Body Camera Obscura: The Semiotics of Police Video

IF 0.4 4区 社会学 AMERICAN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW Pub Date : 2016-08-19 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.2826747
C. Morrison
{"title":"Body Camera Obscura: The Semiotics of Police Video","authors":"C. Morrison","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2826747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our understanding of violent encounters between the police and civilians is now primarily mediated by video images. With surprising rapidity, recording these encounters has become an integral part of modern policing, sparking the current body camera bonanza. When these recordings are used as evidence in police use-of-force cases, the factfinders must decide whether the police officer’s actions were “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment. But there is an unrecognized fault line between “police video” (video recorded by the police in the course of their official duties) and “eyewitness video” (recorded by bystander-witnesses). Police video tends to recirculate dominant narratives of violence and masculinity as heroic ideals that coexist easily with the legal standard of the reasonable officer. In contrast, eyewitness videos typically offer the counter-narrative of an abusive state. These images have evidentiary value, but also cultural currency. They reflect back to us our feelings about violence, race, masculinity, and the law. This article proposes a descriptive critique of the use of video evidence in assessing the lawfulness of police violence. Using insights from semiotics, film criticism, cultural theory, and cognitive psychology, it attempts to sketch out a more nuanced way of approaching video evidence in the context of these cases.","PeriodicalId":51824,"journal":{"name":"AMERICAN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW","volume":"54 1","pages":"791-841"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMERICAN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2826747","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Our understanding of violent encounters between the police and civilians is now primarily mediated by video images. With surprising rapidity, recording these encounters has become an integral part of modern policing, sparking the current body camera bonanza. When these recordings are used as evidence in police use-of-force cases, the factfinders must decide whether the police officer’s actions were “reasonable” under the Fourth Amendment. But there is an unrecognized fault line between “police video” (video recorded by the police in the course of their official duties) and “eyewitness video” (recorded by bystander-witnesses). Police video tends to recirculate dominant narratives of violence and masculinity as heroic ideals that coexist easily with the legal standard of the reasonable officer. In contrast, eyewitness videos typically offer the counter-narrative of an abusive state. These images have evidentiary value, but also cultural currency. They reflect back to us our feelings about violence, race, masculinity, and the law. This article proposes a descriptive critique of the use of video evidence in assessing the lawfulness of police violence. Using insights from semiotics, film criticism, cultural theory, and cognitive psychology, it attempts to sketch out a more nuanced way of approaching video evidence in the context of these cases.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
随身暗箱:警察录像的符号学
我们对警察和平民之间的暴力冲突的理解现在主要是通过视频图像来调解的。以惊人的速度,记录这些遭遇已经成为现代警务不可或缺的一部分,引发了当前随身相机的热潮。当这些录音被用作警察使用武力案件的证据时,事实调查人员必须根据第四修正案决定警察的行为是否“合理”。但在“警察录像”(警察在执行公务过程中录制的录像)和“目击者录像”(旁观者目击者录制的录像)之间存在一条未被认识到的断层线。警察视频倾向于将暴力和男子气概作为英雄理想的主流叙事,与理性警察的法律标准轻松共存。相比之下,目击者的视频通常提供了虐待状态的相反叙述。这些图像具有证据价值,同时也是文化货币。它们向我们反映了我们对暴力、种族、男子气概和法律的感受。本文对在评估警察暴力的合法性时使用视频证据提出了描述性的批评。利用符号学、电影评论、文化理论和认知心理学的见解,它试图在这些案例的背景下勾勒出一种更细致入微的方式来处理视频证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: The American Criminal Law Review is the nation"s premier journal of criminal law. The ACLR is the most-cited criminal law review in the nation, and it also ranks among the country"s most-cited law reviews of any kind. Recently, ExpressO, an online submission service for legal scholars, ranked the ACLR as the top subject-specific law review in the area of Criminal Law and Procedure. Published four times a year, the ACLR provides timely treatment of significant developments in constitutional and criminal law through articles contributed by leading scholars and practitioners, and through notes authored by the journal"s student staff.
期刊最新文献
"ARREST ALL STREET MENDICANTS AND BEGGARS:" HOMELESSNESS, SOCIAL COOPERATION, AND THE COMMITMENTS OF DEMOCRATIC POLICING. Liability for Mass Sexual Abuse Smoke but No Fire Body Camera Obscura: The Semiotics of Police Video Blue on Black: An Empirical Assessment of Police Shootings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1