NYPD's Body Camera Footage Delays Raise Concerns About Transparency and Accountability
A recent audit by the New York City Comptroller's office has found that the NYPD has consistently failed to meet deadlines for releasing body-worn camera footage, often not turning it over until after a request was appealed. The audit, which reviewed police body-worn camera footage requested through New York's freedom of information law, revealed that in many cases, the department took more than 25 business days to respond to requests, far exceeding the standard timeline set by city agencies.
The delay has sparked concerns about transparency and accountability within the NYPD, with Comptroller Brad Lander arguing that the lack of timely release of footage undermines the intended purpose of body-worn cameras. "With proper oversight, body-worn cameras are a tool for gathering evidence, strengthening accountability, improving policing practices, and building trust," Lander said in a statement.
However, an NYPD official has pushed back against the audit's methodology and conclusions, arguing that using data from 2020 as a reference point is methodologically flawed due to the city's unique circumstances during that year. The department also disputed the notion that 25 business days is a standard time period for responding to FOIL requests, pointing out that the 95-day timeframe has been upheld in court.
The audit found that nearly all of the denied requests were later granted after an appeal, often due to the requesters appealing before the department decided whether to release footage. Additionally, the review discovered that officers did not follow proper videotaping procedures in about 18% of cases, with cameras being turned on too late or stopped too early during encounters.
Despite these findings, the NYPD has agreed to several recommendations aimed at improving transparency and oversight of body-worn camera footage, including increasing staffing at its Legal Bureau to respond to FOIL requests and investigate lower activation rates at certain precincts. However, the department's response raises questions about whether these steps will be sufficient to address the issues raised by the audit.
A recent audit by the New York City Comptroller's office has found that the NYPD has consistently failed to meet deadlines for releasing body-worn camera footage, often not turning it over until after a request was appealed. The audit, which reviewed police body-worn camera footage requested through New York's freedom of information law, revealed that in many cases, the department took more than 25 business days to respond to requests, far exceeding the standard timeline set by city agencies.
The delay has sparked concerns about transparency and accountability within the NYPD, with Comptroller Brad Lander arguing that the lack of timely release of footage undermines the intended purpose of body-worn cameras. "With proper oversight, body-worn cameras are a tool for gathering evidence, strengthening accountability, improving policing practices, and building trust," Lander said in a statement.
However, an NYPD official has pushed back against the audit's methodology and conclusions, arguing that using data from 2020 as a reference point is methodologically flawed due to the city's unique circumstances during that year. The department also disputed the notion that 25 business days is a standard time period for responding to FOIL requests, pointing out that the 95-day timeframe has been upheld in court.
The audit found that nearly all of the denied requests were later granted after an appeal, often due to the requesters appealing before the department decided whether to release footage. Additionally, the review discovered that officers did not follow proper videotaping procedures in about 18% of cases, with cameras being turned on too late or stopped too early during encounters.
Despite these findings, the NYPD has agreed to several recommendations aimed at improving transparency and oversight of body-worn camera footage, including increasing staffing at its Legal Bureau to respond to FOIL requests and investigate lower activation rates at certain precincts. However, the department's response raises questions about whether these steps will be sufficient to address the issues raised by the audit.