The Cop Who Killed Laquan McDonald Had Broken His Dashcam On Purpose, Report Says
Source: Huff Post
The Chicago police officer who fatally shot black teenager Laquan McDonald intentionally damaged his dashcam and never synced his microphone to it. And he's not the only one.
More than 1,800 police maintenance logs first obtained by DNAinfo Chicago show a disturbing trend of Chicago cops intentionally and routinely tampering with their dashcams and mics in an effort to block audio.
Jason Van Dyke, the officer charged with fatally shooting 17-year-old McDonald in October 2014, caused "intentional damage" to his dashcam at least once, along with other instances of his dashcam breaking, the logs show. The day of the killing, audio wasn't picked up by Van Dyke's car, nor by the squad car next to his.
The vehicle did pick up video, however, which shows Van Dyke shooting McDonald 16 times
Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/chicago-police-damaged-dashcam-microphones_us_56a952f6e4b0d82286d4e101
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)There's no reason to damage your cam or the audio unless you're planning to commit criminal actions.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)christx30
(6,241 posts)And add Destruction of Evidence to the list of charges, if any. It does show that he was planning something he knew was wrong, but didn't want anyone to find out about it.
"Yes, sir, I shredded those tax documents. But they were boring, and I didn't want to bother the auditor from the IRS. We good, right?"
nyabingi
(1,145 posts)This should be seen as murder in the first degree and I don't see how it can be viewed any other way.
trillion
(1,859 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)I don't believe in that kind of coincidence.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Killers and law breakers.
monicaangela
(1,508 posts)we have a corrupt justice system from the bottom up and top down. Why are these Dash Cams etc., left vulnerable to destruction by the police officers that use them. You would think that there would be a way to program these items so that any corruption of the service would send a signal to the police tech department, and that signal would require the office to bring the car in immediately, or something to that effect.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)Those are the things that are important to most police department employees.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)frizzled
(509 posts)That would stop this kind of crap from happening pretty quick.
greiner3
(5,214 posts)We wouldn't know how many times he fired
Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)Kber
(5,043 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)a law that if dashcam/bodycam aren't working, they cannot pursue suspects. Period.
atreides1
(16,094 posts)Can the dashcam be connected to the vehicle ignition system, and if tampered with the vehicle won't start!
Aerows
(39,961 posts)1. Camera failure with a suspect injured during arrest means automatic leave until the matter is thoroughly investigated.
2. If convicted of tampering with the camera, incarceration.
3. Hidden additional camera that officers are unaware of.
#3 would bust those that damaged their known camera while still collecting data. You would have to keep a very tight lip on the fact that an additional camera is installed, though. Maybe utilize the existing wiring harness/areas that are already factory installed for services like OnStar which are disabled or not implemented in police fleet vehicles.