When an Indiana House committee last month advanced a bill that spelled out how and when video footage from police body cameras would be released to the public, we had serious reservations about the legislation and urged lawmakers not to pass the measure as written.
Our main concern with House Bill 1019 was that it required someone seeking video from a body cam to demonstrate why that footage should be released. In other words, the burden of proof for releasing what is clearly a public record would be placed upon the individual seeking the video.
Fortunately, clearer heads have prevailed in Indianapolis, and this week a Senate committee endorsed an amended bill that says law enforcement agencies that do not want to release body-cam video would have to justify that decision.
The changes, which received bipartisan support, flip the burden of proof from a member of the public trying to persuade a judge why a video should be released to the police department trying to convince a judge it shouldn’t be released. And that’s the right move.
The amendment backed by the committee also requires an expedited hearing when such issues come before the court and tightens airport security language that would have kept such videos secret.
What is certain to be a more controversial provision in the revised bill is one that forces law enforcement agencies to publicly release video if the recordings might show officers using excessive force or violating someone's civil rights.
While the committee’s 7-1 vote is a step in the right direction, final approval of the bill is far from a done deal. As the measure continues to move through the legislative process, we urge state lawmakers to keep those provisions intact.
The bill now moves to the Senate floor for a second reading, where it could be modified. In addition, additional changes could come if the bill’s House sponsor, Rep. Kevin Mahan, R-Hartford City, files a formal dissent on the Senate changes —- a move that would send the bill to a conference committee.
There is no question that this is a thorny issue in the Statehouse this session. Police around the state are concerned that allowing the release of body-cam videos could infringe upon the privacy of officers and victims. Some are also concerned that edited video could inaccurately portray a traffic stop or arrest and cast a negative light on the arresting officers.
But one of the main reasons behind having body cams is to document interactions between police and the public. If allegations of wrongdoing are made against an officer, the video should provide a clear account of what really happened. The importance of such evidence is clear in the recent police shootings in Chicago and other cities.
The changes to the legislation made by the Senate committee this week have significantly improved the bill. And the fact that the measure received bipartisan support among committee members bodes well for passage of the legislation as amended.
However, as we have seen with the recent debate over the Regional Cities Initiative funding, nothing is a done deal in Indianapolis until it’s a done deal.
We realize there may be some additional tweaks to the bill before it clears the General Assembly. That’s part of the political process. It’s imperative, however, that the main focus of the revised legislation — requiring police agencies to defend their decision not to release a video — remain untouched.