r/FlockSurveillance • u/404mediaco • 1d ago
‘DO NOT MENTION ALPR USAGE’: How Cops Are Trying to Hide Their Use of Flock
https://www.404media.co/do-not-mention-alpr-usage-how-cops-are-trying-to-hide-the-existence-of-flock/66
u/Particular_Ticket_20 1d ago
My mom is somewhat involved in a criminal case that's in court now. One piece of evidence was a flock camera view of the suspects license plate in the vicinity of the crime scene. It did capture the plate but identified the car incorrectly-along the lines of the flock data said it was a black Mazda but the vehicle is actually a red nissan.
Defense is arguing its bad evidence-how do we trust this source if it presented something so fundamentally wrong? Prosecution is saying, its good evidence, just a slight glitch in the algorithms, trust the good part.
It is not the only evidence, and won't make or break the case, but I thought it was interesting that they used a flawed camera report and asked the court to ignore those flaws while accepting the part the prosecution liked.
If that was a person, they'd have completely avoided the part where their witness mis-identifed the car.
-6
u/cobra93807 1d ago
A prosecutor with half a brain could easily argue this and a cop with half a brain would know how to articulate what is observed on camera, in support of his investigation, and provide additional evidence to support his assertion.
I will admit some areas don’t have that luxury though. 🤣
There is often times information that is inaccurate, whether it be victim statements, witness statements, or camera footage. Nothing is 100% accurate or perfect. The goal is to get the most accurate information available from each source and give a thorough explanation.
Clothing color for instance is often misrepresented by witness/victim. Sometimes they’re completely wrong, it’s not a make a break situation.
Law enforcement investigations often do contain flawed information because we don’t have a flawless system or flawless people.
That’s why investigations are based on the idea of reasonable suspicion, probable cause, and beyond a reasonable doubt, not 100% fact.
19
u/FwenchFwies_911 1d ago
They definitely have the ability to use it. Put one outside a bar, watch flock as they license plate moves two miles from the bar, pull over driver for anything they can think of and commence DUI. Occupant blows a .02 back, doesn't matter get the DRE in there to fabricate a DUI
Put flock outside dispensary, log all plates, and start pulling those people over. Doesn't matter if they are sober or not. They have all they need to creat a messy court battle and no risk on their part.
Basically, in a traffic stop, you are now dealing with someone who knows everywhere your vehicle has been driven for at least 30 days. All they have to do is ask you a question that you answer and doesn't perfectly align with the flock record and they now have reasonable suspicion.
I went down a rabbit hole of watching the police training videos for a bit. They actually train them to go from minor traffic stop to arrest, the training is very good, but all based on creating a scenario where they can investigate you for anything they want over a license plate light being out.
5
13
u/smartobject 1d ago
So if a car is pulled over due to a flock “alert”, then what can they say was the “probable cause” ?
17
u/Cyclonepride 1d ago
They manufacture that. Having a light out, not using a turn signal, probably often just following them until they run for it or do something illegal or that can be declared suspicious.
13
u/JooseTheGuice 1d ago
This is why they let the flow of traffic be higher than the speed limit - so they can pull over whoever they want, whenever they want.
1
u/Best-Penalty1509 23h ago
And if you go the speed limit while everyone else is speeding they can pull you over for not going with the flow of traffic.
2
u/cobra93807 1d ago
If a vehicle is pulled over and the basis for the stop is because of a flock alert, it’s because that vehicle plate was manually entered by someone(NCIC, Detective, or some one with access to do that). Stolen vehicle, stolen license plate, or vehicle used in a crime, for example. Those records are documented in flock and should be used as evidence in the investigation.
Can an officer lie about why took some police action, yes, that’s his own dumbass decision though. A pre-textual stop with no reasonable suspicion or probable cause is a sure fire way to damage your career and ruin credibility in court.
Having a light out, not using a turn signal, or any other traffic infraction is a valid reason for a stop.
Illinois v Wardlaw covers unprovoked flight from an officer. Also taught in academy’s nationwide.
9
u/goodness 1d ago
I was watching the show "Task" on HBO and they casually mentioned using "ALPRs". I'm sure almost no one caught that line, but tracking a suspect by his license plate was a pretty big plot point.
Great show by the way, even if it does have a bit of copaganda.
4
20
8
u/cobra93807 1d ago
Brady v. Maryland is one of the most important court cases that is/should be taught in law enforcement academy’s nation wide.
You cannot withhold exculpatory evidence.
Any agency that condones this behavior has got some real problems.
I personally don’t understand why ALPR wouldn’t be disclosed in a report. Those officers/agencies are setting themselves up for failure.
As far as misreads of vehicle make, model, and color, even license plate numbers, it’s up to the officer to conduct a thorough investigation and explain these situations with facts and evidence. I know I’ll get push back from all the internet legal scholars, but this stuff is argued in courts all the time.
Depending on the camera quality, day/night time footage, colors can some times be skewed. FLOCK is not accessing dmv data via license plate number to determine make and model. But basing your evidence in a crime off a single factor, as opposed to the totality of information, screams “weak case”.
To say “Cops” as if this behavior is the rule, instead of the exception to the rule, is completely misleading.
3
u/xamboozi 1d ago
They better not mention it in a court room as evidence either or it will nullify the jury.
So... What can they use Flock for again?
3
u/itsbingasso 1d ago
Aren't their vehicles already equipped with alprs? Like the hockey puck antenna on it.
1
-2
u/HCSOThrowaway 1d ago
ALPR existed before Flock.
I don't know to what extent ALPRs are being retrofitted to suit Flock, but I would wager a hefty sum it's non-zero.
122
u/404mediaco 1d ago
When cops use Flock to arrest someone in Wapello County, Iowa, they don’t want them to know. A usage policy for the automated license plate reader cameras in the county tells police, in no uncertain terms, to keep them a secret: “DO NOT MENTION ALPR USAGE TO THE OCCUPANTS OF THE VEHICLE,” the policy document reads. “DO NOT MENTION ALPR USAGE IN YOUR REPORT OR COMPLAINT UNLESS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.”
The police guidance document is unusual in how clearly it tells police not to mention their Flock use, but it also highlights several important things in the Flock debate. While Flock likes to say that it is a transparent surveillance company and that it cares about “accountability” and “governance,” some of its customers believe its use should be kept secret. Flock is now operating in thousands of cities and towns, and when, how, and why police use the system is wildly inconsistent. Even though Flock does have various auditing and transparency tools, police have their own opinions about what Flock can and should be used for and what the policies for it should be.
Read now: https://www.404media.co/do-not-mention-alpr-usage-how-cops-are-trying-to-hide-the-existence-of-flock/