ELPD Stopped Sending the City’s Police Oversight Commission Footage. It’s Unclear Why

With little explanation, the East Lansing Police Department (ELPD) has stopped providing the city’s independent police oversight commission with requested body camera footage to view at home. 

Previously, commissioners were provided with footage in a dropbox to review on their own time. The footage would automatically delete after a set amount of time. On May 21, the day after former Police Chief Kim Johnson resigned, Interim Police Chief Chad Pride sent an email to commissioners stating the following:

“After consulting with the city attorney, the city attorney recommends that the ELIPOC and police administration view the BWC together or hold a closed session with the city attorney.”

This approach of viewing footage alongside ELPD officers or the city attorney won’t work, East Lansing Independent Police Oversight Commission (ELIPOC) Vice Chair Kath Edsall said. ELIPOC is made up of volunteers who have careers and other commitments. When ELPD offered initial time slots to view footage of a recent incident, ELPD did not include weekend availability or slots starting after 5:15 p.m. and Edsall was the only commissioner who signaled she was available. 

Viewing footage is a huge time commitment – as commissioners watch the footage taken from several different cameras and often stop to rewind certain parts. 

“If the video is two hours long, it may take me five hours to watch it because I want to look at certain things more than once,” Edsall said. 

Additionally, Edsall said that watching the footage with officers takes away some of the independence the commission is designed to operate with. 

City Attorney Tony Chubb offered a brief statement about the situation at the June 4 City Council meeting. 

“The question is not whether they should be able to review those videos, we have no problem with them reviewing the videos,” Chubb said. “It’s simply developing the process to ensure we can maintain their confidentiality to protect investigations, to protect the confidentiality of some of the individuals in the videos and things of that nature.”

Chubb also said at the June 4 meeting that “There’s no specific pending videos that they [ELIPOC] wish to see.” 

There is one video the commission would have been sent by now, if the past procedure was used, Commissioner Chris Root told ELi on June 19. 

There was an initial struggle to obtain footage during the commission’s inaugural year. 

ELIPOC held its first meeting in November 2021, and took on its first major incident in April 2022 when an ELPD officer shot DeAnthony VanAtten in the Lake Lansing Meijer parking lot. ELIPOC faced challenges to receive footage from the Meijer shooting and a second incident where it was found officers wrongfully searched a man after he had a seizure. 

The second incident occurred in May 2022, and commissioners had still not seen the footage in October of that year. A dispute over the process of distributing footage emerged. 

The ELIPOC ordinance, Root explained, calls for an ELPD investigator – in this case Pride – to finish their investigation into a complaint. After receiving the investigation report, ELIPOC can request additional information, including camera footage, about the complaint before issuing a recommendation. The police chief will then make a determination on whether or not a complaint is sustained. 

When ELIPOC requested video footage of the second incident, there was a series of events that saw commissioners given a thumb drive with the footage, only for ELPD to request it be returned days later. Emails shared with ELi show Pride said this was because of a state statute that allows police to keep video footage hidden until after an investigation is completed. Pride said this meant the chief would have to make a determination on a complaint before the commission received footage. 

Root responded to Pride’s email with relevant information on the ordinance governing ELIPOC and the collective bargaining agreement between the police and city  – emphasizing the process that should be followed when the commission requests footage. The email included parts of a letter from the city’s Labor Attorney Gouri Sashital backing ELIPOC’s position. 

Pride responded the same day saying he had not seen Sashital’s letter, and that he would speak with the police chief. About 90 minutes after that, Pride sent an email stating that he had spoken with Chubb and Johnson, and the commission could view the video. Since this series of events, ELIPOC has been able to access requested footage from a dropbox – until now. 

On May 21, Edsall, Root and ELIPOC Chair Ernest Conerly sent DEI Director and staff liaison Elaine Hardy an email requesting that the city attorney clarify three points:

“(1) his [Chubb’s] legal opinion on whether ELIPOC members are permitted by Ordinance 1533 to view video footage that they request by themselves, as they have been doing since the Commission began, (2) whether the city attorney changed his legal opinion between October 2022 and now, and (3) if the city attorney has changed his legal opinion between October 2022 and now, what is the legal basis for that change?”

While ELIPOC is left waiting for a response from Chubb, Edsall speculates the change in leadership from Johnson to Pride may have been the reason for the sudden change, as the email notifying ELIPOC of the new policy was sent the day after Johnson resigned. 

Notably, commissioners were unaware Johnson had resigned when they received notice about the change in protocol and drafted their response. The city did not announce Johnson’s resignation until May 28 – eight days after he submitted his resignation and a week after Pride informed commissioners of the change. 

Pride did not respond to an email from ELi requesting that he comment on the matter.

Reviewing body worn camera footage is a critical part of ELIPOC’s work, Edsall said, explaining that sometimes use of force reports or police reports use language that characterize incidents differently than they appear on camera. 

“They [ELPD] make the language much more suitable to their narrative,” Edsall said. 

Edsall said commissioners are sometimes surprised by what is allowed under ELPD policy, and reviewing footage is one way ELIPOC identifies areas for improvement. 

Additionally, reviewing incidents provides an opportunity for the commission to see if the department is implementing some of the recommendations given by external consultant CNA in 2022. 

Right now, ELIPOC is requesting videos of four different incidents – three of which are still under internal review.

There is another incident that the commission has discussed at recent meetings, where multiple officers were injured and an officer shot at a dog. ELPD representatives have maintained at ELIPOC meetings that officers acted appropriately in a difficult and scary situation, but a witness has disputed significant aspects of the police narrative. ELIPOC has not formally asked for the video in the case yet, but commissioners have indicated they may in the future. 

As ELIPOC waits for clarity around the situation, Edsall is hopeful the procedure for viewing footage returns to its previous format soon. 

“I’m hoping we get access to the video footage real soon,” she said. “I’m not sure where we’ll go next if we don’t. This is not acceptable to ELIPOC, that we don’t have access in a way that is convenient to us and potentially transparent to the community.”