Sorry -- April fools! As this piece from the NYT, of all outlets, shows, the notion that police were brutalizing citizens simply because they wouldn't be seen doing it has now been shown to be false.
Indeed, the article goes so far as to suggest that the expense of bodycams isn't worth the candle, because the supposed police attitude of "I-can-do-it-because-you-won't-see-it" was a myth from the getgo.
Imagine that! Still, I tend to favor bodycams, because legal outcomes should be based on truth, and bodycams -- even when they don't catch much misbehavior by the police -- are sure to capture a boatload by arrestees.
The PDF working paper is here.
While I agree that body cams are sure to capture boatloads of crime by arrestees, the problem is that it captures far more of nothing to see. The advent of the body cam encourages less than ideal report writing and as prosecutors we end up having to watch hours and hours of mindless and useless body cam video to find the relevant material. We also have to make sure the defense doesn't pull out some stray fact and catch us off guard at trial.
While the jury is out on the issue, it would not surprise me if the efficiency loss in capturing, storing, producing, and watching the video exceeds the value of the evidence it produces. What was previously a five page report on a typical weekend a bar fight now takes nearly a full day of body cam video viewing to watch the five or six officer's cameras to find out what happened.
Sage insights from a prosecutor which prove that the law of unintended consequences is alive and well.
Camera footage (not body cam) has prevented some serious injustices, e.g., and off the top of my head, there was the incident in College Park, MD where cops seriously beat a University of Maryland student and then charged him with a crime and there was an incident in Milwaukee where a sheriff's deputy caused a car wreck and then, to cover it up, charged the seriously injured woman with driving under the influence (a bogus charge).
Alleged wrongdoing by cops is treated differently in America--any ordinary citizen who shot a woman dead after she (purportedly) banged on his car would be arrested immediately and would be facing at least manslaughter charges. Officer Noor is not. The public seems to be asking for body cams, and given the reality of high profile police misconduct, body cams are likely here to stay.
The real shame of all of this is that the various anti-police groups attempt to paint police as a whole as corrupt, racist, violent etc. The focus should be on bad apples. Body cams likely can help with that, especially if questionable incidents are reviewed for training opportunities or adverse employment consequences.