Body Camera Footage

What It Is

Body-worn camera (BWC) footage is video and audio recorded by cameras attached to officers’ uniforms. When it exists and is preserved, it’s often the single most important piece of evidence in a § 1983 case.

Why It Matters

After Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007), courts view facts “in the light depicted by the videotape” when video evidence exists. This can cut both ways:

• For you: If the video shows the officer using force while you’re compliant, that’s powerful evidence the force was unreasonable
• Against you: If the video shows you actively resisting, the court will credit the video over your testimony

Without video, it’s your word against the officer’s — and juries tend to believe officers. Video levels the playing field.

The Preservation Problem

Body camera footage has a habit of disappearing:

• “The camera malfunctioned” — Convenient timing
• “The footage was automatically deleted per retention policy” — Departments often have 60-90 day retention; if you don’t request it quickly, it’s gone
• “The officer forgot to activate the camera” — Policy violations that are rarely punished
• “Only portions of the footage are available” — Selective preservation

What to Do

1. Request immediately — File a records request (FOIA/state equivalent) as soon as possible after the incident, even before filing suit
2. Send a preservation letter — Written notice to the department demanding they preserve all footage, communications, and records related to the incident
3. Request all footage — Not just the incident. Request booking footage, transport footage, and footage from other officers at the scene
4. Check for gaps — Compare the footage timestamps to the timeline. Gaps may indicate tampering or selective recording
5. Request the metadata — Activation time, deactivation time, buffering period (many cameras record 30-120 seconds of video before activation, without audio)

Spoliation

If footage was destroyed after you requested it or after litigation was reasonably anticipated, you can seek spoliation sanctions under Rule 37(e):

• Adverse inference instruction — The jury can be told to assume the missing footage was unfavorable to the defendant
• Case dispositive sanctions — In extreme cases (intentional destruction), the court can enter default judgment

Key Cases

• Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) — Video evidence standard
• Vos v. City of Newport Beach, 892 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2018) — Court must view disputed facts in plaintiff’s favor even when video exists, if the video is ambiguous