Camera 4: (zoom in) Caucasian, brunette female, holding philosophy books in front of ICC building. Zoom out and pan left across Red Square to two African-American males sitting on green bench talking. Pan right to Caucasian male and Caucasian female sitting at table distributing fliers. Zoom in to fliers on underpass. Read: “There are Native American Hoyas too. Welcome to GAAP weekend.”
Camera 5: (zoom in) African-American male in blue sweats standing by green bench in front of Lauinger library. Spits on ground and disposes of sandwich container in garbage can next to bench. Pan left to Front Gates. Two Department of Public Safety officers stand watch. A Caucasian, blonde female sits on steps. Pan left to Copley lawn. Vision blocked by trees.
Camera 3: (zoom in) Hispanic male enters Harbin Hall carrying books. Pan left to McDonough Gymnasium. Two Caucasian females leaving from side entrance carrying sports equipment. Pan right to Yates Gymnasium. Zoom in back to street leading past Lot T parking area. Brown vehicle with license plate number ET8 05U driving towards Leavey Center.
- * *
We’re in the Department of Public Safety’s Communications Center in Village C West. When not answering phone calls and coordinating student guards, the DPS officer sitting behind the glass pane can use a joystick to survey the campus via 13 different cameras. I’m standing behind Officer Stevie Bowman as he presses buttons on the surveillance control unit?jumping from camera to camera, swooping from one angle to the next. It’s so easy: A clear view of almost every nook and cranny of the campus is at his fingertips.
Lucky 13
In April 2000, the Department of Public Safety mounted the first closed circuit television camera on the main campus of Georgetown University. Overnight, a small, blue, bulb-like camera appeared on the corner of the Village C East building, looming ominously close to unsuspecting students who made their way to and from their dormitories just a few feet below. Some gazed questioningly at the odd-looking, blue contraption, while others walked by without noticing. None were sure, however, of what this camera could do and how it was to be used.
Now, two years after the inauguration of the first surveillance camera at Georgetown, several more have been appeared around the main, undergraduate campus?some readily visible, others in more unexpected locations. The majority of these cameras are mounted in strategic locations to survey and monitor the areas surrounding the on-campus dormitory areas, with cameras, targeted directly at Village C East, Village C West, Harbin Hall and Darnall Hall. Other cameras are located on the Healy clock tower, on the left side of White Gravenor facing Red Square, on the right hand side of the Reiss building and on the Prospect Street side of the LXR dormitory. These cameras allow DPS to monitor Healy and Copley Lawn, Red Square and the immediate surrounding areas, the entrance to the Leavey Center and the path of students returning to campus via Prospect Street, respectively.
What can they see?
The locations for the current cameras were selected for their potential to monitor heavy student traffic during the day. The system originated with four or five cameras and eventually expanded into the 13-camera system that exists now. The images projected onto the screens are surprisingly clear, limited only by the span of the camera and the presence of trees and other obstacles. People’s faces are easily identifiably on the screens, and the text of books carried by them can almost be read from the control center screens. However, the cameras are not enhanced with any special technology to present clear images in the dark, according to Director of Public Safety William Tucker.
According to Tucker, DPS does not have plans to add more cameras as of now, but it will assess their need for further installations in the future. “We tried to select the areas most critical … This is not to say that there will be no more cameras [in the future],” he said. Definite plans for more cameras will come with the completion of the Southwest Quadrangle in Fall 2003.
The Control Center
The control unit in the DPS headquarters is composed of a large screen divided into separate squares for each camera. A separate monitor is located on top of this screen and displays a zoomed-in image of the camera views. The unit is directed by a remote control, which allows the DPS officer on duty to shift from camera to camera as he or she wishes. Each screen is also connected to a VCR. The tapes from the cameras are filed for a certain length of time before being reused. Tucker would not specify the amount of time that the tapes held on file for. “We keep them for quite a bit of time,” he said.
Although the surveillance cameras operate for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, a DPS officer is not constantly on hand solely to monitor the cameras. Instead, since the camera control unit is located within the communications center of DPS, the officer on duty to man the phones during each respective shift is also the one responsible for monitoring the cameras. At times, the officer on duty will be on special alert to monitor certain areas more closely; however, on a day-to-day basis the cameras are used for general surveillance of the campus. For instance, during the past few weekends when students from GU Pride and the Georgetown Solidarity Coalition have chalked messages in Red Square in the early mornings for the Georgetown Admissions Ambassador Program weekends, the DPS officer on duty has been alerted to monitor Red Square more closely to ensure that any type of harassment will be caught immediately, according to Tucker.
GU Pride member Anthony House (CAS ‘02), who was present at several of the GAAP chalkings, said that the security cameras did not provide more security than usual. “I don’t think the people involved in the chalking were aware of the cameras or of special attention from DPS. In retrospect it’s a comforting thought, but I don’t think it affected us during the experience.”
The purpose of the cameras, in Tucker’s eyes, is to work hand-in-hand with the officers already physically on duty in key locations in order to amplify the overall security on campus. If the officer monitoring the control unit sees something or someone of a suspicious nature on one of the screens, he or she will notify the officer on duty in that area. The system also works in the reverse. If an officer on patrol spots something that warrants further investigation, he or she may call the officer at the control unit, who can then zoom in to monitor the situation.
“If something should happen in an area, it enhances our overall security. It enables us to investigate incidents [more closely] … The cameras work in conjunction with the officers out there,” said Tucker.
Do they work?
According to the 2001 Annual Crime Awareness and Campus Security Report published by DPS, the cameras have aided DPS in the tasks of “monitoring persons going to and from buildings, observing vehicular traffic patterns on and around campus, investigating crimes and apprehending perpetrators of criminal incidents.” According to Tucker, the amount of crime on campus has decreased since the implementation of the surveillance cameras; however, it is unclear to what degree the use of these cameras has contributed to this decrease. He added that the cameras have proven useful in apprehending suspects, as well as enforcing speeding limits.
The most common crime at Georgetown is property theft, which Tucker admitted is unlikely to decrease with the use of the cameras due to the nature of the crime. “I can’t say [the cameras] have reduced crime, [but] they have enhanced overall security against any property. It was many programs combined that have enhanced the overall security of the campus,” Tucker said.
“It’s not a panacea,” he said, “it’s technology, and it’s where we need to go.”
Johnny Barnes, Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capitol Area, thinks differently.
“They don’t work,” he said.
“Cameras don’t catch crooks, cops do,” Barnes said. “If there’s a mugging or a murder, a camera can’t help you, a policeman can.”
Barnes compared the Georgetown cameras to the surveillance camera system that has been in place in England for several years.
“In England, there’s a proliferation of these cameras … Despite the fact that the citizen is filmed 300 times a day, the murder rate is soaring through the roof?it’s at record levels,” Barnes said.
On April 13, Jason Bonitsky (CAS ‘02) was assaulted and robbed on Prospect Street, near Village A, while walking to crew practice early in the morning. According to Bonitsky, although DPS responded to his call, they were unable to see the actual incident take place because the location fell outside of the cameras’ surveillance parameters.
“It’s what I call lazy law enforcement,” Barnes said. “Rather than being on the job and doing the job well, you lean on a camera and say, ‘This is how we’re going to watch out.’”
He added that law enforcement agencies should not create the perception that surveillance cameras lead to heightened security. “Cameras give a false sense of security … The resources could be much better used for more effectively proven crime prevention measures.”
“In America, I thought we had Times Square, not Tiananmen Square,” he added.
“There’s one inside, but I’m not going to tell you where it is.”
Of the 13 cameras currently in place, only one camera is used to survey an internal location, Tucker said. He would not elaborate on the location of this one camera, but said that it was used to survey an area of particularly high “tension and friction.”
A surveillance camera is located in the hallway directly outside of the Muslim Prayer Room in the basement of Copley Hall. In April 2001, the Muslim prayer room was vandalized, with no suspects. In the months following the incident, DPS monitored the area around the room 24 hours a day until the end of the semester. This 24-hour guard was re-started following Sept. 11, but has since ended.
“As Muslim Student Association president, I was never informed of [the installation of the camera],” former MSA President Owais Balti (MSB ‘02) said. According to Balti, the camera was installed this past winter. “I don’t know if it was necessary … As a safety precaution it was a good thing, but you’d like to have enough trust in Georgetown students for it not to happen again.”
When the cameras were first installed in Spring 2000, Tucker told the Voice that he was looking into installing cameras inside of dormitories. Now, however, Tucker says there there are no plans to place any other cameras inside buildings due to issues of privacy and legal rights. “That would have to be looked at from a legal stance,” he said.
Privacy: Our most precious right?
In an interview with the Voice, Tucker refused to address questions of potential concerns over the violation of privacy brought forth by the cameras. He stressed that although the cameras function 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, a DPS officer is not constantly monitoring the cameras. “These cameras are not involved in privacy,” he said. “I don’t want to make it sound like there is an officer sitting there staring at the screen all day.”
Tucker added that before installing each camera, DPS seeks the approval with the Office of Facilities and other administrators. “We seek the approval of the person in charge of the area [where the camera will survey],” Tucker said. “We’re not violating any students’ rights.”
Barnes expressed deep concern over the violation of privacy created by the cameras.
“When you weigh the negative benefits [of these cameras] against the burden of our citizens, our most precious right?the right to privacy?it just doesn’t add up,” Barnes said. “I don’t know what the tuition is at Georgetown, but it makes no sense to tax students further for a speculative adventure.”
Barnes referred to past court rulings that state that there is no expectation of privacy in public spaces. “I don’t believe that extends to the interior of a college campus, especially inside of a building,” Barnes said. “When the camera’s eye is on you, it gives a chilling effect on academic freedom.”
Referring to the system of surveillance cameras currently being extended throughout the D.C. metropolitan area, Barnes said, “[Cameras] encourage abuse. The people who monitor these cameras aren’t going to watch the businessmen in suits, they’re going to watch the youth, the minorities … They’re going to watch women and couples. Video voyeurism can be abused without penalties and sanctions ? You could be sunbathing behind the Healy building, and they could be watching you.”
In response to public concern, D.C. Chief of Police Charles Ramsey testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform, addressing the issue of privacy versus security. Ramsey defended MPD’s use of the cameras, saying that they were both legal and effective crime-fighting measures.
“Given this uncertain environment and the enormous challenges we face, I would argue that it would be irresponsible for us not to use every legal tool at our disposal, including CCTV [closed-circuit television], to help protect our city and ultimately, our democracy,” Ramsey said in his testimony. “We will continue to use these tools judiciously, responsibly, openly and with strong public oversight.”
The need to come clear
When the cameras were first installed at Georgetown, no public announcements were made to notify students or faculty of their existence. In addition, during in his interview with the Voice, Tucker would not elaborate on certain details about the surveillance camera system, such as the type of camera being used or the costs involved. Other DPS officers were not permitted to comment on the cameras.
“I don’t want to give all the information because it might be used to compromise our security,” Tucker said.
Barnes disagreed, expressing concern that DPS was not being transparent with its plans. “I believe the students have an absolute right to know [about the camera system],” Barnes said. “This should be public information. Students should have access to it?you probably pay for it in your tuition.”
In contrast, the Metropolitan Police Department has been very forthcoming with detailed information about its surveillance camera system. In an April 10 Washington Post article, the locations of the 12 camera sites were specified by the D.C. police department. The cost of the Joint Operations Command Center?the control unit for the MPD cameras?reportedly cost $7 million. In addition, MPD has invited several journalists and organization members to visit the JOCC in order for them to see firsthand how the system works.
Eyes on the District
The birth of the live video enforcement system of the Metropolitan Police Department came in April 1999 during NATO’s 50th anniversary summit in Washington, D.C. The video surveillance was used again during the 2000 World Bank and International Monetary Fund protests, as well as during the 2001 presidential inauguration. The cameras, which only operate during major events, were also up and running on Sept. 11, and continued to run during the following weeks.
The current MPD system consists of 12 cameras that offer 360-degree views and magnification of 17 times greater than the human eye. Camera locations range from the Old Post Office Pavilion on Pennsylvania Avenue to the intersection of Wisconsin Avenue and M streets. Plans for a round-the-clock surveillance system of all the major monuments on the Mall are in the works with the National Park Service. These cameras are expected to be in place by October. In a statement to The Washington Post on March 22, Associate Regional Director for the Park Service’s National Capital Region John G. Parsons said that the Park Police would use cameras “only in public areas where there is no expectation of privacy” and “only for valid law enforcement purposes.”
“I don’t know how decisions are made on campus, but the system in place so far and is being contemplated by MPD has been done unilaterally without obtaining approval of the local government, citizens or council members,” said Barnes about the MPD and proposed Park Police cameras. “It’s been a unilateral decision by the police and unfortunately, the police chief is only looking at it through the law enforcement lens, rather than the lens of liberty.”
- * *
Camera 5: Focus back in on male student spitting on Healy Lawn.
“Naw, man, don’t do that,” Officer Bowman says to the image on the screen. He turns back to me. “You see the kind of stuff we can see on these cameras?”
