This afternoon, twenty-five Seattle citizens—many of them democratic, civil rights, and minority leaders representing organizations like the NAACP, the Minority Executive Director's Coalition, and CANOES, the Native American city employees organization—spoke out in strident favor of equipping Seattle police officers with body cameras to protect Seattle's residents from its law enforcers. "The evidence gathered by these cameras will not only deter abuses by police officers, but limit frivolous complaints against officers and save the city considerable hundreds of thousands of dollars," testified Pamela Masterman Stearns, a spokeswoman for CANOES.

The hour of emotionally-charged public testimony preceded a special public meeting of the city council's Energy, Technology, and Civil Rights committee, where council members Bruce Harrell and Nick Licata were briefed on hurdles of piloting (let alone implementing) such a program.

Of course, there are roadblocks: Washington's privacy act states that it's unlawful to make a recording of a private conversation without first informing individuals that they are being recorded and securing their consent. Harrell, a vocal proponent of the body cameras, questioned whether routine stops made by officers would be considered public or private conversations. "Traffic stops are considered public," explained city attorney Bob Scales. But the issue is, what's considered a private conversation? "There’s no bright-line rule between what’s private or non-private," Scales explained. "It would be easy to inadvertently record a private conversation and if that were to happen, the officer would be exposed to civil and criminal liability."

Which brings us to the second road block: The videos, which would primarily capture civilians who might or might not want to be filmed (think domestic violence calls), would potentially be available to the public due to public disclosure laws. For this reason, groups such as the ACLU and the Washington Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, have expressed concerns with the project.

Then there's cost to consider: Funding a project to equip and train up to 1,300 officers with cameras, as well store, catalogue, and maintain all the video files, will require major new funding. SPD has sought a $243,000 federal grant to purchase 70 officer cameras, but that grant hasn’t been awarded.

And finally: The Seattle Police Officer's Guild (SPOG), argues that body cameras are subject to their contract negotiations with the city (which have been ongoing for almost a year now).

Still, residents believe these hurdles and more should be overcome. "I support the use of lapel cameras by SPD officers," testified Marc Taylor, a spokesman for the Seattle Indian Health Board. "I’m aware of the concerns expressed by the [Seattle police officer's] guild, the ACLU... but it seems that none of those concerns can dispute the usefulness of these cameras. Film has no secret agenda. Long after we forget, film will remember."

"I've had first-hand experience with police misconduct," testified Fern Renville. Last October, Renville says she was intimidated and verbally harassed by four police officers in uniform while in Victor Steinbrueck park. "I filed a complaint to the [SPD Office of Professional Accountability]. I followed all the recommended steps and 10 months later this issue is still unresolved. I sure wish those four officers had been wearing body cameras. My guess is, if they had they wouldn’t have been engaging in that kind of behavior in the first place."

Only one person among the crowd of 50 spoke out against piloting the body cameras—on the grounds that the cameras wouldn't go far enough to reform police behavior. "A camera will not stop an officer from using his gun," testified Mona Joyner. "Why don’t you give us all a camera and let us record the police?"

But flaws in how the cameras operate might trump a thousand hopes from residents and civil rights leaders. In June, SPD committed to testing four body cameras and reporting back to the city council. However, during today's briefing, SPD reported that only one body camera has been tested—in "simulated police interactions" at SPD's training station, not in the field. The testing showed that the body camera doesn't function or record properly when an officer is moving, raising his or her hands to fire a weapon, or physically touching a suspect.