Press "Enter" to skip to content

Body cameras a welcome addition for GSO deputies

“They’ve been a welcome addition,” said Gloucester Sheriff Darrell Warren regarding the body cameras his deputies began wearing in mid-August.

“The very first week we were using them, we got a call at 6:45 a.m. on a Sunday morning about a guy agitated and blocking traffic on a back road. He was obviously under the influence of something. We ended up having to Taser him, and in situations when you use force it’s good to have that camera to back you up,” said Warren. 

Warren pulled up the footage from the incident and it is, as he said, like watching TV. The agitated man, who is screaming and slamming the hood of a stopped vehicle, turns and curses at the first officer to arrive and ignores his orders. The officer attempts to take the man into custody but the man manages to turn and grabs the officer’s neck.

As the two tussle, another officer arrives and warns the man before deploying his Taser. The man is brought to the ground, sustaining a scrape from the pavement, and finally taken into custody.

“There was no complaint made about the use of force, but there could have been,” Warren said. “It would be hard to justify after viewing the film.”

He cited another incident when a complaint was clearly avoided due to the camera. An officer went to a home to serve a warrant on a man, and before he has even left the property the man’s wife is on the phone to the sheriff’s office complaining about the officer’s behavior. When she was informed about the camera and was assured the incident would be reviewed, Warren said she changed her story. 

He said the footage caught on the cameras can also provide a wonderful training tool, and can be used during a debriefing of officers following a critical situation.

The cameras will cost Warren’s office about $55,000 the first year and about $20,000 annually after that for maintenance, replacement and cloud storage of the footage. He believes it is well worth the cost.

“I was surprised they didn’t have them,” said Deputy Amanda Billups, who came to the Gloucester Sheriff’s Office about a year ago and before the GSO obtained the cameras. Billups had worked for two Peninsula law enforcement agencies, both utilizing body cams.

Billups said she has “no complaints, none whatsoever” about the cameras and added that, even when the camera’s view is blocked by the officer’s hands or actions, having the audio recording of the incident is better than nothing. 

Billups said she activates her camera whenever she is dispatched to a call or anytime she initiates an interaction. “I dealt with an intoxicated person who complained. The tape showed what my interaction actually was,” she said. “To me, it’s a win-win for everyone. There are three sides to every story. Having the camera is a great overall asset.”

“It’s great for DUI stops,” said GSO Deputy Dylan Moore, who shares Billups’s patrol shift. She was on a DUI stop once and Moore stopped to assist. He was able to film the suspect’s feet as he followed Billups’s field test commands.

Moore said it is “very situational” when deciding to activate the camera, but said he does utilize it anytime he is investigating something. “It’s also useful when you get a verbal admission, but the subject doesn’t want to give a written statement,” he said.

“When I download the film, I can get stills from it, label it and categorize it,” Moore said. “And all of my film is stamped with my name. It’s a great tool to work with.”

Warren said prosecutors also welcome the cameras and the evidence they provide. “The downside for prosecutors is if there’s a 45-minute DUI stop, that’s 45 minutes they have to watch,” he said.

“Once some of these cases are adjudicated, we’re hoping we can release some film publicly so others can see just how incredible the cameras are,” Warren said. “It’s also good to have a reminder of what the officers are dealing with out on the street.”

In Mathews

Mathews County Sheriff Mark Barrick said that, while he has had in-car cameras for some time, he is not currently considering adopting body cameras, and their use is not anticipated in the foreseeable future. Cost is one factor, he said, and data storage is a major consideration, as well.