Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 41
41 ready for commercial use could provide a live text descrip- Among others listed were risk assessment staff, safety and tion of video images to alleviate some of the time and labor claims managers, facilities managers, legal counsel, and a of searching though video or image collections. Another variety of rail operations personnel, often in the last instance set of researchers announced the development of software limited to supervisory personnel. A number of agencies that would also save time and tedium by summarizing a chose not to answer this question. Although it is difficult to whole day's video in a few-minutes-long synopsis. In the interpret this lack of response, it may merely indicate that same period, DHS announced a pilot project in conjunction the person who completed the form is not involved in this with the Massachusetts Port Authority to test a system at area of administrative decision-making. If this presumption one terminal of Boston's Logan Airport that puts together is accurate, it indicates a need for policy coordination among a number of cameras to provide a 360-degree wide view all those with responsibility for use and maintenance of the and can analyze images with sufficient detail to scan for video surveillance system. abnormal activity and for suspicious items left behind or removed (Beauge 2010; "Hebrew University Invention ..." An area related to who may access images is what pro- 2010; Simonite 2010). cedures exist to ensure that only those designated with the authority actually have access. To address this area, the sur- As with the use of surveillance cameras along the ROW vey asked a question on procedures that were used to main- and of sensors in conjunction with existing or upgraded tain a record of access (often referred to by law enforcement video surveillance networks, analytics is a relatively new personnel as the chain of custody). Of the 32 agencies that technology that will undoubtedly receive more attention indicated they permitted only designated individuals to from transit agencies as it becomes more readily available access images, 10 had specific sign in/sign out procedures. and as funds become available for additional research and Five agencies said that designated individuals were required purchase. to access the records only with another person present, and five indicated another control mechanism such as writing in a log. Though "only designated individuals" is likely to ARCHIVING, RETAINING, AND ACCESSING be sufficient for internal review, it can be anticipated that SURVEILLANCE IMAGES particularly in a criminal court case, a more formal sign in/ sign out policy will be required to meet chain of custody Agency policies on archiving, retaining, and accessing sur- requirements. Last, there is the question of public access. Of veillance system images differ considerably. A majority of the 41 agencies that answered the question on public access agencies (35 of 42 respondents) archive the images from their policies, 17 indicated they had none. video surveillance systems, but differences exist in the length of time images are retained. In some cases, this has to do with The issues of the length of time images are retained, who state laws; Florida, for instance, mandates that images from may access them, and developing a formal mechanism to surveillance systems be retained for at least 1 month. track access appears to be a fruitful topic for discussion at professional association meetings. Agencies with more for- Archiving images is only one of a series of decisions that mal policies that have had experience relying on their images need to be made about surveillance systems. Overall, reten- might share information with less experienced agencies. tion ranged from none at all unless something exceptional was observed or reported to more than a year, including up to 3 years in one agency. Access to images is another impor- VIDEO SURVEILLANCE AS A FORENSIC TOOL tant policy area with organizational and legal ramifications. Although most agencies indicated that only "designated The importance of policy development surrounding use of individuals" could access images, the definitions of these surveillance images is directly related to its use as a forensic individuals were was not consistent. tool in both criminal and tort (civil) prosecutions. If agencies intend to offer images as evidence in court and in formal But despite the differences in policies, certain gener- internal disciplinary matters, they will be asked to describe alizations are appropriate. In all agencies with their own how the images are safeguarded, how they are labeled as to police departments, police may access the images, although location and time, and what chain of custody policies ensure in some agencies access for forensic investigation may be that the images are not tampered with and are actually the limited to detectives/investigators or supervisory staff mem- ones on which charges were based. bers. Agencies with security departments, rather than fully empowered police departments, are more likely to limit Use of images for criminal or civil prosecutions is com- access to supervisory personnel. When the security staff is mon. Thirty-seven agencies indicated that either their own supplied by an outside contractor, only high-level supervi- police or local police used images from their surveillance sors or agency employees who manage the security staff are cameras in court cases. This is a large increase over Maier likely to be authorized to access images. and Malone's 2001 finding that 10 of 19 agencies had used