Jill Disis

jill.disis@indystar.com

Indianapolis law enforcement officials will begin testing a body-camera pilot program this month, following nationwide calls for increased accountability among police officers sparked by the controversial shooting of black teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo.

While Indianapolis officials say they have been researching body cameras since January, the technology entered the national spotlight in August, when Brown, 18, was shot and killed by Darren Wilson, a white Ferguson police officer. The altercation was not videotaped.

"I am certainly a big proponent" of cameras, said Public Safety Director Troy Riggs. "I have been a big proponent for years for cameras in cars, and now, body cameras."

Civil rights activists have lauded body cameras as a way to document irrefutable evidence of police misconduct, while law enforcement officials say the cameras can protect officers from false accusations and record evidence that could become crucial if needed in court.

Lt. Mark Wood of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department said at least six IMPD officers will use the cameras once testing begins Dec. 15, including four patrol officers, one member of the department's investigations team and a traffic officer from the city's Division of Homeland Security.

Indianapolis joins a growing number of police departments that have announced similar plans in recent days, including Chicago and Philadelphia. The recent surge of interest in body cameras marks a significant change from a year ago, when 75 percent of law enforcement agencies were not using the technology, according to a report released in September by the Police Executive Research Forum, a law-enforcement think tank. The survey included 254 agencies.

After grand jurors in St. Louis County decided last week not to indict Wilson, the Ferguson police officer, Brown's family announced a campaign urging patrol officers to wear cameras.

On Monday, President Barack Obama's administration also weighed in with a call for new rules regarding police equipment. Part of that proposal included a $75 million plan for 50,000 new body cameras to be worn by police officers.

"I'd love to hear that Washington is possibly going to give out more federal dollars for law enforcement," said Valerie Washington, deputy director of public safety. "But first, we look at our own internal revenue sources."

Equipping all of IMPD's roughly 1,500 officers with body cameras is a costly proposal. In addition to the cameras, valued at between $800 and $1,200 per unit, officials would also need to consider the cost of additional storage for the videos as well as maintenance for the cameras, said Brian Reeder, who was a member of a city efficiency team that researched the cameras.

Reeder estimated the total cost at from $2 million to $3 million.

Riggs also said there are other concerns, such as whether the use of body cameras could potentially infringe on constitutional rights.

"These things are never as simple as they seem," Riggs said. "What happens when an individual enters someone's private property? Does the camera have to go off in their yards? What happens when they pass the threshold of the doorway? What are the Fourth Amendment consequences to that?"

Even after the city's pilot program kicks off, officials said it's a long way before every police officer is equipped with a camera. Assuming the pilot program lasts six weeks, Wood said, officials would then need to review the test equipment and go through a bidding process before making a purchase.

So far, Wood said, reaction from other law enforcement agencies to the new equipment has been positive. According to the Police Executive Research Forum report, a police department in Rialto, Calif., reported a significant reduction in officer use of force and citizen complaints after they started using cameras.

The department in Rialto said it found a 60 percent reduction in use of force by officers using the cameras, as well as an 88 percent fall in the number of citizen complaints filed between the year before the cameras were implemented and the year after.

Scott Baldwin, a retired police officer who spent more than a dozen years working for IMPD, said he sees body-camera use by police officers as inevitable.

"I think the general public feels strongly about the need for transparency in law enforcement. I think they're going to press and press until there's cameras in every vehicle, on every officer, and monitoring devices are ubiquitous."

While Baldwin said he can see some disadvantages to using body cameras — police might second-guess some of their actions, he said, — ultimately, he saw it as a positive step forward for law enforcement.

"I think, for the most part, these devices are going to allow us to take a look at certain sets of circumstances and incidents and determine whether we did something the right way, or we need additional training," he said. "Or, (it could) help the public understand what police are up against on a daily basis."

Wood said he also has heard concerns from officers about whether the chest-mounted video cameras would invade their privacy, and how long they were expected to keep them active.

"You don't have to worry about it recording you while you're eating and keeping that for the long term," Wood said, adding that officers would have to manually activate the video cameras.

The cameras that officers are testing also include a special audio function, Wood said. Even when the video camera has not been turned on, the audio constantly records in 30-second loops. When 30 seconds passes, Wood said, the previous 30-second file will be truncated and deleted.

Once the body camera is turned on, Wood said, it also will keep the last 30-second stretch of audio, plus all new audio and video that is recorded after the officer switches it on.

At the end of the officer's shift, Wood said the video file will be wirelessly transmitted to storage via hotspots installed at IMPD's roll call sites. Wood said innocuous video would likely be stored for two weeks, while video that could be used as evidence in a criminal case would be kept until the case is closed.

As other cities also begin rolling out body-camera pilot programs, some experts cautioned against treating the cameras as a cure-all for every problem between police and the public.

"Everybody thinks that's the panacea, and this will change everything," said Jim White, a public safety lecturer at Indiana University-Purdue University in Indianapolis.

"That's not the issue. We keep dancing around the issue — the issue is police-community relations," he said. "And I'm all for body cameras, if that will have a viable impact. But to think that body cameras is the end-all is not the answer."

USA TODAY contributed to this story.

Call Star reporter Jill Disis at (317) 444-6137. Follow her on Twitter: @jdisis.