For the Milwaukee Police Department and Fire and Police Commission
Chapter 5
Use of Force and Deadly Force Practices
Finding 25
Although audio or video recordings of civilian witnesses are required, the audio or video recording of involved and witnessing officers is not.
MPD should require audio or video recordings of involved and witnessing officers to improve the quality and transparency of the investigation.
The practice of not video or audio recording officer statements is in part due to the recognition that officers have a legal right to decline any voluntary interview and will very often choose not to make a statement in the criminal case if it is recorded. The department has not made this a requirement because each officer has the right to consult with an attorney and many attorneys will advise against giving a recorded statement.
The department’s policy with citizen witnesses is to inform them that MPD would like to take a recorded statement, and if they decline, the department will conduct an unrecorded interview. It should be noted SOP 453 (Officer-Involved Deaths and Other Critical Incidents) is currently in the process of being revised and one of the revisions will remove the requirement that citizen interviews must be recorded. The policy will specifically remind sworn personnel that citizen interviews are consensual in nature and that citizens have the right to refuse to be recorded.
The department also acknowledges that the state law requiring an outside agency to conduct an investigation into police-involved deaths takes this decision out of the department’s hands as MPD, by law, cannot control the investigative process of any outside agency if they require the interviews to be recorded.
* Email or Phone:
MPD should absolutely require video and audio recordings of involved and witnessing officers, especially for as long as it is required of civilians.
Even if the officer has a lawyer with them, which of course is a right, once they've spoken to a lawyer (if they choose to do so) their statements should be able to be recorded for transparency.
given the 'shall record' direction for BWC - why would we not have mandatory recorded interviews post-incident? Officers can give a ' I decline to describe the incident, pending a discussion with my attorney' - but then why would any post-incident written report made by the same officer be believed?