this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2026
405 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
80795 readers
2676 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well hey, I have a few questions:
Any police testimony not accompanied by some kind of recording should be inadmissible in court. Likewise any evidence collected while a camera isn't recording should also be inadmissible. Police have shown again and again that they can't be trusted and they're almost always a less reliable witness than some random bystander. It's about time we actually started tearing them that way.
I took a speeding ticket to court, had the officer sitting behind me pre-trial talkin' smack with a colleague "why are you here? Speeding, ha, how hard is that?" Yeah, so he gets on the stand and "reads from his notes" every single thing he said was fabricated, only my location was accurate, his location was a lie: in reality he "witnessed" me from a side street 3 blocks back from the intersection he crossed but in his testimony he "observed me passing a line of five cars" - yeah, except that never happened, what I was passing was a single gardening truck doing 10mph for the past 3 blocks, the other 4 cars were stacked up behind me.
Maybe he really thought that's what he saw, which is all the more reason his dashcam should have been the evidence, not his notebook. https://www.restonyc.com/can-you-not-be-a-police-officer-with-a-high-iq/
Because we dont want or need videos of police pissing in urinals, and they're human and deserve to not have that recorded
I'd be in favor of a "private" button that they can press for such circumstances. The video is still recorded, but marked private - plays back black and silent on ordinary playback software. If it's ever in legitimate question of whether or not "private" was pressed inappropriately the private video can be restored to full picture and sound with the appropriate code key.
The FOV can’t actually capture that, if you’ve ever seen wearable cam footage.
Don't put mirrors in front of urinals. Problem solved.