a Better Bubble™

Aggregator

Phoenix City Council Says PD Can Have Surveillance Drones Without Any Policy In Place Because Some Officers Recently Got Shot

2 years 7 months ago

The Phoenix Police Department wants drones and it wants them now. And, according to this report by the Phoenix New Times, it's going to get them.

After several hours of debate and spirited public response during the Phoenix City Council meeting this week, local officials agreed to authorize the police department to purchase public safety drones right away.

Late Wednesday night the Phoenix City Council voted 6-3 after a lengthy, and at times heated, discussion.

The request was submitted to the city council at the last minute, fast-tracking the agency’s plans to implement the technology.

Why the rush? Well, according to a letter [PDF] signed by Mayor Kate Gallego and two council members, having a drone in the air would have… not changed anything at all about a recent incident where officers were shot.

In the early morning hours of February 11, our officers were ambushed when responding to a call for service at a two-story home in Southwest Phoenix near 54th Avenue and Broadway. Nine of our police officers were injured but thankfully all of them are recovering.

During this incident was determined for the safety of our officers drone would need to be utilized to neutralize the situation. Currently, Phoenix does not own any drones for use by our Police Department, therefore we had to rely on the grace of our neighbor, the City of Glendale, to provide our department with a drone.

News reports about the ambush shooting make no mention of a deployed drone or describe what difference it made in resolving the deadly situation. But that shooting that happened to have a late-arriving drone is being used to justify the sudden acquisition of drones by the PD, which will presumably be deployed as soon as they're obtained.

Since it's apparently a matter of life and death, the request made by the council for the police to develop a drone policy and deployment plan before seeking funding and permission to acquire them has been abandoned. It's apparently now far too urgent a problem to be slowed down by accountability and transparency.

The committee agreed to allow Phoenix Fire to go ahead with its drone purchases — so it could roll the tech out by the summer — but asked Phoenix police to come back for approval separately, with a more fleshed-out plan.

This new proposal will circumvent that, instead allowing Phoenix police to go ahead with the drone purchase “as soon as possible,” according to a memo, without presenting a policy first to the council.

That gives the Phoenix PD permission to send eyes into the skies without meaningful restrictions or oversight. Far too much slack is being cut for a police department that is currently being investigated by the Department of Justice following years of abusive behavior by its officers. Here's what the DOJ -- which announced this investigation last August -- will be digging into:

This investigation will assess all types of use of force by PhxPD officers, including deadly force. The investigation will also seek to determine whether PhxPD engages in retaliatory activity against people for conduct protected by the First Amendment; whether PhxPD engages in discriminatory policing; and whether PhxPD unlawfully seizes or disposes of the belongings of individuals experiencing homelessness. In addition, the investigation will assess the City and PhxPD’s systems and practices for responding to people with disabilities. The investigation will include a comprehensive review of PhxPD policies, training, supervision, and force investigations, as well as PhxPD’s systems of accountability, including misconduct complaint intake, investigation, review, disposition, and discipline.

Not exactly the sort of thing that inspires trust. And certainly not the sort of thing that warrants a free pass on surveillance policies until long after new surveillance tech has been deployed. The Phoenix PD may have recently been involved in an unexpected burst of violence (I mean, committed by someone else against police officers), but that hardly justifies a careless rush into an expansion of the department's surveillance capabilities.

Tim Cushing

St. Louis tries to block lawsuit against police officers from going to trial

2 years 7 months ago

The City of St. Louis is asking a panel of federal judges to reconsider a January decision to allow a lawsuit against city police officers to go to trial.  Short of that, the city is asking for a rehearing in front of the entire U.S. District Court of Appeals for the Eighth District to stop […]

The post St. Louis tries to block lawsuit against police officers from going to trial appeared first on Missouri Independent.

Rebecca Rivas

10 Reasons CBD is Becoming So Popular

2 years 7 months ago
There’s no shortage of praise around cannabidiol (CBD). Despite being relatively new to the supplement market compared to other extracts, CBD’s popularity skyrocketed in ways nobody could’ve imagined.…
Sponsored by Espy's

Arizona moves to restrict recordings of police with unconstitutional proposal

2 years 7 months ago

An aerial view of downtown Phoenix features the Arizona State Capitol and the House and Senate buildings on either side.

Carol Highsmith

A misguided Arizona bill would make it illegal to take photos or video of the police in certain circumstances, running directly against long-established constitutional protections for such recordings. Freedom of the Press Foundation has joined a coalition of two dozen media and press freedom groups opposing the proposal in a letter embedded below.

The house version of the bill, HB 2319, passed through the legislature's Appropriations Committee on Tuesday and through the full House on Thursday, despite its straightforward First Amendment problems. The House vote came down on party lines, with the body's Republican majority giving approval.

The original proposal would have rendered illegal recordings of police made without permission within 15 feet of an officer; as passed in the House, the limit is eight feet. Either limit is likely unconstitutional, as we explain in the letter:

We are extremely concerned that this language violates not only the free speech and press clauses of the First Amendment, but also runs counter to the “clearly established right” to photograph and record police officers performing their official duties in a public place, cited by all the odd-numbered U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal including the Ninth Circuit. ... It is clear from well-established jurisprudence regarding this matter that officers performing their official duties in a public place do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to being recorded and therefore taking enforcement action against someone who “fails to comply with a verbal warning of a violation of this section” is both impermissible and unconstitutional.

Nevertheless, the proposal now proceeds to the state Senate. We urge the lawmakers in that body to treat the Constitution and its press freedom guarantees with more respect than their colleagues in the House.

Parker Higgins

Alabama man given two life sentences for Bethalto triple murder conviction

2 years 7 months ago
ST. LOUIS–An Alabama man will spend the rest of his life in prison after being sentenced to two life terms for the December 2019 deaths of three people in Bethalto. Brady Witcher, 41, was found guilty last month in the execution-style deaths of 59-year-old Shari Yates, her son 30-year old Andrew Brooks, and roommate 32-year-old John McMillan. Witcher and his [...]
Gregg Palermo