Continued from previous page
The New Jersey Police Chief Magazine | June 2017
will find themselves at risk of having legacy solutions and processes which don ’ t scale . Joining up these processes with clear security , digital signatures and audit trails avoids the risk of defense questions about evidential integrity undermining a case .
Device and data challenges
Every force must ensure that the DEM solution it chooses can operate free from major constraints around data formats ; there are 3,000 + video formats in the CCTV industry alone .
Although a force isn ’ t likely to encounter anywhere near as many as this , they will have to manage a great number of formats and codexes . This will be an ongoing issue as , even with standardisation , legacy systems will remain in place for many years .
Not all data is the same , and not all data should be handled in the same way . For example , the process for managing BWV files and the associated metadata will differ from that associated with an evidential interview . A DEM solution must therefore have the capability for maintaining different sets of evidential metadata for each evidence source .
The limitations of device-specific DEM solutions
Forces do of course have an alternative to sourcing a single DEM solution . They can instead use a number of data management solutions that are provided by device manufacturers , and somehow try to integrate these into a seamless system .
Our observation is that they routinely fall short of the DEM solutions that are independent of devices . Even if a device provider ’ s system looks great in terms of a user-friendly front end , the back end and overall functionality is much more limited than independent DEM solutions .
An enterprise system is about much more than the ingestion and storage of media . A full DEM solution must have the security and audit capabilities to ensure integrity , and to be configured with the necessary workflow and rules for the review , retention and disposal of media .
Not all device-specific solutions provide this advanced level of management . It ’ s also the case that not all suppliers have the experience and knowledge to implement such business rules .
In addition , device-specific solutions will inevitably lack the ability to manage a wide range of evidence from other devices and sources . They may be very good at managing data from the supplier ’ s BWV itself , but can they also effectively manage CCTV footage , interview audio and so on ?
Another factor at play is that devices tend to have relatively short shelf lives - and that is perhaps truer of today ’ s digital tools than their analogue predecessors . For example , the ‘ best ’ BWV camera in use today may not be the best or the same BWV device in use in three years ’ time . When a force switches to another camera , its DEM solution must have the flexibility to still support the previous camera ’ s output , as well as the new device which may come from a different vendor .
Usability - from the perspective of multiple user groups
A DEM solution must be able to meet the needs of different users . For example , transcribers may need the solution to accommodate foot-pedals to pause and play audio as they type . Users in a specialist video unit will need all of the functionality they are used to . Officers will need a simple interface so they can quickly upload evidence without having to spend more time than is necessary away from the front line .
7