Several questionable officer involved shootings and perceived abuses of authority disproportionately involving minority citizens have resulted in public outcry, protests, and nationwide scrutiny of police in recent years. The resulting police legitimacy crisis has prompted agencies to rapidly equip officers with body-worn video cameras (BWCs). BWC advocates lauded the findings of an early study that attributed significant reductions in use of force incidents and citizen complaints to the devices and it is this and a handful of other short-term studies upon which the claims of these benefits are predicated. However, subsequent research has produced mixed findings and the sustainability of any reductions remains questionable. The limited knowledge concerning the impact of BWCs on the aforementioned outcomes is problematic considering the potential negative impact of unrealistic expectations and the expense of BWC program maintenance. The objective of this dissertation is to address gaps in the extant research by exploring the impact of an incremental deployment of the devices on the frequency and severity of use of force incidents and the frequency and outcome of citizen complaints while controlling for staffing, volume of officer-initiated enforcement contacts, and the Ferguson incident. Utilizing 86-months of secondary data collected from the Newport News, Virginia Police Department (NNPD) a vector autoregressive multivariate time series analysis indicates that BWCs were a significant factor in a substantial sustained reduction in use of force and a substantial sustained increase in exonerated complaint dispositions at the NNPD.

<p>This study examined how three different manipulations of a single policing stance affected the quality scores and matching performance in a biometric facial recognition system; it was conducted in three phases. In the first phase, the researcher collected qualitative survey data from active, sworn law enforcement officers in 15 states. In the second phase, the researcher collected quantitative data using a single facial recognition subject and a static body-worn camera mounted to an adjustable tripod. In the third phase, the researcher collected quantitative data from body-worn camera-equipped law enforcement officers who filmed a stationary target as they executed a series of specified movements from the interview stance. The second phase tested two different body-worn cameras: one that is popular among law enforcement agencies in the United States, the Axon Body 2; and one that is inexpensive and available to the general public via a popular internet commerce website. The third phase tested only the Axon Body 2. Results of the study showed that matching results are poor in a biometric system where the test body-worn camera was the sensor, with error rates as high as 100% when the body-worn camera wearer was in motion. The general conclusion of this study is that a body-worn camera is not a suitable sensor for a biometric facial recognition system at this time, though advances in camera technology and biometric systems may close the gap in the future. </p>