Seattle needs to try to hire this Gelembuik person asap! Not only does he sound like he’s good at his job, it would have the added bonus of likely driving Barnes out.

TLDR: cops suck, camera footage bad, poor criminals, abolitionists don’t like cops, water is wet.

Oh, hearsay and anonymous sources are solid journalism.

The Stranger can’t be mad at Wilson for keeping Barnes so decide they need to launch a pressure / smear campaign to change her mind.

It's a tough issue. I have personally been a victim of police excessive force in which a body camera would have certainly proven the case. I think they are helpful when the police are doing traffic stops, performing search warrants, or responding to calls for police action. Mass surveillance, however, is quite a different issue, and it is surprising that the City Council has been supporting this over the objection of the ACLU, Community Police Commission, and residents in these neighborhoods. A series of connected fixed cameras that are monitored in real-time, and are not part of a police action or investigation, invariably invade the privacy of innocent citizens whose only 'crime' is walking down the street in their own neighborhood.

@6: “…whose only 'crime' is walking down the street in their own neighborhood.”

No one has any expectation of privacy in any public space; that’s inherent to the definition of “public space.” Whether cameras should operate in a given public location should be decided by analyzing data, not by blanket prohibition because ‘cameras bad.’

@5: "The Stranger can’t be mad at Wilson for keeping Barnes so decide they need to launch a pressure / smear campaign to change her mind."

Ever since Wilson's election, I've wondered how the Stranger would treat her, once she started deviating from their political orthodoxy. Would they turn on her, or would they go full Sawantista for her? While it's still too early to tell, this move suggests they might go the latter route, with any of her deviations from their script either ignored outright, or foisted onto a scapegoat.

A network of camera feeds from very public areas is "mass surveillance" for good reason. It's to keep us safe. If you are worried being caught smoking a joint or drinking in public, walk out of camera range. If you want to kill someone randomly, walk out of camera range. If you're in a political protest, you should be proud of the recording of your presence.

Only the ever paranoid weaklings who think they're forever margarinalized and celebrate their victimhood don't like this.

It feels like the jury is still out on whether or not body cameras are, overall, good or bad for policing, particularly in encounters with our non-white citizens; but I don't think there's enough evidence yet that they are more evil than good. In terms of cctv, at some point you have to trust the watchers and how long cctv recordings are kept. If you ever have the opportunity to see European whodunits (particularly England and Ireland), at least on TV they rely on a LOT of cctv footage.

The guy is a jerk. I lived in Madison for a while and watched police indiscriminately
tear gassing people who weren't protesting or rioting--they were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. And this guy illegally tried to sway public opinion against a law that would ban tear gas.

https://isthmus.com/news/telldylan/can-police-chief-use-his-city-blog-to-sway-public-opinion/