LEXINGTON, Ky. (LEX 18) — After the first public release of body camera footage in three years, some community members are curious about how the Lexington Police Department decides when to release video.
LPD shared the interaction leading up to the arrest of council member Tanya Fogle on March 10 on their social media platforms on Tuesday. It was just hours after a judge decided to dismiss charges against her.
The post says it was in response to multiple requests from media.
The last time LEX 18 could find they released body camera video was about three years ago in 2021, a month after a police cruiser hit a teen with autism.
LEX 18 filed an open records request seeking to obtain information about the incident on March 30, including the names of the officers called to the scene, any and all body camera footage, and the audio of the initial 911 call. A day later, the Lexington Police Department released carefully edited body camera video showing two different perspectives on the incident: one from an officer on the ground and one from the officer who hit the suspect.
LPD declined an interview about how they make these decisions and directed questions to their transparency webpage.
One of the frequently asked questions the page answers is, "why shouldn't all video recorded by police be made available to the public?"
The answer says, in part, that the police department must "balance the legitimate interest of public transparency with the protection of the individual's privacy rights."
The body-worn camera policy also states that recordings are shared at the chief's discretion, and he can limit or restrict viewing as he deems appropriate.
While there were many comments praising the officers and commending their actions after watching the video, the release is also raising eyebrows with community members like Kenzie Green with LPD accountability.
"Why did they choose to release this footage? Between the last footage they released and this, there's been nothing else that they deemed worthy of releasing, so why now?" posed Green.
Green is hoping for more communication about the process.
"We understand that it's the chief's discretion, but what exactly does that mean? What is he taking into account? How does he decide who's right and whose identity is worth being protected?" she said.
The policy says the body camera footage is audited internally, but Green feels an external audit that includes civilians would provide more clarity and build trust.
"There should be very clear criteria for what they're doing and why they're doing it," said Green. "We need to be sure that policies and procedures you have in place are actually being followed."
