Laserfiche WebLink
10 <br />WORKING GROUP POLICE-INVOLVED DEADLY FORCE ENCOUNTERS RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION STEPS <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br />AND ACTION STEPS <br />Review current statutes relevant to body worn cameras based on emerging concerns related <br />to transparency and accountability of police-involved deadly force encounters. <br />Action Step 3.3.1 Law enforcement agencies using body worn cameras should proactively re-engage <br />the public in periodic reviews of body worn camera practices and policies once <br />implemented to ensure public transparency and accountability. <br />Action Step 3.3.2 The Legislature should research and evaluate the impact of body worn cameras by <br />2022. If the evidence suggests they contribute to public safety and community trust, <br />and provide value in deadly force encounters, the Legislature should encourage and <br />fund the full implementation of body worn cameras statewide, understanding that <br />communities have local autonomy on the choice to adopt body worn cameras. <br />Establish a formal, protected, non-disciplinary Sentinel Event Review process similar to the <br />National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to review critical incidents and identify systemic <br />issues that need to be addressed to improve outcomes in law enforcement, including deadly <br />force encounters. <br />Action Step 3.4.1 The State of Minnesota should review similar processes already in place in Minnesota <br />such as the Infant Mortality Review Board and determine the best format to adopt for <br />use statewide. This should include a review of other state models and lessons learned. <br />Local communities and law enforcement agencies should implement customized models of <br />community involvement that increase communication, input, and engagement of the public in <br />establishing openness, listening, and transparency between the public and the law enforcement. <br />The State of Minnesota should work with key stakeholders to explore options to address public <br />concerns about closed cases of police-involved deadly force encounters, such as an Ombuds- <br />man and Office of Inspector General. <br />RECOMMENDATION 3.3 <br />RECOMMENDATION 3.4 <br />RECOMMENDATION 3.5 <br />RECOMMENDATION 3.6