Police Body Camera Policies: Retention and Release

This chart includes categories for how long video is kept if it does not contain evidence of a crime, the rules for public access to videos, and any exemptions to local Freedom of Information laws that are specific to BWCs.

Published: August 3, 2016

Last Updated: July 19, 2019

The body camera policies address several issues related to retention and release of recorded data.

“How long is non-evidentiary video kept?”: In order for video to be used or released, it has to be preserved. Storage space for video is very expensive, however, and privacy and security concerns crop up with a large database of videos. The length of time potential evidence in a court case must be preserved is governed by state law. Retention time for all other video is generally a matter of police policy.

“Can public see or request recordings?” One of the biggest questions surrounding body-worn cameras (BWCs) is whether the video will be eligible for public release under public records laws. This question is often not at the discretion of the police departments or specific to BWC video. Laws in each state address the release of public records and large departments usually have existing policies and offices to deal with public records requests. BWC video, however, presents unique challenges and privacy threats. Many state legislatures are debating bills to address this issue. In the meantime, departments have their own systems for how they deal with requests for video. Where policies are not clear on this issue, we have attempted to fill in some of the gaps with links to reporting. We expect this information to change for many departments as laws are passed and technical and privacy issues crop up.

“How can the data be shared outside of the police department?” Retention of body-worn camera video creates a substantial database that can be used as a powerful instrument of surveillance. Many of the police departments that use BWCs participate in fusion centers, joint information-sharing efforts between local, state, and federal government and the private sector. These fusion centers pull in copious data that is tenuously related to crime or terrorism and generally retain it for long periods of time, and have been castigated as endangering citizens’ civil liberties with little counterterrorism value to show for it. At the same time, departments will occasionally need to be able to share evidentiary videos relating to a specific video with other law enforcement agencies. Even this limited sharing can raise privacy issues if the privacy protections the originating department has in place are not binding on the recipient agency. While most of the policies require permission from the Chief of Police for dissemination of video outside the department, few of the policies or related statutes provide guidance for when and with what limits will sharing with other law enforcement agencies be permitted.

Data can be accessed for criminal investigation or prosecution “as required through the evidentiary sharing process.” The BWC files will not be released to non-criminal justice agency without approval of the legal advisor. If the evidence is needed for internal police department investigations, it will not be released without approval from the Internal Affairs section.

Yes, in accordance with the Atlanta Police Department Standard Operating Procedure 1060 “Public Affairs”.

“The Open Records Unit (ORU) is responsible for coordinating all open records requests relating to the video data captured and of that archived by the BWC.”

“News or other media outlet requests for video will be processed through the Public Information Office (PIO). All other requests will be processed through the department coordinator in Central Records.”

Not specified Requests from the public shall be granted or denied based upon the Maryland Public Information Act, which says to release records as long as release does not interfere with a law enforcement proceeding or constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. According to media reports, a new policy gives police commissioner 1 week after police-involved shooting to determine whether to release the footage to the public.

Process for law enforcement agencies to request access is not specified but upon request, those with prosecuting authority must get approval from BWC Coordinator. In general, Police Commissioner, or their designee, must authorize access in writing. Data shall not “be used to create a database or pool of mug shots.”

Yes, recordings may be requested by the public pursuant to a public records request, as defined in Chapter 66, Section 10 of Massachusetts General Laws (M.G.L.).

The Video Evidence Unit processes requests from the public as well as federal, state and local prosecutors. Civil discovery requests are submitted to the assigned attorney in the Office of the Legal Advisor and requests by collective bargaining representatives under M.G.L. c. 150E are submitted to Office of Labor Relations. If an officer receives a court order or civil case subpoena, he or she forwards it to the Office of the Legal Advisor.

“Recordings are not public records as defined by G.S. 132–1. Recordings are not personnel records as defined in Part 7 of Chapter 126 of the General Statutes, G.S. 160A-168, or G.S. 153A-98. Recordings shall be disclosed only as provided by Chapter 132 of the General Statutes, GS 132–1.4A.” That being said, the following individuals may receive disclosure of video/audio recording: a person whose image or voice is in the recording; a personal representative of an adult person whose image or voice is in the recording, if the adult person has consented to the disclosure; a personal representative of a minor or of an adult person under lawful guardianship whose image or voice is in the recording; a personal representative of a deceased person whose image or voice is in the recording; a personal representative of an adult person who is incapacitated and unable to provide consent to disclosure.”

Police Records must approve and complete any records requests. Media requests for recordings will be approved by the Public Information Office. Release of any recordings relating to instances of driving under the influence will be approved by the prosecutor.

The Chief of Police handles requests to release media to outside parties. “The Mobile Support Unit shall also screen and forward requests for any law enforcement purpose (e.g., court, case files, and supervisory investigations).” The Office of Professional standards is granted access without filing a public records request.

Recordings will not be shared outside the Department unless requested through Public Records or a “Criminal Justice request.” The latter is undefined in the policy.

30 days, per the City and County of Denver General Records Retention Schedule (GRRS) 100.080*BB Public requests for video are governed by the general records disclosure policy, Denver Police Department Operations Manual Section 109.04, which allows for release of any records not explicitly required for or prohibited from disclosure at the discretion of the Records Coordinator.

Any request for BWC media made from outside the Denver Police Department, including other law enforcement agencies, must comply with the department’s records management and disclosure policies (OMS 109.04 and 109.05). These policies do not specifically address BWC videos but allow criminal history records/photographs to be shared with other law enforcement agencies.

In accordance with MO Statute 610.205, recordings that “depict or describe a deceased person in a state of dismemberment, decapitation, or similar mutilation including, without limitation, where the deceased person’s genitalia are exposed, shall be considered closed records” and will only be disclosed to the deceased’s next of kin or an individual who receives a written release from the next of kin. In the case of closed criminal investigations, circuit court judges can disclose recordings “upon findings in writing that disclosure is in the public interest and outweighs any privacy interest that may be asserted by the deceased person’s next of kin.”

In accordance with the California Public Records Act, when a member of the public requests to inspect a record, the agency shall make the records promptly available. Beginning on July 1, 2019, recordings relating to critical incidents can be withheld during active investigations for no longer than 45 days and if the privacy interest in withholding the video outweighs the public interest in disclosure. When there is a reasonable expectation of privacy for the subject, the agency can also use redaction technology, including image distortion, to obscure specific portions of the video to protect privacy. In instances when privacy outweighs public interest in disclosure, upon request, recordings should still be released to the subject whose privacy is being protected, the legal guardian if the subject is a minor and the beneficiary, heir, authorized legal representative or designated immediate family member if the subject is deceased.

185 days, per AZ State Archiving Law GS 1031

Yes, copies can be requested through a public records request as outlined in DPM 3.3.70, Public Records Request.

Access and copying permitted only for “official law enforcement purposes,” and “dissemination of information will be for criminal justice purposes only.” All public records requests are received and processed in the Records Section and “will be routed to the Program Administrator(s) for redaction.”

1 year Yes, public records requests are to be considered in accordance with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and other applicable laws. MN. Section 13.825 of the Act states that a video that is not part of an active investigation is subject to public records requests if it depicts firearm discharge or use of force by an officer resulting in substantial bodily harm; if a subject requests it be public (with non-consenting civilian subjects redacted in any copies); or if it is “public personnel data.” The department may redact video portions that are “clearly offensive to common sensibilities.” Any person may bring action in district court to challenge decision to withhold video.

Requests by the public and other law enforcement agencies are handled by the Records Information Unit in accordance with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. Section 13.825 of the Act says that access by other law enforcement agencies must be authorized in writing by the Chief of Police and must be shared for a “legitimate, specified law enforcement purpose.” The recipient agency must comply with all data classification, destruction, and security requirements of the law.

18 months, per NYPD website Generally, yes. Under the New York Freedom of Information Law, agencies can refuse to disclose records that are specifically exempted by state or federal statute, and records that could: interfere with law enforcement investigations or judicial proceedings, pose unwarranted invasions of personal privacy, identify confidential sources, deprive a person of a right to a fair trial, endanger the life or safety of any person, or reveal criminal investigative techniques. When there is a high-profile incident, the NYPD will confer with the Attorney General about release.

Desk Officer is responsible for sharing arrest footage with the District Attorney’s office. “Other than providing copies of BWC video to members of the Department for official purposes and prosecutors as described above, uniformed members of the service may not copy, publish, share or disseminate any audio, video, image or data to anyone unless authorized by the Police Commissioner.”

Requests for digital recordings from non-law enforcement agencies are processed by the Department’s Right-to-Know Officer and the Digital Evidence Custodian. Pertinent members of the District Attorney’s Office and PPD investigators are given access as needed for official investigations and the District Attorney’s Office Charging Unit can gain access through submission of a PARS report. Other prosecutorial agencies can gain temporary access in prosecution/legal defense cases that arise from BWC incidents and only the Police Commissioner can release recordings to the media (for legitimate law enforcement purposes).

Files will be reviewed and released according to “federal, state, local statutes and Departmental policy (public records act, etc.) as set forth in General Order 810 Public Information Release.” Media inquiries and requests are processed in accordance with General Order 346 Media Relations. The publicly available Rialto Police Department Policy Manual does not include any policies at those General Order numbers, but does include a Media Relations Policy at General Order 324.

Yes, but video footage should not be released without express written permission from non-law enforcement subjects of the video footage. In cases where subject of the video is shot by a firearm, killed or grievously injured, the requested footage will be provided as quickly as possible – no later than 5 days after receipt of the request. Footage cannot be withheld from public on basis of being an investigatory record when a police officer or other law enforcement employee is the subject under investigation in relation to his or her on-the-job conduct.