If cops are required (maybe by mechanical/tech constraints) to record via the body cam, that does remove some of the incentive for them to tell others not to record them. There's already a record of them.
Except when the body cam footage inexplicably vanishes most inconveniently (say, during subpoena with a defending cop) and everyone just goes ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, repeatedly.
sounds like we need legislation to require the badge-cam video evidence to be presented the court to the allow any legal proceeding to by the police to continue and any where the proceeding are initiated by a member of the public to be found in their favor automatically if badge-cam footage is not presented.
I think it would be more apt to issue a jury instruction that loss of evidence against law enforcement by law enforcement can be interpreted as a sign of guilt, similar to how pleading the 5th can be interpreted as a sign of guilt in civil cases. It does not conclusively mean they are guilty (accidents do happen), but it can be considered in cases that lack other evidence.
Furthermore, if the person who "lost" the evidence can be found, they should be tried as a conspirator.
It's not about incentives, it's about opportunities. Why should free citizens not have the opportunity to tell their side of the story with pictures? The cops have all the opportunity they need, and the backup of the political apparatus as well.
I never said that people shouldn't have that right. Just that the incentive for an officer to violate that right can go down if the officer already knows that they are being recorded by body cams (if it's physically mandatory and the storing organization isn't corrupt).
