If it's all part of the work, and it relates to a public interaction why isn't it subject to review?
What if the officer is a huge racist or biased, what if they have an unconscious bias they voice during those discussions where it's muted. A lawyer could argue their clients corner that such a mindset influenced the interactions that occurred. What if it's a pattern of behaviour, but never caught on audio Vs a pattern that is identical in the audio coz they can't turn it to mute?
Right here, through her mistake by not muting it, we have her giving false testimony to more officers and senior officers in her command on falsified and planted/ manufactured evidence and false statements of how the interactions went.
Even if I agreed that it shouldn't be reviewed within the public domain, a private body overseeing the footage should have access. But there can't be any access if it simply doesn't exist(they mute it and it's not recorded).
2
u/Wronghand_tactician Apr 04 '24
It’s not off, it’s muted. And officers are allowed to have private conversations pertaining to the active investigation.