Body Worn Video Steering Group
William B. Scott is the author of “The Permit,” a novel based on his son’s murder. His son Erik Scott, 38, was shot by Metro officers William Mosher, Joshua Stark and Thomas Mendiola on July 10, 2010, as he walked out of a Costco store, and Scott believes body worn video could have prevented this tragedy.
Writing for Politico, the former Rocky Mountain Bureau Chief for Aviation Week & Space Technology and a Flight Test Engineer graduate of the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School questions why his son was killed, and how body cameras can play a part in preventing future incidents such as his loss:
My eldest son, Erik Scott, might be alive today if Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department officers had been required to wear body cameras in the summer of 2010, when Erik was shot to death. Officer William Mosher—who panicked and shot my son as Erik and his girlfriend calmly walked out the door of a Costco—had already killed one man, in his first five years on the Metro force.
Erik’s shooting was ruled “justified” because Costco security system video was destroyed via collaboration between local Costco personnel and Metro detectives. That evidence would have proven Erik was murdered in cold blood. With no video data, a coroner’s inquest jury had no alternative but to accept the blatantly false accounts of on-scene police officers.
If he’d been wearing a bodycam, Mosher might not have panicked and fired at Erik. Having narrowly escaped criminal charges before, Mosher might have asked himself—as he hovered near the door of Costco, shaking in fear, according to witnesses: “If I shoot and kill again, will I be fired? Will criminal charges be filed against me?” With his and dozens of other cops’ body cameras documenting every move, there would have been no escaping the truth this time.
Given what we now know about the fatal shooting of Walter Scott in North Charleston, S.C., it’s reasonable to ask the same question about the police officer who killed him, Michael Slager. Would he have acted the way he did had he known it would all be captured on video?
Unfortunately, Slager’s attempt to cover up his apparently unprovoked shooting of Walter Scott isn’t unusual. The veracity of police officers everywhere is being questioned, simply because far too many cops are guilty of duplicity.
Law enforcement and its apologists are quick to declare that most police officers are good, honourable troops, are never quick to shoot, and don’t reflexively lie. Still, a sizeable percentage of today’s officers are guilty of such misdeeds.
The answer, it seems to me, is simple: If you’re entrusted with a badge and gun, then you must be held accountable by being required to wear bodycams and accept zero-tolerance protocols that ensure their proper use.
Honest, well-behaved officers actually welcome body cameras, knowing they are an effective tool of both deterrence and protection. Body-worn cameras are a powerful inhibition to the use of deadly force, because they literally are “unimpeachable witnesses.”
Consider the case of my son. Body cameras on officers Mosher, Thomas Mendiola and Joshua Stark (the three shooters, who fired seven rounds into Erik, including five in his back) might have motivated the officers to opt for a much different tactic: Follow Erik into the Costco parking lot, calmly talk to him, then check his legal concealed-carry weapon permit. Every officer would have gone home safely, and Erik Scott would be alive today.
That was almost five years ago, when bodycams were relatively new. Today, cameras are ubiquitous. Fixed-base cameras monitor street intersections, government facilities, retail stores, homes and offices.
Additionally, most citizens now carry camera-equipped cell phones, and are quick to film any interaction between police officers and civilians.
There’s a very high probability that an officer’s actions will be captured, as evidenced by the invaluable cell phone video of the Walter Scott shooting. And the game-changing value of video data cannot be overstated.
In South Carolina, if bystander Feidin Santana hadn’t secured irrefutable proof that Officer Slager systematically shot and killed Scott, Slager’s fabricated claim about fearing for his life—and Scott taking his Taser—would have been accepted without question.
Not only did Santana’s video constitute evidence that Slager literally murdered Scott—shooting the victim in the back, as he ran away—it documented the cop retrieving his Taser, then dropping it near Scott’s body. In other words, a bystander’s video exposed an attempted cover up of a homicide-by-cop and refuted the killer’s fallacious report—which North Charleston officials had accepted and promulgated as fact.
A bodycam ensures events are captured close-up and can be reviewed from the officer’s perspective. Video and audio records back up their version of an encounter, and ensure far fewer complaints are lodged by citizens. Bodycams also document heroic actions, such as the recent case of a cop rescuing a child from a burning home.
Finally, experience validates that cameras often deter criminals from mouthing off or attacking officers, because even bad guys realize they can’t hide from that unflinching camera’s eye.