October 10, 2024

If police have violated your civil rights through the use of excessive force, you may be able to file a lawsuit. A civil rights and police misconduct lawyer at the Helbraun Law Firm can help you get accountability and justice by helping you take legal action.

Police officers are coming under increasing scrutiny over how they do their jobs and whether they follow the law. Unlike in the past, police officers may operate with more accountability, if only because there are more ways to monitor their conduct and prove that they may have broken the law. Footage shot with cell phone cameras and recordings from body cameras worn by police officers may be used as evidence in a police misconduct lawsuit.

Schedule a free initial consultation with the Helbraun Law Firm today to learn more about your legal rights. We are your protector and advocate when the police’s wrongful actions have made you feel powerless.

Technology Can Help You Prove What a Police Officer Has Done

Some experts are pointing to technology as a way of enhancing law enforcement accountability and reducing instances of police misconduct. Over the past decade or so, there have been numerous advances in technology that allow for increased monitoring of police officers as they do their daily jobs. Further, individuals have their own means of recording police, both letting law enforcement officers know that they are always being watched and obtaining evidence that can be used in police misconduct lawsuits.

In 1991, a Los Angeles plumber named George Holliday, shot nine minutes of grainy footage on a home video camera of four police officers brutally beating a man named Rodney King. The officers were charged with state law crimes, although they were initially acquitted (the police officers were eventually convicted of federal civil rights charges). This incident was one of the first notorious instances in which police officers were charged with misconduct based on a home recording.

With the advent of the smartphone, people are now able to regularly record police officers and the actions that they take when interacting with civilians. For example, when George Floyd was murdered by a Minneapolis Police officer, the footage was taken by a bystander. Countless other instances of excessive force by police have been captured on cell phones, and the officers have been charged criminally based on this evidence. In some cases, it has been the video evidence that was largely effective in helping prosecutors win a conviction against the police officer.

Most Police Officers Now Wear Body Cameras

In the wake of numerous incidents of police brutality and excessive use of force, there has been a movement to more closely monitor police officers on the job. When a police officer has the knowledge that they are not only being watched, but there is a means to record their behavior and use it as evidence against them, they may be more likely to follow the law in any account or with citizens. However, some research has shown that the use of body cameras has not necessarily reduced police brutality or misconduct.

Body-worn cameras have recently started to be used in major police departments across the country. In New York City, the police department began to use body cameras in response to an order from a federal court after the department was found to have used an illegal stop-and-frisk program targeting minorities. Federal funds helped spur their increasing adoption, to the point where 80% of large police departments were using body cameras by 2016.

Body cameras are supposed to let police officers know that they are continuously being watched. If there are any complaints about the police officers’ actions, supervisors or courts can review the body camera footage.

In addition, both police officers and motorists often use dash cams to record footage from cars. By 2016, over 80% of police departments had dash cams installed in their vehicles, and the number has risen since then. Drivers have also taken to purchasing dash cams to protect themselves, both from police misconduct and other drivers on the road. When a police officer has pulled a motorist over at a traffic stop, the driver may have their own dash cam recording what happens.

Admissibility of Video Evidence in Court

Body camera evidence is generally public record, although police place many hurdles in your way if you are trying to view a recording. In addition, the police may not give you a copy of the video to use for a case, especially if you are suing them. However, it is possible to obtain and use body camera evidence in a lawsuit for police misconduct.

Still, to introduce body cam evidence in a police misconduct trial, you must meet the requirements of rules of evidence. One of the main requirements is that you are able to authenticate the evidence that you are using in your case. In addition, you must show that there was a clear chain of custody of the evidence from the time that it was recorded until you are trying to use it in court. Finally, the recordings must be irrelevant to your case to be admissible.

If you are able to meet these requirements, recordings of police actions can be extremely valuable evidence in a misconduct lawsuit. either your video, or recordings obtained directly from the police, can back up your side of the story when you claim that the officer broke the law and violated your civil rights.

Contact a San Francisco Police Misconduct Lawyer Today

If the actions of law enforcement have harmed you, schedule a free initial consultation with a San Francisco police misconduct attorney at the Helbraun Law Firm today. Our police misconduct law firm can help you mount an aggressive legal case that could show why you deserve financial compensation. You can schedule an appointment with a police misconduct attorney by reaching out to us online or by calling us today at 415-982-4000.

David M. Helbraun

Attorney David M. Helbraun at the Helbruan Law Firm in San Francisco emphasize litigation and conflict resolution in the areas of legal malpractice, civil rights & police misconduct and insurance & tort litigation.