So who knows who is running this Plod scheme?

Members of the public will soon be able to directly upload to the police – for the first time – doorbell video footage of crimes, according to police chiefs.

Olivia Pinkney, the National Police Chiefs’ Council’s lead for local policing, said forces were aiming to have a standard online platform by next year that would allow crime victims to submit video when they reported an incident.

The move aims to capitalise on the explosion in video technology ranging from door bell cameras and dash cams in cars to CCTV and mobile phone images to enable the public to report crimes from thefts and burglaries to dangerous driving and anti-social behaviour.

Ms Pinkney said a pilot by her force with traffic offences drew 250 submissions from the public, of which a third resulted in police action.

It’s amazing what people on this blog know at times.

I’ve a piece of software lying around which would be a useful backbone for this system. Developed for the US military it was. The aim and idea being collection and monitoring of exactly this sort of input. It actually works right now too.

So, who should I go talk to?

22 thoughts on “So who knows who is running this Plod scheme?”

  1. Yeah, doorbell video of criminals. Not in any way vindictive neighbours or anything. Not a facility for dobbing in for any number of ‘offences’ which have somehow appeared from nowhere. Not to mention speeding and phone use in the car. Now those are real crimes, but the spirit of Pavlik Morosov is not something we ought to be encouragfing.

    As for the software, you won’t get a look-in.

  2. I have some dash cam footage of a deliberate crash on the motorway. I went to upload it to the pigs’ video upload site but the page asked so many intrusive questions that, for my own safety, I chose not to.

    I’ve no doubt this new one will be just the same.

  3. @BiW

    If you are uploading footage that could be used in court you are effectively a witness, and therefore the normal rules apply

    Hence the ‘intrusive’ questions

    Presumably the perpetrator got away with it?

  4. It occurs to me that PC Plod might get more than he bargained for with this upload system, how many videos of the police behaving illegally will get uploaded and how will they be able to cover them all up?

    On our hosts question, the answer is regardless of whether he gets through to the right people, he’ll get the bums rush because the last thing the people tasked with getting this thing going want is an off the shelf solution that just works. That would put them out of a job. They want something that will take ages to spec, and design and implement, while they oversee the whole thing, collecting fat salaries and building up decent pension rights.

  5. Sorry Tim, first could you provide a copy of your Equality and Diversity Policy, then detail your strategies for increasing representation of BAMEs, Disabled People, and LBGTQ+ in your organisation.
    Cheers,
    Plod

  6. Some big woke firm will get paid £100M to do this site. Tenders will be out next years and you will need a team just to fill out the bidding documents.

  7. Bloke in North Dorset

    They’re already doing this in the USA and some in some areas there’s moves to connect them live to video surveillance centres rather than having to ask the owner for permission if they want access to the footage.

    Bit I suppose there’s no money in it for the cronies if we don’t reinvent the wheel.

    Note, I’m not advocating it, just pointing out its already been done.

  8. Presumably the perpetrator got away with it?

    Don’t know, and don’t particularly care. It was a small car driven at speed into the back of an artic, so presumably the transport company’s insurance dealt with it.

  9. Oh, and if I had any trust at all in the honesty and integrity of the pigs then the intrusive nature of the questions would matter a lot less. I don’t, so it does.

  10. Sorry Tim, first could you provide a copy of your Equality and Diversity Policy, then detail your strategies for increasing representation of BAMEs, Disabled People, and LBGTQ+ in your organisation.
    Cheers,
    Plod

    Plod – you forgot Tim’s Modern Slavery statement, insurances for up to £15m, GDPR policies, RIDDOR reports going back 5 years even if they’re completely irrelevant, disaster recovery and business continuity strategies, ISO 14001 Environmental certification, and commitment to becoming a Scottish Living Wage accredited employer*

    Then all you need to do is get yourself approved by the relevant public sector buying consortium, such as a Crown Commercial Service framework. Unless it’s a cloud-hosted solution (G-Cloud is refreshed annually), the next opportunity to get on something like Technology Products and Associated Services or its successor is December 2022.

    *Where appropriate, or you’ll be kilt

    the last thing the people tasked with getting this thing going want is an off the shelf solution that just works.

    Not exactly true. The IT guys generally know what they want, the problem often lies with Procurement mangling the requirements and buying on price.

    Which is fine if you’re buying a commodity, but very stupid if you’re trying to procure a complex bespoke solution that integrates with your legacy infrastructure and application stacks.

  11. TMB – lol

    In all serious, Tim, it’s probably a better angle to try to sell to one of the big public sector IT suppliers. They’re already trading with Plod.

    So BT, Softcat, SCC, Computacentre, that sort of outfit. Their contact details are on CCS. RM6068 seems like a good place to start.

    I’d also do a bit of Googling to find a Procurement contact @ Plod who can give you a steer on how and when they plan to buy this. You want an IT category manager or equivalent.

  12. If you are uploading footage that could be used in court you are effectively a witness, and therefore the normal rules apply

    Hence the ‘intrusive’ questions

    I think I’d be suspecting that having answered all the intrusive questions, Plod would do bugger all with the video. But would retain the answers to all the intrusive questions & causing a world of grief the mug who’d answered them

  13. Tim – I’d be delighted under normal circumstances but unfortunately I’m unable at the moment, doing a bit of a high wire act just now 🙁

  14. It was a small car driven at speed into the back of an artic,

    That sounds potentially lethal. Wouldn’t do that if I was being paid for it, personally.

  15. Had cause to contact the Police when someone set my neighbour’s wheelie bin on fire a few weeks ago and found that my CCTV had caught them a few minutes earlier attempting the same (unsuccessfully) with my bin.

    Took two weeks for them to get back to me to find out what I had. And another two weeks for them to ask if they could have the footage. Uploaded it to my Dropbox for the PC to download, only to hear back that their security protocols meant he couldn’t access it. Had to give it to him on a memory stick instead, which he asked me to provide.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *