POLICE bodycams would pay for themselves in just a couple of years, according to Chief Constable Sir Stephen House.
Currently only officers in north-east Scotland wear body-mounted CCTV systems, and the force's main civilian watchdog has called for a public debate before they are rolled out nationwide.
But Sir Stephen has stressed he believes the cameras - which would cost about £5 million - could bring major savings to the justice system, not least by providing images that could lead to early pleas in prosecutions.
Appearing to refer to controversy over armed policing practices, he warned that what was acceptable in the old Grampian force area might not go down well elsewhere in the country.
He said: "The Scottish Police Authority [SPA], I think quite rightly, take a view there has to be a public debate on this because, as I've learned to my cost in recent months, doing something in one part of the country for five or seven years and then announcing it across the rest of the country doesn't always work as seamlessly as you would like, and I wouldn't want to do the same thing with body cameras.
"There are questions around privacy and there are questions around data protection that have to be answered."
Sir Stephen was speaking at a conference on domestic abuse in Edinburgh.
Mhairi McGowan, of the Assist scheme to help abuse victims, said human rights objections to the cameras should be overcome.
"I think they could be very helpful in dealing with domestic abuse cases. How many times have police reported to the courts that the home - the crime scene - was in disarray. Imagine if they had video? Or images of the victim?
"I think this would help get early pleas and I think the quicker such cases are dealt with the better."
Vic Emery, chairman of the SPA, has said a decision about the use of bodycams should not be left to the police alone.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article