Backroom_boy
Member
Not sure if any notification is needed but I imagine it's fairly obvious that recording has been turned on and consent isnt required if there are proper grounds for making the recording
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
TPE bodycams flashing red - meaning
- Thread starter speedy1
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
If you are in a public place with no reasonable expectation of privacy then consent is not required.
Don't be absurd. No member of frontline staff has access to the footage.
There's a sign on the device, it makes a noise and the button glows red (on Axon cameras)
announcements
Member
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 717
I would hope you are right, but there is always risk; I know police officers have done this. This isn't me singling out railway staff, it could be a scandal that happen in any institution with bodycams unless the correct management and behaviours are in place.
The correct management is in place
Rail staff who choose to wear the body cameras have absolutely no access to the footage stored on said body cameras, even if they wanted to.
announcements
Member
- Joined
- 31 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 717
Good! Discussion forums like this are useful to have this conversation.
Monty
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 2,372
We have been asked, where possible to inform the individual that the camera has been activated as a courtesy, the idea being it may encourage the person involved to think before they act. But we've also been told that if you forget in the 'heat of the moment' it's not critical you tell them and the evidence can still be used.
I found that the "beep beep" of the Axon camera when pressing the button was often sufficient to get most people to ease off.
Indeed
PSNI disciplines 74 officers who viewed bodycam footage ‘for entertainment’
Drugs arrest captured on camera widely shared and watched 248 times by police ‘with little regard for privacy’
www.theguardian.com
Reprimand issued to Greater Manchester Police over CCTV failings
Police force demonstrated “serious shortcomings” in how they handle CCTV footage
NHS worker sent patient record screenshot to partner in data breach
Documents reveal an NHS worker shared a patient's record with a partner and accessed up to 200 files.
www.bbc.co.uk
NHS England » NHS warns ‘snooping’ staff face sack or prison for inappropriate access of patient data
NHS England » NHS warns ‘snooping’ staff face sack or prison for inappropriate access of patient data
www.england.nhs.uk
You could easily find 100+ more cases worldwide of data being hacked/leaked/accessed against policy...
Monty
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 2,372
Indeed
PSNI disciplines 74 officers who viewed bodycam footage ‘for entertainment’
Drugs arrest captured on camera widely shared and watched 248 times by police ‘with little regard for privacy’
Reprimand issued to Greater Manchester Police over CCTV failings
Police force demonstrated “serious shortcomings” in how they handle CCTV footagecy.ico.org.uk
NHS worker sent patient record screenshot to partner in data breach
Documents reveal an NHS worker shared a patient's record with a partner and accessed up to 200 files.
NHS England » NHS warns ‘snooping’ staff face sack or prison for inappropriate access of patient data
NHS England » NHS warns ‘snooping’ staff face sack or prison for inappropriate access of patient data
You could easily find 100+ more cases worldwide of data being hacked/leaked/accessed against policy...
The key difference for most of the cases mentioned is that police officers are able to review their own body cam footage gather evidence, which unfortunately means it's potentially easier to abuse, rail staff on the other hand have no such access.
Police officers need access to their bodycam footage in certain situations in order to accurately file investigations. Obviously they would seek to be taking the correct notes at the time, as that's exactly what they relied on prior to the use of bodycams, and the contents of their notepad can then be submitted in evidence for court if needed. If they didn't file the paperwork precisely correctly in accordance with what were on the bodycam footage however, it would completely undermine the prosecution if they had some minor variance which, though not significant to the charge in itself, were enough to sow the seed of doubt about the officer telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
As noted above, any abuse of bodycam footage such as looking at it for resons other than a police investigation, or sharing it with someone not involved, or incorrect protocol for request, storage and disclosure of CCTV more generally, is a very serious form of misconduct and has seen officers lose their jobs. It is treated as seriously or even more seriously than a doctor looking up someone's medical records who isn't a patient of theirs, it's very serious malpractice.
If you're captured by a bodycam on the railway you're likely to be entitled to request the footage under the GDPR too, which is as it should be. Whenever you walk past some random person's door filming you they may be keeping that footage of you with absolutely no way for you to know who they are.
As noted above, any abuse of bodycam footage such as looking at it for resons other than a police investigation, or sharing it with someone not involved, or incorrect protocol for request, storage and disclosure of CCTV more generally, is a very serious form of misconduct and has seen officers lose their jobs. It is treated as seriously or even more seriously than a doctor looking up someone's medical records who isn't a patient of theirs, it's very serious malpractice.
If you're captured by a bodycam on the railway you're likely to be entitled to request the footage under the GDPR too, which is as it should be. Whenever you walk past some random person's door filming you they may be keeping that footage of you with absolutely no way for you to know who they are.
I understand the differences. I understand the current policies.
The common element of all the situations is that the recording exists.
And the body cameras with the railway have been a rather quick slippery slope: they have increased in number substantially, the buffer time has been increased substantially, they now connected to a central network for live usage, the justification for their usage expanded etc (I've made these points previously, and they've been ignored, yet it forms a basis of my arguments)
With the proliferation of the cameras, it is not hard to imagine the 'burden' of the current policy being relaxed. New 'solutions' will be needed for the amount of data.
There is no point waxing lyrical about how railway staff are above reproach, how their policies are different etc. It will not move me.
These things are always introduced by people claiming how recording is minimal, policies are in place and so force, all an act to squash criticism. And time and time again we see breaches and people's privacy encroached upon a little bit more every year, chasing vastly diminishing returns of increased safety.
The common element of all the situations is that the recording exists.
And the body cameras with the railway have been a rather quick slippery slope: they have increased in number substantially, the buffer time has been increased substantially, they now connected to a central network for live usage, the justification for their usage expanded etc (I've made these points previously, and they've been ignored, yet it forms a basis of my arguments)
With the proliferation of the cameras, it is not hard to imagine the 'burden' of the current policy being relaxed. New 'solutions' will be needed for the amount of data.
There is no point waxing lyrical about how railway staff are above reproach, how their policies are different etc. It will not move me.
These things are always introduced by people claiming how recording is minimal, policies are in place and so force, all an act to squash criticism. And time and time again we see breaches and people's privacy encroached upon a little bit more every year, chasing vastly diminishing returns of increased safety.
Entitled to request, that is all. I'm sure you know the request can be denied.
Last edited: