Flock cameras appear to be one of the few things that can get police officers fired.
It does make me wonder whether electronic evidence of police behavior will materially impact actual behavior over time. But given that the normal reaction is to deny access to evidence, I doubt it.
The people who want to be police officers tend not to be the people everyone else would want to be police officers.
It's tiring for good people when everyone they interact with thinks they're the villain.
I'm cynical enough about how work-organizations function to worry that those at the top will be selective in firing officers found violating policies.
Gotta make a statement with the low level grunts so the citizenry think these systems have accountability.
What is remarkable about this story is that something happened to them. Now were they prosecuted for any of a hundred laws they probably broke?
No.
All of these officers will have new jobs lined up by the end of the week.
It's not on the unions, it's on the people who hired the officers.
This model you have inside your head, where there are public officials responsible for hiring that can exercise whatever they imagine are the prerogatives of the public at large when making hiring decisions, is fictional. Public sector unions, for better or worse, have long since obviated such jeopardy and effectively call all shots with regard to who is hired for what.
The real teeth behind these disciplinary events, at least in suburban/metro areas, are that departments don't want to lose the cameras, and know that they will if abuses aren't answered.
That's an effective way to get put on a list for harassment, or worse.