Body Worn Video Policy (PS 306)
BACKGROUND
Body Worn Video (BWV) is a vital tool in the fight against crime and driving transparency of usage of Police powers and interaction with our communities. BWV can be utilised in many aspects of Policing and partnership work and brings with it opportunities to offer an improved service to the public through better quality and more robust evidence in cases, victimless prosecutions and improved efficiency through behaviour modification in the presence of BWV influencing fewer assaults on Police Officers, Police Staff (including PCSOs) and partners and a reduction in the use of force (Rialto, 2013).
ABOUT THIS POLICY
This policy explains the approach to the use of BWV and is aimed at all staff and members of the wider police family involved in the criminal justice system within Nottinghamshire, and to help inform the wider community of the strategic aims of the use of body worn video, this policy should be read in conjunction with:
This policy is bespoke to Nottinghamshire Police and members of the wider policing family including strategic partners. It has been developed to allow common working practices, and assists in compliance with the 12 guiding principles as detailed within the Surveillance Camera Code Of Practice 2021 and the five body-worn video principles laid down by the National Police Chiefs Councils (NPCC) Body-Worn Video V1.0 guidance of October 2022:
-
Principle 1 - The use of body-worn video, by the police, is lawful.
-
Principle 2 - Data will be processed and managed in line with data protection legislation and the NPCC Digital and Physical Evidence Retention Guidance.
-
Principle 3 - The majority of use of body-worn video will be overt.
-
Principle 4 - The operational use of body-worn video must be proportionate, legitimate and necessary and incident specific. Officers will use common sense and sound judgement when using body-worn video, in support of the principles of best evidence. Body-worn video does not replace conventional forms of evidence gathering (such as written statements and Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) interviews, it supports them.
-
Principle 5 - Forces will consult locally with their communities on the use of body-worn video.
Body-worn video (BWV) is an overt method by which police users, police staff and partners (from here on in known as ‘users’) can obtain and secure best evidence at the scene of an incident or crime, as well as being used for the protection of the public, or for any other policing purpose.
This policy is intended to enable users to comply with legislation and informs the user of other sources of information to enable the full and correct use of body-worn video equipment, the retention, review and disposal of evidential and non-evidential footage, and the evidential process from image capture to court of body-worn video footage.
BWV must only be used where it is justifiable and necessary, its use must take into account its effects on individuals and their privacy. There are situations where the use of BWV is not appropriate, some of which are detailed in this document but these do not form an exhaustive list, users and supervisors must use their professional judgement with regard to recording in-line with legislation, best practice and the national decision model.
Public reassurance is important to Nottinghamshire Police, and through a Privacy Impact Assessment, the impact of body-worn video on public reassurance will be monitored.
This procedure does not deal with covert or directed surveillance, which is covered by the codes of practice issued under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.
PROCEDURE
Training
The use of BWV and any supporting software is restricted to those who have received formal training. Training includes attending a specified training event or self-learning through the resources on the Nottinghamshire Police Body Worn Video intranet page and the on-line College of Policing (formally NCALT) packages. Until users have completed a specified training event, normally delivered during initial training, they are not able to be deployed operationally with the device.
As the use of BWV is a 'core skill', all users in identified roles, will be trained in its use. In addition, other users such as negotiators and Tactical Firearms Commanders may also utilise body-worn video.
A training package has been developed which includes:
-
Why body-worn video is being used
-
Equipment familiarisation
-
Using the camera
-
Using the Back Office Software
-
-
Practical and legal considerations including
-
Tactical options and considerations including:
-
Practical use
-
Recording an incident
-
using video to prepare statements
-
reviewing first accounts with witnesses
-
Evidential continuity
-
Health and Safety Issues
-
Diversity issues
-
Stop and Search
-
Professional Standards
-
Equipment Issue
When not in use, all equipment must be stored in a suitable location within the police station. Where cameras are not personal issue, a Kiosk LAN Machine will be used to issue and return cameras, or other suitable system must be available in order to show evidential continuity if required. A small number of specific users such as on call negotiators may take their devices home and they remain responsible for the security of the device.
As the benefits of body-worn video have been evidenced, it is mandatory that all users, once trained will deploy with the equipment as standard practice during that tour of duty.
When issued with the equipment the user must ensure that it is working correctly prior to leaving the station. This should include the following basic checks:
-
The unit is undamaged
-
Recording picture is the right way up
-
Sound recording level is appropriate to use
-
Date and time stamp is accurate
-
There is sufficient memory available for the shift ahead
-
There is sufficient battery life available for the shift ahead
Recording an Incident
The decision to record or not to record any incident generally remains with the user, although recording an event must be justified and necessary in the circumstances the user is faced with. It would be for the user to document / present their rational for recording or not recording an event.
Users must not indiscriminately record entire duties or patrols and must only use recording to capture video and audio at incidents that would normally be the subject of PNB entries or as ‘professional observation’, whether or not these are ultimately required for use in evidence. Therefore, if the user is present at an evidential encounter or an encounter which from professional observation evidence is likely to be captured they should record the incident. Users should also conduct recording when using a Police Power, this includes but is not limited to Stop and Search, s.17 PACE, s.163 RTA and Use of Force.
The use of BWV at each incident must be subjected to a dynamic risk assessment on its own merits. The risk assessment must include the consideration of the health and safety, human rights and welfare of all those involved. The general risk assessments for uniform police-work or role specific risk assessment for a nonuniformed role should be borne in mind along with any specific risk assessments relating to body-worn video.
Nottinghamshire Police has mandated that Body-Worn Video will be used;
-
At all Domestic Abuse / Violence incidents,
-
During all stop and search encounters.
-
During all taser deployments.
A robust documented rationale will be required if a recording is not made.
When a body-worn video user is approached by victims or witnesses who are giving their first account of a crime and a recording of this is made the user should treat this as an evidential recording and submit it to the investigating officer. This is important under compliance with statutory identification procedures under PACE Code D. Such recordings do not replace the need for formal written statements but they can be used as supporting evidence and used in accordance with the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
If a members of the public was to specifically request that any encounter or interaction is recorded, even if the user does not feel that there is any evidential reason to do so and there is no clear reason to not record, the user should record such an encounter. The user though should inform the person requesting the recording that, unless there is an evidential reason to retain the footage, it will be automatically deleted in line with local guidelines.
In principle, users are not required to obtain the expressed consent of any person being filmed. If any person requests that the BWV be switched off, the user should advise the subject that:
-
Any non-evidential material is not retained for any longer than necessary
-
This material is restricted and cannot be disclosed to third parties without the subject’s express authority, unless prescribed by law
-
Recorded material can sometimes be police information and can be accessed on request in writing in accordance with a subject access request in accordance with the DPA or evidential disclosure (as appropriate).
It is then for the user to consider on a case-by-case basis whether or not to switch the BWV off. There should always be a tendency to record (within the confines of legislation) unless circumstances dictate otherwise, further guidance to aid decision making in specific circumstances can be found below.
Start recording early
It is acknowledged that the dynamic nature of Policing can result in a delay to commencing a recording, for evidential quality and transparency a recording should begin at the earliest opportunity from the start of an incident.
Recording Introduction
At the commencement of any recording the user should, where practicable, make a verbal announcement in plain English detailing;
-
Date, time and location
-
To those present that the incident is now being recorded using both video and audio
-
Why the recording has been activated
If the recording has commenced prior to arrival at the scene of an incident the user should, as soon as is practicable, announce to those persons present at the incident that audio and video recording is taking place. This may not be practical for specific users such as negotiators where informing a vulnerable person that they are being recorded may increase the risk of a threat to life.
Selective Capture / Interrupting Filming
In general the Body-Worn Video user should record entire encounters from beginning to end without the recording being interrupted; however, the nature of some incidents may make it necessary for the user to consider the justification for continuing to record throughout entire incidents.
For example, the recording may be stopped in cases of a sensitive nature or if the incident has concluded prior to the arrival of the BWV user. In all cases the user should exercise their professional judgment in deciding whether or not to record all or part of an incident. In cases where the user does interrupt or cease recording at an on-going incident, they should record their decision on the recording prior to concluding or if not practical in a pocket notebook or similar log. Areas for consideration include;
Collateral Intrusion
In so far as is practicable, users should restrict recording to areas and persons necessary in order to obtain evidence and intelligence relevant to the incident and should attempt to minimise collateral intrusion to those not involved. The recording by body-worn video is not subject to RIPA when used overtly for ongoing spontaneous incidents.
Mental Health Assessments
In any incident that involves mental health issues, the recording of the ongoing spontaneous incident should be recorded in line with the principles in this document, however at the point that a mental health assessment is carried out by a health care professional, users should cease recording unless there are exceptional circumstances to continue.
Private Dwellings
It is of paramount importance that the necessity and proportionality test is applied to any use of body-worn video in private dwellings. Users must consider the right to private and family life (Article 8 of the ECHR) and must not record beyond what is necessary for the evidential requirements of the case.
Users may find that one party objects to the recording taking place; for example where domestic abuse is apparent. In such circumstances users should consider whether recording should continue, the below assisting with that assessment;
-
Is recording justified and necessary in the circumstances they are faced with,
-
Would the circumstances be the subject of PNB entries or ‘professional observation’
-
Are the circumstances and evidential encounter or an encounter which from professional observation evidence is likely to be captured,
It would be for the user to document / present their rational for recording or not recording an event.
If they decide to continue recording they should explain the reasons for continuing.
BWV can also be used to record the location and proximity of objects, evidence, and people at the scene of a crime or during the search of premises. This can be particularly beneficial in allowing the senior investigating officer an opportunity to review scenes of serious crime or effectively recording the positions of vehicles and debris at the scene of a serious road traffic collision. This should be treated as an evidential recording and where possible the officer should provide a ‘running commentary' of factual information to assist later viewers.
When conducting a premises search, body-worn video can be used to show the entry and a pre and post search walk through. The filming of an entire search from start to end would produce a large amount of data, that requires storage and reviewing (CPIA guidance) and should be subject to a policy decision and not necessarily the norm so as to minimise collateral intrusion.
There is no reason that the seizure of any item during the search cannot be recorded on an individual basis. Recording of questions by the exhibit officer to any persons present about items found on premises, and/or any other significant statements should also be captured. This could greatly assist the completion of search logs and evidence presented at court will be enhanced.
At serious crime scenes, SIO’s may wish to consider BWV use by scene guards to capture potential witnesses or offenders returning to the scene.
Sensitivities connected with individuals / communities
The filming in some circumstances may cause concern with some individuals or communities due to their religious or cultural beliefs and practices. These should be recognised and respected and users should be aware of this fact and be sensitive to the wishes of those involved in these cases.
Concluding filming
Recording should conclude as soon as continuing to do so is no longer justifiable, necessary and proportionate.
It is considered advisable that the user continues to record for a short period after the incident to clearly demonstrate to any subsequent viewer that the incident has concluded and the user has resumed other duties or activities. Recording may also be concluded when the user attends another area such as a custody centre where other recording devices are able to take over the recording.
Prior to concluding recording the user should make a verbal announcement to indicate the reason for ending the recording this should state:
-
Date, time and location
-
Reason for concluding recording
Deletion / Retention of footage
Once a recording has been completed this becomes police information and must be retained and handled in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Management of Police Information, Data Protection and in line with other legislative and best practice guidance.
All material recorded to the body-worn video unit should be downloaded at the end of the users tour of duty. The downloaded video image file will be electronically stored and saved. Where this is not possible for technical / practical reasons (e.g. bandwidth), a detailed rationale should be recorded in the user’s notebook, a record of the footage recorded made on the occurrence relating to the recording, and the footage should be uploaded at the earliest opportunity.
The footage on the body-worn video device will be deleted after the transfer of data unless there is a technological recording failure.
Downloaded footage marked as non-evidential will be automatically deleted after 31 days. Evidential and unused material will be saved for a period of time in accordance with Management of Police Information (MOPI) guidelines.
Nottinghamshire Police backs up files on a disaster recovery server, and deleted footage from DEMS will be kept (at a lower quality) for a short period of time on the DR server before being deleted.
Production and Disclosure of Exhibits
In order for the recorded evidence to be presented in court, a copy must be preserved and marked as an exhibit. This can be stored on a secure server or on hard disk.
Evidence should be recorded and marked as an exhibit as soon as practicable after the footage has been downloaded. Users should not start duty with a recording device that contains evidence of cases from a previous duty or day.
Creation of exhibits should follow the 4 ACPO principles and Digital Imaging and Multimedia Procedure v3.0 (Nov 2021) and a ‘master’ copy or original footage containing all footage of the incident must be created and stored in accordance with local force procedures. The master copy or original footage should be a ‘bit-for-bit' copy of the recording on the device. Nottinghamshire Police’s DEMS system uses fingerprint SHAH to ensure bit for bit copies are made, thereby ensuring the integrity of the footage.
Where more than one body-worn video device is present at the scene of an incident or the area of the incident is also covered by a CCTV system, the officer in the case must ensure that all available footage of the incident is secured as exhibits or unused material. As a reminder, all material in a case should be reviewed by the exhibits officer to assess whether it undermines the prosecution or assists the defence; this includes both evidential and unused material.
Users dealing with all cases involving video and CCTV evidence must be mindful of the ‘Birmingham defence', whereby a video recording had not been disclosed to the defence, even after specific requests for unused material to be served were made. By the time of the trial the tape could not be found and there was no prospect of it being found. It was held that the prosecution was under a duty to disclose; that the defence was prejudiced as a result of the nondisclosure; and that a fair trial was therefore impossible. All body-worn video footage will need to be identified by the investigating/disclosure officer of an incident, regardless how minimal it may be for this purpose.
If the body-worn video software fails and users are unable to download footage that is evidential it is recommended that users place the camera in an evidence bag and seal it. The handling of that camera and footage can then be recorded until such time as footage can be downloaded. This allows for effective evidential continuity of the footage. Advice should be sought from Force Digital Evidence Investigation Unit (DEIU) or Information Service Desks to ensure that evidence is correctly downloaded.
In general terms body-worn video recordings should be disclosed to the defence in the same manner as other case exhibits. It should only be necessary to provide copy data to the defence in the case of actual or anticipated not guilty pleas.
Pixilation of Footage
Footage captured during an ongoing spontaneous incident and subsequently classed at evidential or unused material, ordinarily should not require pixilation or other editing. In the same vein, any footage that is non-evidential and due to be deleted after 31 days should also not ordinarily be required to be pixelated or otherwise edited.
If footage is required to be pixelated, this should be carried out by the DEIU.
Footage that could be subject to pixilation could include footage released to the media (for example – a Crime watch appeal), and footage due to be released under FOI or subject access request.
STOP & SEARCH
Standard Search
‘Stop and search’ encounters will be recorded unless the search is an ‘intimate search’ or ‘strip search’ or if the search requires removal of more than outer clothing (see below).
A video recording does not replace the need for a ‘record of search’ to be completed by the officer.
Any clips that are evidential in nature, i.e. there has been an evidential find, should be marked as such on the back office software (if the software allows) and also categorised as ‘Stop and Search’.
There is currently no specific power within PACE to take a photographic or video image of a person during a stop search, although such action is not explicitly prohibited.
Nottinghamshire Police, as part of their Stop-and-Search auditing process may decide to use stop-and-search data to search for specific clips on their back office system, and view such footage to audit the compliance of users against legislation. Footage, or the lack of, should be seen as a learning opportunity for both the Force and the user, providing an opportunity to give either positive or developmental feedback.
Nottinghamshire Police also allow the use of any body-worn video footage that is recorded during a stop and search to be scrutinised by a Stop and Search Scrutiny Board the process for which is documented, managed and directed by the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner. The Force Stop and Search lead will be responsible for making available requested footage. The use of footage in this way can increase transparency and allows Nottinghamshire Police to obtain feedback to feed into best practice. This has to be balanced against the Human Rights of the individual filmed concerned and any due process, sensitive personal data will be processed under the Data Protection Act exemption of ‘the processing is necessary for monitoring equality of opportunity, and is carried out with appropriate safeguards for the rights of the individual’.
Strip / Intimate searches
Body-worn video must not be used for the direct filming or photographic recording of strip / intimate searches or in any other circumstances where persons are in a state of undress. This will include circumstances where more than outer clothing is removed. If there is a requirement to record the audio of the search the lens of the device should be placed against a wall or other non-reflective surface or covered by a non-porous material so that audio of the search can be recorded.
SERIOUS SEXUAL OFFENCES
Obtaining initial disclosure when responding to an incident of a sexual nature / offence. This has been agreed with CPS and is also being adopted by the College of Policing:
Should I turn my Body Worn Video Camera on when I attend an incident of rape or serious sexual assault?
If the incident has just happened & you attend the scene then yes. Record the complainant’s demeanour, injuries & capturing the initial scene. There is no requirement to obtain their permission to do this.
Please then switch the camera off but having obtained the complainant’s informed & genuine consent, audio record the victim’s first account. This will capture all the information which might be lost in your handwritten notes, but it also defends the integrity of your conversations from accusations of coaching or leading a witness. For clarity, if you cannot turn off the video, then turn the camera away from the complainant and capture the audio on it.
In terms of informed & genuine consent we rely on your professional judgement. There is no minimum age, although with young children you should obtain the consent of the person with Parental Responsibility (s.3 Children Act 1989). An older child who is Gillick Competent* can give their own consent.
*"...whether or not a child is capable of giving the necessary consent will depend on the child’s maturity and understanding and the nature of the consent required. The child must be capable of making a reasonable assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of the treatment proposed, so the consent, if given, can be properly and fairly described as true consent." (Gillick v West Norfolk, 1984)
In law children do not require an appropriate adult – that only refers to suspects under PACE, although it is still good practice to involve parents in decisions about their children.
If the complainant is an adult and has an obvious learning disability or mental health issue then you may decide that they are not able to give this consent.
Have confidence, make a decision & record your rationale.
If you do not attend the scene there is no requirement to video record your initial attendance, although do audio record the initial account for the reasons above.
The following examples are provided to give clarity;
-
If you were taking a recent complaint of an assault, sexual or otherwise, where injuries and damage to clothing were evidentially important, you might well have taken photographs before we had BWV. Now you might use BWV.
-
If you were taking a non-recent report, even if only hours later, when the complainant was at home, tidied up and dressed differently, you wouldn’t even think of taking photos of them or the interior of their house. So why would we use BWV? Although we might use audio to capture the conversation.
SUPERVISION AND LEARNING
The use of body-worn video will be a constant learning process for both users and Nottinghamshire Police particularly due to learning and legislative changes. It is imperative that to maintain public confidence and continually identify issues and best practice body-worn video is used to enhance learning opportunities.
Users are encouraged to review their own footage for self-reflection and review, and line managers to review their reportees body-worn video as part of their role as a supervisor. To be clear line managers are not required to view all of their reportees body-worn video, but to identify specific incidents as part of the normal supervisory process where the provision of developmental feedback to users/staff could be required, such as complaint and performance management.
HMICFRS recognise that the review of specific incidents, such as Domestic Violence or Stop and Search is considered good practice nationally to ensure the police response to such incidents are sufficiently robust, and any opportunities or learning can be gleaned, users and supervisors should regularly review their and their reportees performance in these areas for self-development and learning.
Users are also encouraged to speak with their line managers, or the body-worn video senior user to gain feedback or if they have any concerns about any aspect of their use of body-worn video.
Professional Standards will not routinely trawl users footage but it is expected that where a complaint is received the department will view any footage available as part of the normal investigative process.
Any breach of this procedure or misuse of the body-worn video device or subsequent footage could lead to disciplinary action.
COMPLAINTS
Body-worn video has value in establishing quick and effective resolution of complaints, in particular incivility issues which often arise from incidents involving conflict.
Any complaint received by Nottinghamshire Police will be dealt with as per the existing complaints procedure.
If an officer has a recording that in their opinion is not of any evidential value, but they believe the incident recorded is likely to be the subject of a complaint then the officer should retain this material for 31 days in accordance with PS 317 Review, Retention and Disposal Policy.
In the event that an encounter is non-evidential but the officer feels that they may be subject to a complaint, the officer should liaise with their supervisor and together view the footage, and their supervisor record any relevant comments. Any material deleted from the application after 31 days can then be corroborated by the users supervisor in any subsequent investigation. Any viewing for this purpose should be recorded by both the officer and the supervisor in the notes section of DEMS for that particular piece of footage.
Users should not keep recorded material longer than this time ‘just in case’. Where there is a specific concern in relation to the deletion of data, the user should discuss this with their supervisor and possibly PSD and the policy decision recorded.
POST INCIDENT PROCEDURES (PIPs)
In the event that an incident is of a serious nature such as deaths after Police Contact (pursuits/Firearms etc…) the implementation of a PIP may follow.
In the event a PIP being called users should continue their body-worn video recording (or start/re-start recording if already turned off) from the incident, the journey and arrival at a Post Incident Suite. Users should only stop recording when they are told to by a Post Incident Manager.
RESTRICTED LOCATIONS
Filming on Court Premises
This area is still being developed however inappropriate filming in court premises could see users breaching Sec. 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1925 and Sec. 9 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981.
Whilst clarification is being sought users may wear their body-worn video device inside a court building when in full uniform but be prepared to remove them if requested.
Users must not record inside a court building unless attending to deal with a specific spontaneous incident, and at the conclusion of which the officer must cease recording.
Users must not record in a court room whilst it is session unless specifically directed by a Judge or Magistrate.
Secure Environments (Prisons / Care Homes / Mental Health Establishments)
In most cases recording inside a secure establishment (High, or Medium Security) may be prohibited and in some cases users and staff may even have to surrender their equipment including body-worn video. Users should take note of any instruction from staff at these locations and unless there are exceptional circumstances, they should acquiesce to any request not to record. These locations (not exhaustive) could include prisons, secure mental health facilities, military bases and secure children’s homes.
In the event that it is desired for an incident or part of to be captured by body-worn video and this necessitates users wearing and using the devices on High or Medium secure premises, permission should be sort from the governor or other facility supervisor. Once permission is granted this and any conditions imposed should be documented and any users involved should be fully briefed as to the requirements of the particular deployment.
In low security environments such as hospitals and low security mental health facilities, users should inform others where practicable that they are recording in addition to the subject they are dealing with. This will include ward nurses and others.
Section 12 of The Mental Health Units (Use of Force) Act 2018 states that if a
police officer is going to a mental health unit on duty that involves assisting staff who work in that unit, the officer must take a body camera if reasonably
practicable. While in a mental health unit on duty that involves assisting staff who work in that unit, a police officer who has a body camera there must wear it and keep it operating at all times when reasonably practicable.
INTERVIEWS
Recording of Interviews at Police Stations
Body-worn video does not replace the obligations required of users through the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). Body-worn video should not be used to record interviews of suspects under caution that occur at a designated police station, or one where Voluntary Attendance facilities exist.
Recording of Interviews at places other than Police Stations
PACE allows Body-Worn Video to be used to record suspect interviews away from a Police Station.
Vulnerable Witnesses Interview (VWI)
The use of body-worn video is not a replacement for vulnerable witness interviews and vulnerable witnesses must be dealt with in accordance with force policy.
OTHER EVIDENTIAL CONSIDERATIONS
CCTV
Whilst body-worn video has the potential to capture best evidence at a scene of an incident, it does not replace the obligations of users to gather all other forms of other primary evidence available, including CCTV.
There may be occasions due to expediency at an incident or where footage cannot be burned off from a CCTV unit at that point, body-worn video could be used to record the screen of a CCTV system to expedite the initial part of an on-going spontaneous incident. This should be seen as a temporary option until the primary evidence, in this case CCTV footage can be burned to secondary media and exhibited and presented as part of a case as per individual force procedures.
CSI
Body-worn video does not replace the need to involve CSI teams where appropriate. Body-worn video may enhance evidence capture, particularly at the beginning of an incident and to capture early any scene, however the expertise of CSIs will still be required where the incident dictates.
Legal privilege and Journalistic Material
Users must be careful to respect legal privilege and journalistic material and must not record material that is, or is likely to be, subject to such protections.
Replacing other recording media
There are instances where departments within forces will already utilise digital or ‘film’ video recorders to capture processes to ensure a fair trial. For example to video a viewing at a person’s home to show a transparent process.
Body-Worn Video can undertake these tasks and can be used in place of other digital media devices with the advantage that all digital media are stored in one repository.
SPECIALIST RESOURCES
Authorised Firearms Users at Firearms Incidents
Authorised Firearms Officers (AFOs) will deploy with BWV at Firearms incidents, and this is covered by a separate SOP.
AFOs will also deploy with ‘normal’ BWV, and the tenants within this Procedure should be observed.
Incidents involving Taser Resources
Where an incident is assessed as requiring the additional attendance of a Taser resource to increase the available tactics on the ground, it is generally due to a higher level of threat being offered by a subject(s) to either themselves, other members of the public or attending users or other members of the emergency services.
Users deploying with Taser must have access to body-worn video.
Taser users must record any incident they attend as a Taser resource. It would be for the user to document / present their rational for not recording an event and for when to end the recording.
Negotiators
Nottinghamshire Police have issued body-worn video to their negotiator cadre. By the very nature of their role negotiators will deal with some of the most vulnerable members of society, and will require the negotiator to consider and adopt the most appropriate approach to make the attempt to safeguard the individual and the public. The use of body-worn video during negotiations may capture specific evidence required post incident.
Negotiators may deploy in both uniform and non-uniform to a scene and have differing considerations to that of the front-line uniformed police officer.
Due to the vulnerable nature of many of the subjects, negotiators may consider a number of options when using body-worn video to limit any addition distress and to help resolve the incident as safely as possible. Specific considerations can include but are not limited to:
-
Whether to inform the vulnerable person that they are being recorded or not
-
Whether to use the camera in a covert or overt mode
-
Whether to continue to record if specifically asked to stop, including whether they continue to record covertly.
All of the above and other considerations should be noted in the negotiators policy log or verbally recorded on the device.
Specific negotiator standard operating procedures are held by the negotiator cadre with detailed instructions specifically related to negotiators.
Drone Operators
It is mandatory for RP’s (Remote Pilots) to activate BWV when deploying drones operationally, including the training environment. Recording is to commence when the drone is deployed, which includes the set up and assembly of the drone and ends when the drone lands and motors stopped.
Initial Kit Checks carried out at the start of the RP’s tour of duty are to also to be captured on BWV.
This requirement supports demonstration and reassurance of safe operation, (operating as single trained officers - excl. Airspace Observer), capturing and supporting Dynamic Risk Assessment and environmental hazards, assists with post incident problem solving, fault reporting and professional improvement through learning and development.
Generic Purpose Police Dog Deployment
Where an incident is assessed as requiring the attendance of a Dog resource to increase the available tactics on the ground, it is generally due to a higher level of threat being offered by a subject(s) to either themselves, other members of the public or handler or other members of the emergency services or the necessity to capture suspects attempting to evade capture.
Handlers deploying a General Purpose Police Dog must have access to body-worn video and record all deployments.
This is due to the high levels of public scrutiny around the use of Police Dogs. All deployments involving a third party must be recorded and evidenced. It would be for the user to document / present a robust rational for not recording an event and for when to end the recording.
ADDITIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS
Users fitted with Pacemakers
A small number of users or staff may be fitted with a Pacemaker for an ongoing condition.
Nottinghamshire Police should seek advice from each individual’s pacemaker supplier as to whether the wearing of body-worn video will affect the pacemaker and what precautions should be put in place to minimise any effect.
Explosive Devices
BWV cameras contain wireless transmission technology that transfers radio frequencies over the air as a form of energy transfer. Wireless transmission has been deemed a risk factor in igniting an explosive environment. If you need to enter a potentially explosive environment or approach a suspect device the BWV camera should be switched off. BWV cameras should not be powered on within 15m of a Suspect Package and must not be used to record any suspect device in situ.
RELEASING FOOTAGE TO THE MEDIA
Ordinarily any footage captured by body-worn video would not be released unless it is proportionate, necessary and there is a legitimate policing purpose to do so.
Prior to release, consideration should be given to the subject right to privacy under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act and as to any sensitivities involved.
The media must be edited and consideration should be given as to whether any non-involved persons should be pixelated to protect their identity (see ‘Pixilation of Footage’ below). This could include patrons of any establishment who may not wish to be identified as such by the wider community, service users of a certain facilities or persons from other diverse / minority backgrounds which require sensitivity or privacy.
Any such release should only be on the approval of the Force Information Security Office.
Where the footage due to be released has been filmed on any Mental Health Premises, once edited, and prior to release, the head of Governance (Mental Health) and/or the Police Operational Mental Health Lead must have first viewed and sanctioned its release. This is to ensure the personal data of non-involved service users are protected and protect the individual police force from any litigation arising out of any harm that may have otherwise been caused.
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND PUBLIC ACCESS
Vetting
All users of body-worn video devices are envisaged to be uniformed Police Officers, PCSOs, Police Staff and Council Community Protection Officers and therefore will have been subject to Police Vetting. All users of these devices must be Police Vetted.
Any user of the supporting software must be Police Vetted.
Any supplier visiting force premises and who will be accessing servers or other software/hardware must only do so if passed Police vetting and/or accompanied by the appropriate staff member.
Any hardware returned to the supplier for repair and has been returned with footage there-in (due to a fault meaning forces are unable to retrieve their own footage) the supplier will use an encrypted stand-alone laptop; that will be secured when not in use; to download any footage (to return to force) if possible, and make any software repairs. Any employee handling said equipment will be Police Vetted.
Audit Trail
EMS (Digital Evidence Management Software) has the provision of a full audit trail both for every video as well as every user.
Data that is downloaded from BWV devices and defined as non-evidential will be stored for 31 days. During that time it is searchable and can be retrieved and marked as evidential. After this period it will be automatically deleted from the application.
Any Evidential or unused footage, and/or any DVD/CD’s produced should be retained in line with the Management of Police Information (MoPI).
Access to downloaded footage and any subsequent disclosure of the footage or images is restricted to those who require it for a policing purpose, those being:
-
Protecting Life and Property
-
Preserving Order
-
Preventing the Commission of Offences
-
Bringing Offenders to Justice
-
Any Duty Arising from Common or Statute Law
-
Any other authorised use (this could include showing to a stop and search scrutiny panel or other authorised use)
Anyone accessing footage for anything other than the above may be subject to disciplinary action.
Subject Access
Footage from body-worn video may be subject to a Subject Access Request. Subject access requests have statutory timeframes attached to them within which Nottinghamshire Police must respond to applicants and provide the relevant information (subject to the application of any relevant exemptions). Please note that it is an offence to delete any information if a request for this information has been received by the force.
Requested footage will be provided to the Force Data Protection office (or similar) to allow for any redactions to take place and the footage will then be required to be placed onto a viewable medium (DVD or similar). Please note that a request will cover any information held at the time a request is received so if the footage has not been deleted, it will need to be supplied for consideration, even if there is an intention to delete in the future.
LOST DEVICES
Users should follow the force procedures relating to loss of data/electronic devices in the event that a body-worn video device is lost. At a minimum when a device is lost, the following will need to be informed:
-
Line manager
-
IS department
-
Information Security department
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The Senior Business User will be responsible for monitoring the issue and use of body-worn video and body-worn video footage.
MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REVIEW
The body-worn video strategic lead is responsible for monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of this procedure and the overarching policy and will review this procedure on a bi-annual basis, or as and when changes in legislation or working practice dictate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS 306:
Body Worn Video
Type of Document:
Policy
Version:
1.2.3
Registered Owner:
Superintendent Paul Burrows
Author/Reviewer:
Inspector Matthew Ward
Effective Date:
January 2025
Review Date:
June 2025
Related procedures, policies and information: