Mobile Video Audio Recording Systems (MVARS for short) simply refers to police dashcams. These cameras are mounted on police vehicle dashboards, face forward, and are set to begin recording whenever the officer turns on the emergency lights.
A few of the things a dash cam can record include:
- conversations between police and you before and during arrests,
- your field sobriety tests, and
- your driving patterns before being pulled over by authorities.
Mobile Video/Audio Recording Systems are typically admissible in criminal proceedings.1 Further, since dashcam footage is unbiased and objective, it can be both helpful and hurtful to your case – depending on the circumstances.
You have a legal right to view the footage from a dashcam, provided that one was used in your case.2
What are MVARS and how do they work?
As the term implies, dash cams are mounted to the dashboards of “certain” police patrol vehicles. We use the word “certain” because the use of these cameras is not required by law. While some police departments like them, others do not and will not use them. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) does use them. (See our article on how to get MVARS from the CHP).
The camera itself faces forward at all times and it is continuously on. MVARS save a video as soon as an officer turns on their vehicle’s emergency lights. A police officer is not allowed to turn off a dash cam.
There are several reasons why law enforcement agencies use these devices. Some of the top four include:
- they place more accountability and transparency on authorities when arresting you;
- the devices can record conversations between you and the police prior to an arrest;
- they are helpful in DUI cases, especially in the context of field sobriety tests; and,
- MVARS capture evidence of your driving patterns before being pulled over for a traffic ticket.
Do dash cams help my case?
The answer depends on the type of case and the facts involved. Mostly, it can help contradict incriminating claims in the police report. For instance, MVARS can help your case in the following situations:
- if there are questions on critical facts, camera recordings can capture facts or events that authorities deny and show the discrepancies between your account and the police report;
- in cases of DUI, a video of a field sobriety test may portray you as sober (not slurring your speech, not staggering, etc.); and,
- if you were not treated properly upon an arrest, a dash cam recording may provide video evidence of a law enforcement officer violating your personal rights.3
Can dashcams hurt my case?
Once again, this answer depends on the type of case and the facts involved. Some examples of when a MVARS video may hurt your case include the following circumstances:
- you say the police had no probable cause to pull you over, but since the dashcam recorded your driving for several seconds before you stopped, it can show that you were indeed violating traffic laws (such as speeding or swerving);
- you say you were sober during a traffic stop, but field sobriety tests obviously show you were driving under the influence;
- you want to show that a police officer violated certain Constitutional rights post stop, but a dash cam shows that all rights were complied with; and,
- a MVARS video captures a conversation between you and police showing that you were unruly and uncooperative.4
Can I see a MVARS video?
California law says that if you are accused of a crime, you can obtain the footage of a dash cam video – if such video or audio was recorded. Typically, your lawyer requests the footage from the arresting department or agency. These entities normally supply a copy of the video/audio and keep the original.
Please note that prosecutors have the right to use MVARS videos as evidence in criminal cases. This means that if a video or audio recording makes you look guilty, you should anticipate that a prosecutor will use the recording against you.5
Dashcam videos are difficult to suppress as evidence. However, it may be possible to cast doubt on what the video purports to show by arguing the footage has bad lighting, bad angles, or other technical problems. Expert testimony can even be used to argue that the video is unreliable.
Additional reading
For more in-depth information, refer to these scholarly articles:
- Detecting disparities in police deployments using dashcam data – Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency.
- Look there! The effect of perspective, attention, and instructions on how people understand recorded police encounters – Behavioral Sciences & the Law.
- Collateral Visibility: A Socio-Legal Study of Police Body-Camera Adoption, Privacy, and Public Disclosure in Washington State – Indiana Law Journal.
- Public Access to Police Body Camera Footage – It’s Still Not Crystal CLEIR – University of Cincinnati Law Review.
Legal References
- See, for example, King v. State of California () .
- See Brady v. Maryland (1963) 83 S.Ct. 1194.
- See note 1.
- Tavorn v. Shiomoto (Court of Appeal of California, Fifth Appellate District, 2019) F076994.
- See note 2.
