs to it all, but ofc if you are doing it all in house it also adds quite a few jobs.

As for the power a fixed security camera consumes less than 3 watts per hour depending on model, so even assuming 3 watts we would need 24 watts for 8 hours, an lg g4 battery has an alleged capacity of 11.4w, so you would need roughly 2 cellphone batteries, but ofc you want to overspec this, so lets say the equivalent of 3 LG G4 batteries.
 
D

Dali

Member
The wording had me thrown off for a moment. "Programmed to record 30 seconds prior to being activated." I was like "how does it know it's about to be activated in 30 seconds?" They should have said programmed to save video that was already being taped and recorded 30 seconds prior to the button being pressed to indicate there is an encounter the officer wants to record. A lot more words, yeah, but at least it doesn't make it seem like the camera utilizes some precog future tech.

Hope all three of these fucks go to jail. It's like witness tampering/intimidation or perjury. It's shaking the foundation of the judicial system itself and they should be punished accordingly.
 
P

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
Ragnorok64 said:
it does...


but I didn't expect them to be standing right there looking at him plant the evidence as the video started.
Click to expand...

Ah, must have missed that. Almost a throwaway line. It definitely seems like they are being ignored for the most part, unless I missed something else. They need to be tarred and feathered right along the other cop.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
Micael said:
A fixed security camera at 1080p 3mbps 15fps gives a pretty reasonable quality (depending on lenses and so on), and to function for 8 hours a day for 365 days would occupy around 4TB, so that would be around 140 petabytes for 35k officers assuming each one did 8 hours a day for 365 days a year, on amazon according to the charts I can see it costs around 2.8 million per petabyte for 3 years, so roughly 1 million per year, but this cost goes way way down on other services, like to half or less, so we are talking about somewhere between 47 million to 140 million per year on storage, this assuming single petabyte ranges, truth be told we are talking about a government and sizes much bigger than a single petabyte, so we can easily lower this cost down way further.

Goes without saying you do need systems to archive it, retrieve, maintain and so on and so forth, which will add significant costs to it all, but ofc if you are doing it all in house it also adds quite a few jobs.

As for the power a fixed security camera consumes less than 3 watts per hour depending on model, so even assuming 3 watts we would need 24 watts for 8 hours, an lg g4 battery has an alleged capacity of 11.4w, so you would need roughly 2 cellphone batteries, but ofc you want to overspec this, so lets say the equivalent of 3 LG G4 batteries.
Click to expand...

You may not be able to store this with conventional cloud providers standard storage options given the potential sensitive nature of some of it. You might be able to get away with it if you use some kind of NSA certified encryption on it first, but encryption/decryption of that much data with such an algorithm is going to require a pretty beefy conputer setup.
 
The Faceless Master

The Faceless Master

Member
Dreams-Visions said:
So about 750GB per officer to store 6 months of full 8-hour shifts. Assuming battery life issues could be resolved, hopefully this is something that can happen in the future. Also, that's about 1 exabyte for the entire US police force? Interesting. Anyway, that is a very reasonable amount of storage in 2017 on a per department basis and only gets more affordable as time goes along. Hopefully we get there.
Click to expand...

what battery life issues can they have if it's already always recording from a technical standpoint?

for it to have the 30 second rollback buffer, it has to already be continuously recording but just not permanently saving the data.
 
B

BigDes

Member
In an ideal world these things would be recording all the time and wireless streaming to an independent site whose location is not disclosed to the police.
 
S

ShironRedshift

Member
Enzom21 said:
https://twitter.com/BaltimorePolice/status/887760901842927616
They had a press conference...
"They might have been recreating the discovery of the drugs to document on their bodycams."
Yeah fuck all of them.
Click to expand...
Waiting for those good cops to show themselves. Just a few bad apples right? Everyone else on the force will surely be calling that out as BS any second now, right, since it's just the ones on video that are corrupt right?
...

Of course, all of this is just business as usual. Looks like nothing's changed in a year since this came out. Surprise, surprise:
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/just...ngs-investigation-baltimore-police-department
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
Justice Department Announces Findings of Investigation into Baltimore Police Department

Justice Department Finds a Pattern of Civil Rights Violations by the Baltimore Police Department

The Justice Department announced today that it found reasonable cause to believe that the Baltimore City Police Department (BPD) engages in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution as well as federal anti-discrimination laws. BPD makes stops, searches and arrests without the required justification; uses enforcement strategies that unlawfully subject African Americans to disproportionate rates of stops, searches and arrests; uses excessive force; and retaliates against individuals for their constitutionally-protected expression. The pattern or practice results from systemic deficiencies that have persisted within BPD for many years and has exacerbated community distrust of the police, particularly in the African-American community. The city and the department have also entered into an agreement in principle to work together, with community input, to create a federal court-enforceable consent decree addressing the deficiencies found during the investigation.

“Public trust is critical to effective policing and public safety,” said Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch. “Our investigation found that Baltimore is a city where the bonds of trust have been broken, and that the Baltimore Police Department engaged in a pattern or practice of unlawful and unconstitutional conduct, ranging from the use of excessive force to unjustified stops, seizures and arrests. The results of our investigation raise serious concerns, and in the days ahead, the Department of Justice will continue working tirelessly to ensure that all Baltimoreans enjoy the safety, security and dignity they expect and deserve. I am grateful to all of the community members, local officials, faith leaders and current and former police officers who spoke with us during the course of our inquiry, and whose input will remain critical to our efforts as we move forward. Additionally, I commend the city and BPD for its proactive and collaborative approach to our inquiry and for demonstrating a strong commitment to restoring public confidence by already taking steps to make needed changes. I look forward to continuing our work together to implement urgent and necessary reforms.”

“We found that BPD has engaged in a pattern or practice of serious violations of the U.S. Constitution and federal law that has disproportionately harmed Baltimore’s African-American community and eroded the public’s trust in the police,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, head of the Civil Rights Division. “The agency also fails to provide officers with the guidance, oversight and resources they need to police safely, constitutionally and effectively. In communities across America, even in communities where trust has been broken, we’ve seen transformative reform rebuild relationships and advance public safety. In the weeks ahead, as we negotiate our consent decree with the city, we will seek input from law enforcement and community members. With the city and commissioner’s commitment to reform, I am optimistic that we will work to drive that same progress in Baltimore.”

In May 2015, Attorney General Lynch announced the comprehensive investigation into the BPD after considering requests from city officials and hearing directly from community members about a potential pattern or practice of constitutional violations. The investigation focused on BPD’s use of force, including deadly force; stops, searches and arrests; and discriminatory policing.

In the course of its pattern or practice investigation, the department interviewed and met with city leaders and police officials, including BPD Commissioner Kevin Davis, former commissioners and numerous officers throughout all ranks of the police department; accompanied line officers on dozens of ride-alongs in every police district; conducted hundreds of interviews and participated in meetings with community members, activists, and other stakeholders; reviewed hundreds of thousands of pages of police documents, including all relevant policies and training materials; and analyzed BPD’s data on internal affairs, use of force, sexual assault cases and pedestrian stops, searches and arrests.

During the course of its investigation, the department found that the legacy of “zero tolerance” street enforcement, along with deficient policies, training and accountability systems, resulted in conduct that routinely violates the Constitution and federal anti-discrimination law. Throughout the investigation, the department heard consistently from both the community and law enforcement that BPD requires significant reforms to address problems that undermine its efforts to police constitutionally and effectively.

The department found reasonable cause to believe that BPD engages in a pattern or practice of:

Conducting stops, searches and arrests without meeting the requirements of the Fourth Amendment;
Focusing enforcement strategies on African Americans, leading to severe and unjustified racial disparities in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Safe Streets Act;
Using unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment;
Interacting with individuals with mental health disabilities in a manner that violates the Americans with Disabilities Act; and
Interfering with the right to free expression in violation of the First Amendment.
The department also identified serious concerns about other BPD practices, including an inadequate response to reports of sexual assault, which may result, at least in part, from underlying gender bias. Another significant concern identified by the department was transport practices that place detainees at significant risk of harm.

In the agreement in principle, both parties agreed that compliance with the consent decree will be reviewed by an independent monitor. The agreement in principle highlights specific areas of reform to be included in the consent decree, including:

Policies, training, data collection and analysis to allow for the assessment of officer activity and to ensure that officers’ actions conform to legal and constitutional requirements;
Technology and infrastructure to ensure capability to effectively monitor officer activity;
Officer support to ensure that officers are equipped to perform their jobs effectively and constitutionally; and
Community policing strategies to guide all aspects of BPD’s operations and help rebuild the relationship between BPD and the various communities it serves.
The agreement in principle provides a framework for change, but the department will be doing community outreach to solicit input in developing comprehensive reforms. Comments may be provided by email at Community.Baltimore@usdoj.gov (link sends e-mail).

Throughout the department’s investigation, BPD leadership remained receptive to preliminary feedback and technical assistance, and started the process of implementing reforms. BPD leadership has proactively taken steps to address some of the findings, including updating its policies, instituting new trainings and responding to other issues identified by the department. While these measures are an important start to cooperative reform, a comprehensive agreement is still needed to remedy all of the department’s findings.

In October 2014, city and BPD leadership requested to enter a collaborative reform process with the Justice Department’s Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS office). While the Civil Rights Division opened the pattern or practice investigation in May 2015, the COPS office, the Justice Department’s Office of Justice Programs and others have maintained their ongoing efforts to offer federal resources, such as technical assistance, to the BPD, city officials and community leaders.

This investigation was conducted by the Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section with the assistance of law enforcement professionals pursuant to the pattern or practice provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Over the last seven years, the Special Litigation Section has opened 23 investigations into law enforcement agencies. The section is enforcing 17 agreements with law enforcement agencies, including 14 consent decrees and one post-judgment order. For more information on the Civil Rights Division and the Special Litigation Section, please visit www.justice.gov/crt.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GTA III: behind the scenes of the game that propelled Rockstar to the top of the world
Analysis Retro Game Dev
47
8K
Uhtred replied
  • Locked
Cop gets caught turning off body cam to plant drugs on perp. Cam catches him anyway
1
2K
xxracerxx replied
Baltimore Drops More Cases After Third Video Shows ‘Questionable Police Activity’
8
2K
Future replied
Second body cam video shows Baltimore cops allegedly planting evidence
2 3
137
13K
GK86 replied
Body cam shows Baltimore police planting evidence
1
2K
shadow_shogun replied
Top Bottom