> In a setting where you have an arresting officer you can question the officer in court you can question his thought process his procedure you can understand why he made the decision he made and challenge all of those base assumptions.

This is strange as many jurisdictions take an officer's written report of crimes as a higher form of evidence than any other evidence (video), combined with post court revealations that officers routinely lie under oath.

Then you have the whole escalation issue, where a failed turn signal, excessive (or, now less than excessive) speed, or failure to stop leads to a situation where 1. The police officer is likely to be hit by a vehicle while on the side of the road 2. The stopped driver may react erratically 3. The stopping officer may act erratically.

With recent American police failings coming to light, we should welcome video evidence as safer and more accurate for all parties