Footage from police body-worn cameras has become increasingly common as evidence in Canadian criminal trials. In this blog, we’ll review the basics of body-worn cameras. We’ll also explore the legal benefits and challenges associated with bodycam footage: how it’s used as evidence and the constitutional issues it raises.
What Are Body-Worn Cameras and How Are They Used?
Body-worn cameras are small, lightweight devices—typically worn on an officer’s uniform—that capture audio and video of police interactions.
From the police perspective, bodycams are an important tool for documenting events as they unfold. The footage they create serves as an objective record of encounters with the public. As well as establishing a factual account of an incident, bodycams can act as a deterrent. Studies suggest that when people know they’re being recorded, they’re less likely to commit crimes or engage in violent behaviour. The mere presence of a camera can encourage the parties involved to act with greater care and caution.
Legal Benefits and Challenges of Bodycam Footage
Evidence in Arrests and Trials
Body-worn camera footage can play a key role in criminal cases, either supporting or undermining witness testimony. It may be summoned by the Crown or the defence.
For the Crown, the footage can:
- Corroborate an officer’s account, especially as it pertains to the accused’s behaviour, the sequence of events, and any risks present at the scene
- Provide a visual and audio record for judges or juries, providing a clear picture of the officer’s point of view at a given time.
- Show that police acted lawfully and proportionally, or that the accused engaged in criminal behaviour.
For the defence, the footage is equally useful. It can:
- Reveal discrepancies between police testimony and the recorded events, potentially undermining the officer’s credibility.
- Support claims that police exceeded their authority, breached the accused’s rights, or somehow misinterpreted their actions.
- Capture evidence of coercion or disproportionate use of force by police.
Ultimately, bodycams are not inherently advantageous to one side or the other. Rather, they are neutral tools; their value depends on the circumstances of the case and how each party frames the facts.
Charter Issues
Beyond their role in evidence, body-worn cameras also raise important questions under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the document that guarantees the rights and freedoms of all Canadians. In particular, the use of bodycams has been linked to issues with sections 7, 8, and 10, each of which we explore below.
Section 7: Life, Liberty, and Security of the Person
Section 7 of the Charter protects life, liberty, and security of the person. Body-worn cameras can engage this section in several ways.
Notably, if a police interaction is recorded but the footage is later lost, withheld, or altered, that can limit the accused’s ability to present a full defence—a core element of procedural fairness under section 7.
Similarly, the misuse of bodycams (e.g., when audio is muted at key moments) can bring about a claim of abuse of process. And if the misconduct leads to a wrongful conviction or a disproportionately harsh sentence, it impacts the accused’s liberty and security interests.
Section 8: Search and Seizure
Body-worn cameras can also engage section 8 of the Charter, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure. Recording police interactions raises privacy concerns—especially when footage is captured without proper legal authority or in situations where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Courts must balance the goal of police transparency with an individual’s right to privacy. In doing so, they try to determine whether the recording was justified, necessary, and lawful in the circumstances. If the court finds that section 8 was breached, it may decide to exclude the footage to protect an individual’s privacy rights and preserve the integrity of the justice system.
These issues were illustrated in R. v. Aubrey, a 2022 decision of the Ontario Superior Court. The judge ruled that covert video surveillance from a public location—directed at a private residence—violated section 8. The hidden camera, installed without judicial authorization, violated the reasonable expectation of privacy, and the court found the surveillance unlawful.
Section 10: Right to Counsel Upon Arrest or Detention
Section 10 of the Charter guarantees the right to be informed promptly of the reasons for arrest or detention and the right to consult a lawyer without delay.
Body-worn cameras can help protect these rights by documenting whether police complied with their obligations. Footage of officers informing an accused of their right to counsel can strengthen the Crown’s case. On the other hand, conspicuous footage gaps may call into question whether section 10 rights were fully respected.
To determine whether section 10 was violated, courts consider whether the absence of footage was accidental or deliberate. If missing footage obscures a breach of the accused’s rights, the court may exclude the bodycam evidence or impose other remedies as appropriate.
Privacy Considerations
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has addressed the impact of bodycams on privacy. It has been recommended that police notify individuals when a body-worn camera is in use. Ideally, notice should be given at the start of the interaction and include the officer’s name and badge number. This might help prevent the infringement of Charter rights.
Bodycams are thus a double-edged sword. While they could capture and store sensitive personal information, they can also enhance police transparency when used within clear legal and policy guidelines.
Balancing Evidentiary Needs With Charter & Privacy Rights
Police bodycams can present a clear, objective record of police interactions, benefiting both the Crown and the defence. But they are not free of challenges—especially regarding privacy, procedural fairness, and compliance with the Charter.
As bodycam use becomes more widespread in Ontario and across the country, the legal system will continue to adapt to this technology and refine how it’s governed. For police, criminal defence lawyers, and the public alike, understanding the opportunities and limitations of body-worn cameras is essential to ensuring the dual values of accountability and justice.
Barrison & Manitius: Leading Criminal Defence Lawyers in Oshawa & Durham Region
At Barrison & Manitius, our knowledgeable criminal defence lawyers understand the crucial role that bodycam footage can play in court proceedings. We advocate for our clients’ Charter rights in a wide range of offences, including drug charges, assault, weapons offences, and murder/manslaughter. We help at all stages of the criminal justice process, from arrest to bail hearings to trial.
Barrison & Manitius is conveniently located just steps from the Durham Consolidated Courthouse. We proudly serve all of Durham Region, including Oshawa, Whitby, Ajax, and Pickering, as well as the surrounding communities, including Cobourg, Peterborough and Lindsay. Our team accepts cases on private retainer and Legal Aid and offers 24-hour phone service. To schedule a confidential consultation on your criminal law matter, call us at 905-404-1947 or reach out online.