New Hampshire
New Hampshire Police Body Camera Laws (2026 Guide)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 20, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 20, 2026. · 3 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

New Hampshire has no statewide mandate requiring police to wear body cameras, but any agency that uses them must follow RSA Chapter 105-D's activation and retention rules. Footage is exempt from the Right-to-Know Law by default, except recordings showing force, a firearm discharge, or a felony arrest.
This guide is part of our Police Bodycam Laws by State series.
Jurisdiction scope: This article addresses New Hampshire law governing police body-worn cameras: activation and retention under RSA 105-D, and public access under RSA 91-A:5, X, as verified in July 2026. It does not address a civilian's right to record law enforcement, a separate and well-established question addressed elsewhere on this site.
Does New Hampshire require police to wear body cameras?
No. New Hampshire has never passed a statewide mandate requiring any city, town, or county law enforcement agency to equip officers with body cameras. RSA Chapter 105-D instead sets the rules an agency must follow once it decides to authorize body-worn cameras, covering activation, deactivation, and retention. To help close the funding gap that keeps some smaller departments from adopting cameras at all, RSA 105-D:3 established the Body-Worn and Dashboard Camera Fund within the Department of Safety, a grant program meant to help local agencies pay for camera equipment and data storage, according to the official New Hampshire Revised Statutes. Adoption across the state's roughly 200 local police departments still varies by budget and local decision; even the New Hampshire Department of Corrections did not complete a department-wide rollout of body cameras until relatively recently.

When must a New Hampshire officer's camera be recording?
RSA 105-D:2 sets specific activation triggers. An officer must activate the video and audio components of a body-worn camera upon arrival at the scene of a call for service or when engaged in any law enforcement-related encounter or activity, and some agencies additionally require activation whenever emergency lights and siren are engaged, according to the official New Hampshire Revised Statutes. New Hampshire builds meaningful privacy carve-outs into the activation rule. A person inside a private residence, restroom, or locker room may ask an officer not to record, and the officer must deactivate the camera or ensure the image is permanently distorted or obscured, unless the officer is executing a warrant or another recognized exception applies. Protection for crime victims runs the opposite way, as an opt-in rather than an opt-out: RSA 105-D:2, VII(d) bars recording an interview with a crime victim unless the victim's express consent has been obtained before the recording is made, so an officer needs affirmative permission first and the victim's silence is not permission. Interactions with a person seeking to report a crime anonymously are barred outright. The statute also bars recording several other categories regardless of consent, including private communications between officers, undercover operations, strip or body-cavity searches, activity on the grounds of an elementary or secondary school except when responding to an imminent threat to life or health or a call for service, an officer's personal breaks, and situations involving a suspected explosive device.
How long does New Hampshire require footage to be kept?
The default window is narrow. RSA 105-D:2 requires that a recording be permanently destroyed no sooner than 30 days and no later than 180 days from the date it was made. That default extends to a minimum of 3 years when the footage involves an officer's use of deadly force or a deadly restraint, the discharge of a firearm unless the discharge was for the destruction of an animal, a death or serious bodily injury, or a complaint filed against an officer within 30 days of the recorded encounter. Recordings needed as evidence in a pending civil or criminal case, or in an internal-affairs or disciplinary investigation, are retained for as long as that need continues, independent of the calendar-based windows above.
| Category | New Hampshire retention rule (RSA 105-D:2) |
|---|---|
| Standard recording, no flag | Destroyed no sooner than 30 days, no later than 180 days |
| Deadly force, deadly restraint, or firearm discharge (except a discharge to destroy an animal) | Minimum 3 years |
| Death or serious bodily injury | Minimum 3 years |
| Complaint filed within 30 days of the encounter | Minimum 3 years |
| Needed for a pending case or internal investigation | Retained as long as the need continues |
Is New Hampshire bodycam footage a public record?
Generally, no, with three significant exceptions. RSA 91-A:5, the exemptions section of New Hampshire's Right-to-Know Law, states that video and audio recordings made under RSA 105-D are exempt from disclosure, except where the recording depicts a restraint or use of force by a law enforcement officer, the discharge of a firearm, or an encounter that results in a felony-level arrest. Even within those three exceptions, an agency does not have to release portions of the recording that would constitute an invasion of privacy or that are otherwise exempt from disclosure under different provisions of the Right-to-Know Law. Outside those three categories, footage stays exempt by default, which makes New Hampshire's baseline access rule notably more restrictive than states like Colorado or Nevada, where footage is presumptively public and the agency bears the burden of justifying non-disclosure.
Is New Hampshire's access rule changing?
It may be, but not yet. A 2026 bill, HB 1587, would have made body-worn camera footage generally subject to the Right-to-Know Law and required a public body to respond to a footage request within 5 business days, effectively reversing the default from exempt-unless-listed to open-unless-exempt, according to LegiScan's bill tracking. The House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee voted to refer the bill for interim study rather than advance it, a vote adopted on the House floor on February 19, 2026. That leaves the current RSA 91-A:5, X framework, exempt by default with the three force, firearm, and felony-arrest exceptions, in place for now, though the interim-study process means the Legislature could revisit a similar proposal in a future session.
Is it legal to record the police in New Hampshire?
That is a separate question from what this page addresses. New Hampshire is a two-party consent state for recording private conversations, but that consent requirement does not apply to an officer performing public duties in public, and a bystander generally has a well-established right to record on-duty police. For a full explanation of that right, and how it differs from the bodycam access rules discussed here, see Is It Illegal to Record Someone? and our New Hampshire recording laws guide.
Disclaimer
This article provides general legal information about New Hampshire law governing police body cameras and public access to footage, as verified in July 2026. It does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Readers should consult a lawyer licensed in New Hampshire for advice about a specific records request or incident.
Related articles
- Police Bodycam Laws by State: the complete hub
- Is It Illegal to Record Someone in Public?
- New Hampshire Recording Laws: Two-Party Consent Rules
Last updated: 2026-07-08. Statutes cited reflect their in-force version as of 2026-07-08.
More New Hampshire Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Does New Hampshire require police to wear body cameras?
No. New Hampshire has no statewide mandate. RSA Chapter 105-D only sets rules for agencies that choose to use body-worn cameras, including activation triggers and retention periods.
Is New Hampshire bodycam footage a public record?
Generally no. RSA 91-A:5, X exempts footage recorded under RSA 105-D from the Right-to-Know Law by default, except recordings showing a restraint or use of force, a firearm discharge, or a felony-level arrest, which are subject to disclosure.
How long must New Hampshire police keep bodycam footage?
Recordings must be destroyed no sooner than 30 days and no later than 180 days after recording under RSA 105-D:2, extending to a minimum of 3 years for footage involving deadly force, a firearm discharge other than one to destroy an animal, death or serious injury, or a complaint filed within 30 days.
Can a person ask a New Hampshire officer to stop recording?
Yes, in limited circumstances. A person inside a private residence, restroom, or locker room can decline to be recorded, and the officer generally must comply unless executing a warrant or another exception applies. Crime victims are protected more strongly: an officer may not record an interview with a crime victim at all unless the victim gave express consent before the recording was made. Recording a person who is seeking to report a crime anonymously is prohibited outright.
Is New Hampshire changing its bodycam public-records rule?
A 2026 bill, HB 1587, proposed making footage generally subject to the Right-to-Know Law with a 5-business-day response deadline, but the Legislature referred it for interim study rather than passing it, so the current exempt-by-default rule remains in place.
When must a New Hampshire officer turn on their body camera?
Upon arrival at the scene of a call for service or when engaged in any law enforcement-related encounter or activity under RSA 105-D:2, and the officer generally cannot deactivate it until the encounter ends.
What footage can I get from a New Hampshire police department?
Footage showing a restraint or use of force, a firearm discharge, or a felony-level arrest is subject to disclosure under RSA 91-A:5, X, minus any portions that would invade someone's privacy or are otherwise exempt. Other footage is generally exempt by default.
Updates
Corrected the crime-victim rule to the express-consent requirement the statute actually imposes rather than a right to decline, added the call-for-service exception to the school-grounds recording ban, and noted that a firearm discharge to destroy an animal does not trigger the 3-year retention minimum.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated, TITLE VII SHERIFFS, CONSTABLES, AND POLICE OFFICERS, CHAPTER 105-D BODY-WORN CAMERAS
§ 105-D:2Use of Body-Worn Cameras.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
I. This chapter shall apply to any law enforcement agency that elects to equip its law enforcement officers with body-worn cameras. All BWCs shall be operated in a manner consistent with the provisions of this chapter. Every law enforcement agency that elects to equip its officers with BWCs shall adopt policies and procedures relating to the use of BWCs and the retention and destruction of data consistent with this chapter. II. Officers shall only use BWCs issued by their respective law enforcement agencies. BWC equipment and all data, images, and video captured, recorded, or otherwise produced by the equipment are the property of the officer's law enforcement agency and shall be subject to the restrictions in this chapter. III. Officers who are assigned BWCs shall successfully complete an agency-approved training program to ensure proper use and operations. IV. Officers shall only use BWCs while in uniform. V.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at gc.nh.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State of New Hampshire v. Judith Tompson (Supreme Court of New Hampshire 2023)“…2 had forgotten to advise the defendant. See RSA 105-D:2, VIII (Supp. 2022). The City also filed…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New Hampshire Police Reports: How to Get a Crash Report, Incident Report, or Bodycam Video
§ 105-D:3Body-Worn and Dashboard Camera Fund.In force
I. There is hereby established the body-worn and dashboard camera fund within the department of safety for the purpose of encouraging local law enforcement agencies to equip officers with body-worn cameras and agency vehicles with dashboard cameras. All moneys in the fund shall be nonlapsing and continually appropriated to the department of safety. II. (a) The fund shall provide matching grants to local law enforcement agencies to assist agencies with the purchase, maintenance, and replacement of body-worn and dashboard cameras and ongoing costs related to the maintenance and storage of data recorded by body-worn and dashboard cameras. (b) The commissioner of the department of safety may also use the fund to pay for the classified position of business administrator I established in the department of safety, division of administration. III. All local law enforcement agencies shall be eligible to apply for grants from the fund. IV. The fund shall be overseen by the commissioner of the department of safety and the attorney general who shall, within 180 days of the effective date of this section, jointly establish a process for the application for matching grants from the fund.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at gc.nh.gov
New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated, TITLE VI PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, CHAPTER 91-A ACCESS TO GOVERNMENTAL RECORDS AND MEETINGS
§ 91-A:5Exemptions.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
The following governmental records are exempted from the provisions of this chapter: I. Records of grand and petit juries. I-a. The master jury list as defined in RSA 500-A:1, IV. II. Records of parole and pardon boards. III. Personal school records of pupils, including the name of the parent or legal guardian and any specific reasons disclosed to school officials for the objection to the assessment under RSA 193-C:6. IV. Records pertaining to internal personnel practices; confidential, commercial, or financial information; test questions, scoring keys, and other examination data used to administer a licensing examination, examination for employment, or academic examinations; and personnel, medical, welfare, library user, videotape sale or rental, and other files whose disclosure would constitute invasion of privacy. Without otherwise compromising the confidentiality of the files, nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit a public body or agency from releasing information relative to health or safety from investigative files on a limited basis to persons whose health or safety may be affected. V.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at gc.nh.gov
Cited in 56 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Mans v. Lebanon School Board (1972) read RSA 91-A:5 exemptions narrowly and balanced interests to hold teacher salaries not exempt under paragraph IV. Union Leader Corp. v. Fenniman (1993) made police internal investigation files categorically exempt, but New Hampshire overruled that per se rule in 2020 and restored balancing.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mans v. Lebanon School Board (Supreme Court of New Hampshire 1972, 112 N.H. 160)✓A Lebanon taxpayer sought the name and individual salary of every schoolteacher, which the school board withheld; the court read the RSA 91-A:5 exemptions restrictively and held teacher salaries are not the intimate details whose disclosure would constitute invasion of privacy.
- Union Leader Corp. v. Fenniman (Supreme Court of New Hampshire 1993, 136 N.H. 624)✓A newspaper sought a police department's internal investigation file on a lieutenant accused of making harassing phone calls; the court held those records pertain to internal personnel practices under RSA 91-A:5, IV and are categorically exempt, with no balancing test applied.
- New Hampshire Right to Life & a. v. Director, New Hampshire Charitable Trusts Unit & a. (Supreme Court of New Hampshire 2016, 169 N.H. 95)✓A group's Right-to-Know requests for state files on Planned Parenthood were partly refused; the court held attorney work product falls inside the RSA 91-A:5, IV exemption for confidential information, and vacated the withholding of clinic security DVDs for more privacy findings.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New Hampshire Right-to-Know Law: Records Requests (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 105-D:2, use of body-worn cameras: activation triggers, recording refusal rights, and 30-180 day retention extending to 3 years(gc.nh.gov).gov
- N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 91-A:5, X, Right-to-Know Law exemption for body-worn camera recordings made under RSA 105-D, with exceptions for use-of-force, firearm-discharge, and felony-arrest footage(gc.nh.gov).gov
- N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 105-D:3, Body-Worn and Dashboard Camera Fund(gc.nh.gov).gov
- New Hampshire HB 1587 (2026), proposal to subject body-worn camera footage generally to the Right-to-Know Law, referred for interim study on February 19, 2026(legiscan.com)
- New Hampshire Municipal Association, Body Worn Cameras: New Law, New Considerations for Police Departments(nhmunicipal.org)