On June 21, the Oregonian reported that language in the draft contract between the city and the police "union" would allow Portland officers to review video recordings from body cameras of another officer's use of deadly force before writing reports or being interviewed. Three days later, the Oregonian wrote a scathing editorial about this practice entitled "Draft body cam policy places union's concerns over public's." This editorial notes police accountability experts contend allowing an officer to review the recording before an interview or writing a report may hurt the quality of an investigation into officer conduct. This editorial referenced the case of 16 year old Thai Gurule, who police kicked, punched and tasered in 2014 (PPR #65). The police maintained Gurule attacked officers, but non-police video footage contradicted the officers' reports. If the cops had viewed the recording first, it might have changed their testimony to fit the tape. The editorial calls for the public to weigh in on this policy.

We agree with the Oregonian editorial. Portland Copwatch (PCW) has remained neutral on the issue of body cameras in part because we believe the City must present its proposed body camera policies to the public for meaningful review and input. The Police Bureau did hold a series of public meetings on the issue, but they were poorly attended and many people were not well versed regarding body cameras (PPR #67). PCW recommends the City develop best practice protocols with input from organizations such as the ACLU and other cities. The City must hold a public discussion and vote on policies regarding who can see the recordings and when, how are these data saved, when the body cameras must be recording and when they can be turned off, among other things. Until then, the issue of body cameras should be put on hold.