This entry was posted
on Tuesday, July 19th, 2011 at 4:01 pm by Radley Balko
and is filed under General Criminal Justice.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
In what will no double come as a shock to everyone here, Kern County Sheriff’s Department has found that the shooting of Deacon Turner was justified. Also shocking:
“A surveillance video released by the Sheriff’s Department shows Turner walking through the parking lot of the convenience store with two other individuals, stopping as deputies drove up and walking over to them to be searched.
After the search Turner picks up the bags he set down and turns to walk away. One deputy follows him and can be seen striking Turner while the other deputy moves to keep the other individuals — who included Turner’s 19-year-old son, according to reports — back from the confrontation.
But the video cuts out just before the fatal shotting, omitting a crucial six-second segment.
Youngblood said the video was on a motion sensor and the camera shut off for a brief time until additional motion triggered it to start recording again.”
I have a feeling we are about to be hit with a mass puppycide by the PG County Sherriff’s office on the home of a 90 year old couple which was the wrong address based on information from an anonymous informant and bite mark evidence.
Wow. The camera suddenly stopped working just in the crucial moments before the shooting. Funny how often that happens.
(You’d think they could start coming up with better excuses than that. “The camera stopped working” has become the functional equivalent of the old “She fell down the stairs” excuse spousal abusers use)
Wait – Turner is answering police questions, get agitated, and walks away. Deputy strikes his leg with a baton. Turner then swings a bag containing 2 beers at a deputy and before he could do it again, Kraft shoots him twice.
And this is not enough motion to re-start the recorder? From the deputy hitting Turner with the baton to Kraft’s two shots seems like about 6 seconds. Funny that the camera wouldn’t detect the motion of Turner swinging beers “tomahawk-style”.
Even taking this motion sensor shit at face value, it doesn’t add.
No one has asked “why did the camera stop recording”. I call bullshit on that. Since when does a camera “detect motion” to start recording, and stop recording when it “doesn’t detect motion”? I know technology makes it possible, but it isn’t a valid configuration for police work, so it’s a lie.
“I forgot to mention the presence of the couple’s 8 great-grandchildren aged 4 to 6, who were having a sleep over.”
Or a duly-processed, “legal” no-knock raid because an inordinate number of the great-grandchildren were suffering from nasal congestion and great-grandma bought “too much” Sudafed which she might have used to manufacture methamphetamine.
That’s enough for me, though. Good news (especially in such magnitude) is rare enough I’m going to stop that and try to find something to appreciate today.
What does it say about me (or at least what this site has done to me) when, just glancing down the thread, I thought Aresen’s story (backed up by Jeff’s additional details) was true, and that I had just missed a link somewhere?
aaaaand, then I read the Turner article. Bonus authoratai reinforcement, they arrested Turner’s adult children for yelling at the police (who had just murdered their father). Charges include making criminal threats and participating in a criminal street gang.
“No one has asked “why did the camera stop recording”. I call bullshit on that. Since when does a camera “detect motion” to start recording, and stop recording when it “doesn’t detect motion”? I know technology makes it possible, but it isn’t a valid configuration for police work, so it’s a lie.”
Being a security systems expert, I can say that it’s quite common to use motion sensing in digital video recorders for security systems. It helps reduce the amount of hard disk space needed to record, as it only records when something is moving.
However, the vast majority of these systems have a buffer which records a few seconds before motion starts, and also continue to record for several seconds or more after motion stops, to avoid situations just as the one described. So I’d say they are lying their asses off.
“A news release issued by the sheriff’s department about 2:30 p.m. said the use of force in the Turner case by Deputy Wesley Kraft was within department policy.”
See, what you guys are failing to realize is that department policy says it’s totally cool to shoot unarmed folks. Or, at least it NOW says that. You can make anything fit a policy when you are the one making the policies.
>> So…cameras can predict the future and start recording a few seconds >>BEFORE motion starts them? Yeah, you’re a ‘security expert’ alright.
A “buffer” is a temporary storage location for data, so yes it is possible to record what happens several seconds before or after motion activates the recording, while saving disk storage space since the buffer is constantly being overwritten/updated. Or I’m just guessing that’s how it works.
Anyway, it’s no surprise that there is no video of Turner swinging the beer cans — amazing how a motion-activated camera stops recording with all that action going on! However, I read an article where his son says that there is another recording out there that shows everything — if so we’ll see how they can find a way to keep that from coming out.
Cliff – to hang a little more meat on the description: Digital video surveillance systems continuously record to hard drive. The software then can analyze the video and look for motion within pre-selected sectors. The segments of interest are then automatically excised and saved.
They’ll also often have automatic media rotation, retention policies (delete after 30 days, etc.).
So it wouldn’t be at all surprising to have a video clip showing motion that begins before the motion.
It is also possible that this particular camera had a zone defined around the door or some other area of interest that was not being triggered by the action with the police at all. It is a remarkable coincidence that the one particular moment in time which would show that the officer is somehow not guilty of manslaughter for shooting and killing a man armed with a bag with beer in it is somehow the moment that is missing. Lucky for him the presumption of innocence thing is really amped up when the defendant works for the government.
“It is also possible that this particular camera had a zone defined around the door or some other area of interest that was not being triggered by the action with the police at all.”
If you look at the video in question, posted upthread, that excuse (not saying you are making the excuse) melts away rapidly. There’s LOTS of motion going on everywhere and the camera stays on for many, many minutes, with the sole exception being that six seconds when he gets shot.
Sean “A “buffer” is a temporary storage location for data, so yes it is possible to record what happens several seconds before or after motion activates the recording, while saving disk storage space since the buffer is constantly being overwritten/updated. Or I’m just guessing that’s how it works.”
That’s exactly how it works. The video is placed in a buffer which holds several seconds, and as new video is added the old is pushed out, unless the system detects motion, at which point that buffer is then written to the hard disk along with the motion video.
And Cliff, as I have been working in the security industry for 20 years and writing manuals for digital video recording systems, I’d say that qualifies me as an expert.