The aftermath of the police shooting of Chance David Baker seems to have quickly devolved into a debate over the efficacy of body cameras, with the Press Herald running an editorial (Our View, Feb. 25) and a column by Bill Nemitz (Feb. 26) concluding that officer-mounted body cameras would not “have added to our understanding of this specific event” and “there is no evidence that police officers did anything wrong at the scene.”
It is remarkable that Mr. Nemitz and the Press Herald Editorial Board could make such statements without A) being privy to an ongoing investigation that has only just begun and B) having actual audio and video footage of the event with which to come to that conclusion.
Indeed, Mr. Nemitz in his column argued that body camera footage can give false impressions when shot from short range but are more effective from longer range.
His insights might be more compelling were it not for the fact that the kill shot took place from 100 feet away, according to information released Feb. 21 by Portland Police Chief Michael Sauschuck.
Perhaps all the squabbling over cameras is a matter of willful delusion that Portland, with its generally well-regarded police, is not capable of killing a black man who did not pose a mortal threat. But the melancholy truth is that it can happen here as well as anywhere.
The Press Herald, along with everyone else, should wait until as many facts are known before anyone is condemned or exonerated by extenuating circumstances and before concluding whether a more timely introduction of body cameras prior to this tragedy might have assisted us all with any questions now still unanswered.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
