Wouldn't you fire someone who did that? How incompetent is that??
Do you shoot someone if you know it is not on film? I mean the guy is pinned on the ground? Don't you want to make sure there is no question why you had to BLOW HIM AWAY? 5 times?
Yes, on the basis of the camera alone they should be fired. That maybe one camera may have fallen off but both officers cameras fell off? No, either did not have them on or took them off.
These officers were wrong and should go to prison or worse.
Yes, but see, the CAMERA is something that is REQUIRED for them to wear. They cannot just claim they dropped it. How many cameras are there? Just one? Then that guy needs to film and stay out of firing range and let the other cops shoot the pinned down victim to DEATH so we call all watch on tv while eating our popcorn and booing them.
Exactly even if he was grabbing for his gun...the officer did not have to shoot point blank to kill. He could have shot to stop the gun grab.
I think we had a discussion on Answerbag about a year ago when video recordings were used to prosecute a police officer for (yet another) unjustified shooting of a private citizen.
There was a proposal floated then that all cops should be required to wear body cameras to record ALL of their interactions with the public.
At that time, I raised what I thought was the central problem with the proposal: Would the absence of video ("Gosh, it wasn't working at the exact time I happened to be 'defending myself' against an unarmed Nig...er, suspect") be treated as prima fascia evidence of guilt, or would it be treated as "Gosh, it sure is a shame the video wasn't working then. I guess we can only take the officer's word for what happened?"
I guess we have a test case already. We shall see....
There is a cell phone video... Personally I don't believe both the officers cameras fell off. CNN has the video up.
OLD SCHOOL. I totally agree with your take on the video situation. The major fault here in this incident is that they DID NOT HAVE THE Video TAPE playing. Videos may open more cans of worms than intended, but that video is supposed to be ON at all times from the approach to the arrest. Or there may BE no one TO arrest.
I know if I were a cop and I had to make sure my ass was covered at all times, I would make damned sure (especially in this day and age of COPS are being watched and monitored during questionable shootings...) to make sure that video was on my body AND WORKING before I interacted in any manner with a gun.
Imagine being a professional photographer and going to a photo shoot and not having any film in the camera? This is just as ludicrous and there is more than time and money involved. This has to do with KILLING citizens you are sworn to protect and serve.
I know. I know. That is too much for the police to consider. You know, if you are a cop and you have a gun, why would you worry about the OUTCOME or RESULTS of your actions? Why would you ever concern yourself with taking a life that can result in your destroyed career or jail? Why would you come prepared to an incident and make sure all your equipment worked?
I mean that is just silly.
@Shar -- I'm not sure how sarcastic you are being.
Yes, if I were an honest pro-social cop, I would want to make sure that I held myself to the highest standards of conduct and that there was always video evidence to corroborate my professional behavior.
But my reading of the evidence suggests most police departments, like most criminal thug gangs, don't want scrutiny and don't want their behavior recorded. So long as there is no physical or video evidence to upset their alibis, cops depend upon a Code of Silence and the brotherhood of officers to protect their own.
Yes, cops know they are being watched, but they also know that the legal system gives them great deference in the absence of incontrovertible evidence of their wrongdoing.
Being very sarcastic
Sorry, if that was missed, OS. VERY sarcastic. Thanks. 
There are several things I find questionable in this case. And yes, the claim that both body cams were dropped is one. There seems to be quite a few cases where dash and/or body cam footage is unavailable.
I would also like to hear the tape of the call that was said to be the reason the officers approached the man in the first place. The caller is reported as saying the man threatened him with a gun. Yet whoever shouts that he has a gun on the cellphone video sounds surprised. The person who says that is not visible, but sounds to be out of breath, as would be the officer who tackled and brought the man down. According to the store owner, the gun was removed from the man's pocket after he was shot.
I also believe that whenever there is a police shooting, it should not be investigated by the department responsible. Nor do I think police should be treated any differently than anyone else involved in a shooting regarding questioning them and taking a statement.
“We give officers normally a day or so to go home and think about it” before being interviewed, McKneely told the Advocate.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/07/06/video...
Update:
