Concerns regarding the use of so-called death books by police enforcement have persisted in the wake of Vanessa Bryant’s lawsuit against Los Angeles County first responders over photos taken of the remains of her deceased husband and daughter.
In 2020, after news broke that deputies had shared photos from the helicopter crash that claimed the lives of Kobe Bryant, his daughter Gianna, and six other people, LASD Sheriff Alex Villaneuva acknowledged that some cops are known to keep “macabre” catalogues of bodies and human remains from crime scenes and disasters.
In a phone interview with Insider, Adam Bercovici, a law enforcement specialist who was requested by Bryant’s team to testify, referred to them as “photographic souvenirs.”
“I remember a time before phones. Consequently, before Polaroids, when people started taking pictures for their own personal collections or items they wanted to keep, that is when I first noticed them “He continued, pointing out that the practise was distinct from murder books, which are collections of images and data pertinent to an investigation handled by homicide detectives and subject to rigid protocols.
The LA County Sheriff’s Department was singled out by the jury when they decided in Vanessa Bryant’s favour and gave her a $15 million damage award.
Los Angeles Sheriff’s Deputy Doug Johnson, who was among the first to arrive at the fatal incident, stated that “it’s a widespread practise.”
He added that he had visited 25 to 50 accidents or crime scenes, where he had photographed victims or their remains, and that other officers had at least 20 times sent him pictures of bodies or body parts.
The jury ultimately concluded that Vanessa Bryant and Chris Chester’s constitutional right to the privacy of their loved ones’ images had been violated by the first responders’ actions. In the collision, Chester lost his wife and children.
When We See Photographs of Some Dead Bodies and Not Others by Sarah Sentilles, who wrote the piece, told Insider that keeping images like this can have a severe effect on the relatives of the victims.
Vanessa Bryant claimed that even now, just thinking about the photographs being published, gives her panic attacks.
Chester claimed that even though losing his wife and children had left him feeling hollow, learning about the images had made him furious.
Death books can also have significant ramifications for those affected.
Forensic psychologist Park Dietz, MD, of the consulting firm Park Dietz & Associates, advised Insider that it is improper for investigators to distribute images that are related to an investigation.
“I’ve used pictures of deceased celebrities in a case, but they were always handled with care and had to be given back to the agency, but definitely not for anyone’s amusement, “Dietz said.
Earlier in the trial, Bercovici said in court that during his 30 years with the Los Angeles Police Department, other officers frequently showed him images of murdered victims, including a Polaroid taken at the scene of Nicole Brown Simpson’s death.
According to Bercovici, who testified in court, law enforcement occasionally kept pictures of accident victims in memento “ghoul books.”
However, Bercovici told Insider that patrol police normally shouldn’t handle photographs of an accident or a crime scene. In some cases, they ought to be recorded in murder diaries.
In an interview with ABC7, sheriff Alex Villanueva acknowledged that death books were a persistent problem in the department.
He said that he had ordered the images to be erased quickly after a private person complained about a policeman distributing the photos at a bar.
It is completely inappropriate, he declared. It’s repulsive,
When Villanueva testified in the Bryant case, he denied being aware of such death books. He insisted that the pictures needed to be taken, though they didn’t have to be shared.
Insider’s request for comment from LASD did not receive a response right away. Villanueva’s spokeswoman previously told Insider that he was “happy to have led the drive to lawfully erase all of the known photographs of the crash on that horrible day,” but this has since been contradicted.
Kobe’s representative Jennifer Buonantony added, “We hope and pray that all of the pictures are gone forever so that we may remember our hero Kobe and his lovely daughter with memories of joy and love.
“It is unfortunate that the County attorneys did not more effectively defend our efforts. Following this incident, Sheriff Villanueva spearheaded an initiative to outlaw future photo opportunities. The Bryant family has our best wishes.”
Deputies said during their depositions that they shared the images out of “curiosity” and to “alleviate tension.”
“It’s not ethical, regardless of whether it’s a coping technique to dehumanise and desensitise those things. That’s undoubtedly a factor. Additionally, there still needs to be policy and regulation “According to Bercovici, pictures should only be used as evidence, Insider reported.
According to Bercovici, the lawsuit is a sign that the department has problems with accountability and leadership.
“Poor supervision and an early lack of protocol led them to believe they could just charge in and start snapping pictures. After that, there was no accountability because they believed they could share the pictures “He continued, mentioning the department’s choice to remove the images.
The importance of popularity and ethnicity as motivators for sharing and taking photos
Celebrities walk a fine balance between being approachable and remote to their audience. Certain aspects of their lives—and deaths—might seem to be available for public consumption.
The loss of privacy combined with a prominent figure’s cultural influence may lead to a false impression of familiarity among followers and the general public.
Photos of human remains are delicate artefacts that society may not be prepared to view in an ethical context, according to Sentilles, a writer who has also taught courses on photography and the deceased.
“Every violent image is an intimate image to someone; it may be that person’s sister, brother-in-law, spouse, or other close relative.
And as the Bryant family made apparent, I believe it has a terrible impact “Informed Insider, Sentilles.
She claimed that historically, Black and Brown bodies in particular have been “othered,” making it easier for people to share, mention, and view them.
“It’s not just a picture of a famous person; it’s a famous Black person. And I’ve been considering which bodies are made public and whose ones aren’t, and in American media, the majority of the bodies that are placed on the front page are bodies of colour “Informed Insider, Sentilles.
Sentilles emphasised that whereas images of Black individuals slain by police or Brown people killed abroad are more often broadcast in media, images of white dead are not typically made public.
Sentilles stated that there has been a long history of images of violence against others being circulated, including lynching postcards, photos of torture, and photos of war trophies. “Even if in this situation for Kobe Bryant it was a helicopter accident, I believe you can’t divorce that past from a legacy of racial violence.”
According to Bercovici, it’s conceivable that the death book phenomenon extends beyond famous people. However, he went on to say that Kobe Bryant’s notoriety and his family’s wealth were what brought the matter to public attention and exposed the “cracks in the Sheriff’s Department.”
“People looked up to Kobe because of all the good he did for the world and because he was such a great person. I believe that the fact that he died in the incident is what caused this to come to light; otherwise, if it had been simply normal folks without the celebrity position… I can’t tell for sure, but not as big of a fuss would’ve been made out of it,” Bercovici remarked.
Sentilles argued that the case demonstrates the wider moral quandaries associated with images of death.
She added, “I believe that every picture of the deceased deserves to be well-tended, whatever that may be.” “How do we take care of the photos of the deceased is something that I believe the Bryant family is raising. Who is permitted to view them and who is not, and how might we approach this in a more moral and considerate manner?”
Leave a Reply