It’s so that no one can document things like this, in Minnesota:
Can you imagine the cover-up that would have resulted absent this video?
On-board and body cameras on police officers are good things. You get to see what kind of consent was actually granted during a stop, what the PC was, and what really happened in an incident.
Which is why the BPD doesn’t want them, and have been actively avoiding their implementation.
They’re not alone — most police forces feel the same way. The difference is that many other towns have civilian overseers who are conscientious about these issues and insist on maintaining some kind of oversight.
BTW … they were pulled over for a “broken tail light”… which is classic bullshit PC for a phony stop and search. Burbank used to do this all the time in the 80s and 90s, and they may do it still. It’s PC 101.
It’s also harassment. Half the time that “tail light” or “brake light” isn’t really broken or burned out. It’s just an excuse to pull people over. The classic Burbank cop line at night back then was that your tail light was “blinking.”
The media of course is not asking about why these people were stopped in the first place. You can be damned sure too that if their tail light wasn’t broken to begin with at the time of the initial stop (which it probably wasn’t), it was definitely broken to bits by the time the tow truck showed up.
Don’t believe us? Ask any defense attorney. Especially the ones who used to be prosecutors.