FGW Revenue Protection Trial Body Worn CCTV

[BrownE]

Does anyone have any further information on this? So far all I know is based on a few tweets.

https://twitter.com/owen_young/status/410310553790603264

@FGW can I ask why the conductor on my train is carrying a mobile camera unit with him?

@owen_young That'd be an R.P Inspector - and the CCTV is a trial scheme we're running. Eli.

Personally I find this a bit concerning.

 

[Captain Chaos]

It only records when we tell it to I think, by pressing a button. Only used when required for.things like verbal assaults etc as far as I am aware. Not trialling then my end though so don't know a great deal.

 

[asylumxl]

I'm assuming it's intended for providing more evidence when somebody kicks off and tries to assault an RPI.

 

[Mugby]

A sad reflection on our times!

 

[CC 72100]

I don't get what's 'concerning' about it - if that's somebody successfully caught after an assault on train crew, isn't that a positive thing?

Equally so if staff feel more confident doing their duties when wearing them - again to me that is not 'concerning' but positive.

 

[class303]

good idea. i don't envy RPIs in this day and age

 

[RPI]

What's concerning about it? If you had to endure some of the abuse that we're subjected to then you would agree that it's a good thing!

 

[table38]

I've often wondered if RJ should get one to record his encounters

 

[Flamingo]

Apparently it's reduced assaults in Merseyrail by over 50%. On our patch, I've heard that nobody is sure if it'll stand up in court or not - as there have been no incidents involving the people wearing it - so draw your own conclusions...

I don't know why the OP is concerned about it - I'd love to have it, having been the victim of both verbal assaults and physical assaults in the past which BTP have not acted upon due to lack of evidence, and having had a number of malicious complaints to both my employer and BTP which this technology would have totally contradicted.

 

[yorksrob]

Perhaps the fact that it's about as inconspicuous as Long John Silver's parrot, might have the effect of calming tensions.

 

[Flamingo]

Perhaps the fact that it's about as inconspicuous as Long John Silver's parrot, might have the effect of calming tensions.

It's supposed to be - no point in having a hidden deterrent (unless it's on a submarine )

 

[CockneySparrow]

Does anyone have any further information on this? So far all I know is based on a few tweets.

https://twitter.com/owen_young/status/410310553790603264

Personally I find this a bit concerning.

I dont, but I always buy a ticket so there is no problem when they come round

Suppose its only concerning for those that think they might be filmed

 

[Howardh]

I'm OK with it, but the worry is some embarrassing situations caught by conductor/train CCTV ends up on youtube. What procedures are in place to keep the footage *in house* if no offence is committed??

Things like a bloke fast asleep, a lesbian couple snogging, a tranny on his (her??) journey home looking worse for wear, someone with someone they're not supposed to be with??

Wat are the rules and regs and does data Protection come into it?

 

[455driver]

Personally I find this a bit concerning.

But its okay for people to shove cameras in our faces when they feel like it! :roll:

Personally I think this should be rolled out to every RPI (and guards on certain routes) as a way of stopping the morons kicking off or being filmed when the do kick off.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What are the rules and regs and does data Protection come into it?

Hopefully the same as all the videos of staff that end up on youtube without their permission but I think there will be certain rules in place to protect the stupid/ignorant/arrogant/abusive*/etc 'customers'.

* delete as applicable.

 

[route:oxford]

Personally I find this a bit concerning.

It's only fair, you could quite easily be filming using a hidden camera.

I'm always wired up for audio and video when I go "mystery shopping" either for the company I'm visiting, their competitor or regulator.

 

[Howardh]

Hopefully the same as all the videos of staff that end up on youtube without their permission but I think there will be certain rules in place to protect the stupid/ignorant/arrogant/abusive*/etc 'customers'.

* delete as applicable.

There is an issue there as I have seen many an innocuous video on youtube of someone's train journey (yes, I know I need a life) where other people inc. train staff are clearly shown. Can't see a problem there at all, but whether it's public filming staff or the other way round in situations they wouldn't rather be shown in I'm wondering how the law stands? Is a train "public" or "private" property, for example - that you (public) would need permission to film in?

Think that modern technology has way overtaken the law in respect of this. Train companies can always cover themselves by clearly signing video footage (fixed or moving) may be taken and that is part of conditions of carriage.

I don't want the day to come where it is forbidden for the public to video/photograph within a train.

Wider discussion??

 

[185]

As a customer facing employee, I hear mixed messages from colleagues.

Some are concerned it will crucify them, as any one, at any employee can say things in the heat of the moment.

Others, indeed the majority of us, are confident, that if you do you job right, and follow policy/procedure, it can then only be used to crucify (okay... not literally) the passengers committing the verbal abuse, assaults, fraud etc.

CCTV needs heavy regulation, and one example of misuse of (publicly-funded) CCTV being misused was First Transpennine Express who unashamedly issued a disciplinary to a Conductor Rep for wearing a union tie, using the CCTV as evidence.... that is where this falls down at present.

 

[DownSouth]

Apparently it's reduced assaults in Merseyrail by over 50%. On our patch, I've heard that nobody is sure if it'll stand up in court or not - as there have been no incidents involving the people wearing it - so draw your own conclusions...

My guess is that any competent defence lawyer would be able to have it disallowed on the basis that it is only turned on when the user wants it to be turned on, the easy falsification of audio and the weak chain of custody.

A brilliant defence lawyer might be able to convince a court that it is evidence of entrapment and therefore the whole case should be thrown out.

 

[route:oxford]

the easy falsification of audio and the weak chain of custody.

Falsification of audio is far harder now. Sophisticated analysis techniques can immediately identify timing issues in the background audio.

 

[Flamingo]

My guess is that any competent defence lawyer would be able to have it disallowed on the basis that it is only turned on when the user wants it to be turned on, the easy falsification of audio and the weak chain of custody.

A brilliant defence lawyer might be able to convince a court that it is evidence of entrapment and therefore the whole case should be thrown out.

I'd be interested to hear the opinion of one of our Legal Eagles on this...

 

[Suraggu]

Its funny. The Revenue Protection Manager who started this shoulder camera trial has not been seen on trains recently and wont be for quite some time.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I can't say I'm a fan of people being routinely filmed, and then the decision whether to save the footage rests with one half of the dispute, but, as uncomfortable as it is, it's the world we love in nowadays.

 

[broadgage]

I have seen many cases of passengers behaving badly, usually when caught without the correct, or any, ticket.

I have also seen a few cases of RPIs behaving with excessive zeal.

Audio and video would seem valuable in either case since subsequent prosecutions or the threat thereof otherwise hinge largely on contradictory recollections as to whom said or did what.

 

[Flamingo]

I can't say I'm a fan of people being routinely filmed, and then the decision whether to save the footage rests with one half of the dispute, but, as uncomfortable as it is, it's the world we love in nowadays.

It's not recording 24/7, but is switched on by the RPI as they feel is appropriate.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

It's not recording 24/7, but is switched on by the RPI as they feel is appropriate.

I thought it was one of those ones that recorded constantly but if you pressed a button the last 15 minutes or so were saved and not overwritten? May be wrong though.

 

[bnm]

I've also been told that the system used records constantly and overwrites. With the facility to save the last 15 minutes at any given time.

 

[Flamingo]

Not according to our briefing on them.

 

[1e10]

Seen an RP wearing one fo these around 6 weeks ago.

 

[Timster83]

It's not recording 24/7, but is switched on by the RPI as they feel is appropriate.

I think this would be the main concern I have with this kind of technology, especially if it was to be used in legal proceedings.

I have no experience of this myself, but I do read posts in the disputes section where a common complaint is that "the RPI was rude" or "the RPI manhandled me" etc.

If such a situation was to occur and the RPI was acting inappropriately (e.g. as described in some of RJ's stories), how likely is it that he or she would make the decision to record their actions? My gut feeling is that it would only be used to record bad behaviour from passengers and not railway staff.

I'm not against the technology in principle. I know I'm likely to get recorded when out and about and I will also record videos myself too which are likely to have real people in them.

I would be completely in favour of a system which automatically recorded a rolling 15 minutes and at any point, either the RPI or the passenger could request that the footage be uploaded, stored and made available via a subject access request.

 

[SPADTrap]

What I find most ironic are the passengers now freaking out about data protection, via their twitter account where they post very personal stuff, or on their Facebook, perplexing behavior.