How Ohio police justify charging hundreds of dollars for bodycam video

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/politics/ohio-politics/how-ohio-police-justify-charging-hundreds-of-dollars-for-bodycam-video

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Police officers in Ohio are defending their soon-to-be new ability to charge hundreds of dollars for body camera footage requested by the public and media, saying it protects officers from harassment. Advocates, attorneys and professors fear for government transparency and accountability.

Police body and dash camera footage helps Ohioans know what's going on in their communities.

"They're out for understanding, they're out for transparency and they're looking for justice," attorney ​Sarah Gelsomino said.


-------------

Mike Weinman with the Fraternal Order of Police said this new law would help smaller municipalities that already struggle with staffing.

"Whoever is in charge of their public records, that person might be pulled off the road to do these things," Weinman said. "So that means there's a person who's not responding to calls, who's not out there being proactive in the community."

Police still want to be transparent, he added, but they want to make it more difficult for social media bloggers — or activists — who mass request footage.

For example, Marion Police Chief Jay McDonald, also the president of the Ohio FOP, showed me that he receives requests from people asking for drunk and disorderly conduct videos. Oftentimes, these people monetize the records on YouTube, he added.

[A HERETIC I AM]

1. Watch out for more of this sort of thing. A LOT more.

With the incoming administration and his overt authoritarian inclinations, it will embolden police departments to do this sort of thing and more.

Trumpy has voiced his desire to see cops be more violent with the public on more than one occasion. He expressed the desire to make it impossible for a cop to lose his qualified immunity, the loss of which is something that helps win civil cases where suits are brought against officers for assault, brutality and incidents of constitutional rights violations.


Once again, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

[Historic NY]

2. I understand it but the went too far to fix the problem

There are people that actually make money off this.They are the individuals that actually run you-tube sites, and anti-police groups. They collect and post videos. They run it as a commercial business and clickbait operation.

The same thing with various fees charged for genealogical requests etc. you are charged if they even go look w/o producing an item. It 2025 most of this stuff could be computerized. Many grants have been given to do this

[OldBaldy1701E]

3. Wow. Seizures from sketchy laws are not enough for you greedy cops, eh?

Figures. They just hate the fact that they are not making money off of every single thing they look at.

[jimfields33]

4. What about the you tubers making big bucks off of camera footage?

They want to stop that which I think is definitely correct.

[OldBaldy1701E]

8. You mean the footage created by cameras paid for by us?

The police have those things because of taxpayers. The police make A LOT of money above and beyond from questionable seizures and unclaimed 'evidence'. They refuse outside audits and will not keep good records about this stuff.

It is not my fault that someone came up with this and the police pitched a fit because learned that they could make lots of money from doing something like this, but they did not think of it. But, we taxpayers are going to pay for their continued fights over this. Not the departments.

So, they come out on top regardless of the outcome. Per design, of course.

[FBaggins]

9. Particularly the ones who stage the conflict in the first place

Police have better things to do than deal with childish harassment/baiting for clicks and views on YouTube.

[VGNonly]

5. The Great Ohio Shakedown Act of 2025

"You got a nice justice system there, it would be a shame if something happened to it".

[Littlered]

6. I get your opinion but,

Why should I as a taxpayer be on the hook for television studios and other for profit organizations that use their resources? I do believe there should have been a provision for those needing the footage for “court cases.” As I am sure they are exempt for prosecutorial purposes.

[VGNonly]

7. It's just a joke.

[FBaggins]

10. There doesn't need to be an exception for court purposes

They rarely have the option of charging if the footage is for discovery purposes.

[ecstatic]

11. There has to be a middle ground here

That law needs to be tweaked or struck down entirely. There are several alternatives. The state of Ohio could contract with a nonprofit or private firm that handles those requests on their behalf. Automatically upload and index all footage, and when any footage is requested, the external company would redact any sensitive information and then fulfill the requests.

Or, police departments could charge high volume requesters. For people requesting footage of more than one incident per year, if the additional footage requested is not related to incidents or cases involving the requesters, their loved ones or clients, they could be asked to pay or join a subscription plan in order to retrieve more footage.

Or, the police departments can be proactive and start posting the redacted footage themselves for profit on YouTube or selling the content on their websites. Anyone using that content on their own channels would then have to pay for licensing rights, and it would be a mostly automatic process due to YouTube's copyright technology. The profit made could then be used for hiring additional staff to fulfill requests.

Regardless of which option Ohio goes with, regular citizens deserve access to these records. From my understanding, open records are federally mandated, and any charges for fulfilling request should be reasonable.