Cops reject reform in Austin and SF

As cities and states push to restrict the use of facial recognition technologies, some police departments have quietly found a way to keep using the controversial tools: asking for help from other law enforcement agencies that still have access.

Officers in Austin and San Francisco two of the largest cities where police are banned from using the technology have repeatedly asked police in neighboring towns to run photos of criminal suspects through their facial recognition programs, according to a Washington Post review of police documents.

In San Francisco, the workaround didnt appear to help. Since the citys ban took effect in 2019, the San Francisco Police Department has asked outside agencies to conduct at least five facial recognition searches, but no matches were returned, according to a summary of those incidents submitted by the department to the countys Board of Supervisors last year.

SFPD spokesman Evan Sernoffsky said these requests violated the city ordinance and were not authorized by the department, but the agency faced no consequences from the city. He declined to say whether any officers were disciplined because those would be personnel matters.

Austin police officers received the results of at least 13 face searches from a neighboring police department since the citys 2020 ban and appeared to get hits on some of them, according to documents obtained by The Post through public records requests and sources who shared them on the condition of anonymity.

Thats him! Thank you very much, one Austin police officer wrote in response to an array of photos sent to him by an officer in Leander, Tex., who ran a facial recognition search, documents show. The man displayed in the pictures, John Curry Jr., was later charged with aggravated assault for allegedly charging toward someone with a knife, and is currently in jail awaiting trial. Currys attorney declined to comment.

But at least one man who was ensnared by the searches argued that police should be held to the same standards as ordinary citizens.

We have to follow the laws. Why dont they? said Tyrell Johnson, 20, who was identified by a facial recognition search in August as a suspect in the armed robbery of an Austin 7-Eleven, documents show. Johnson said hes innocent, though prosecutors said in court documents that he bears the same hand tattoo and was seen in a video on social media wearing the same clothing as the person caught on tape committing the crime. Hes awaiting trial.

A spokeswoman for the Austin Police Department said these uses of facial recognition were never authorized by department or city officials. She said the department would review the cases for potential violations of city rules.

When allegations are made against any department staff, we follow a consistent process, the spokeswoman said in an emailed statement. Weve initiated that process to investigate the claims. If the investigation determines that policies were violated, APD will take the necessary steps.

The Leander Police Department declined to comment.

Police officers efforts to skirt these bans have not been previously reported and highlight the challenge of reining in police use of facial recognition. The powerful but imperfect artificial intelligence technology has played a role in the wrongful arrests of at least seven innocent Americans, six of whom were Black, according to lawsuits each of these people filed after the charges against them were dismissed.

Aint no point in laws if cops dont have to follow em

So an armed robber was caught by facial rec and hes mad? Theres no expectation of privacy in public. Not jsut from law enforcement. Just assume youre always on camera when you leave the house these days. Casinos use facial rec and a lot of popular tourist shopping areas do as well

So an armed robber was caught by facial rec and hes mad? Theres no expectation of privacy in public. Not jsut from law enforcement. Just assume youre always on camera when you leave the house these days. Casinos use facial rec and a lot of popular tourist shopping areas do as well

I didnt see that paragraph, I see it now. But a city ordnance can be nulled by federal law

I didnt see that paragraph, I see it now. But a city ordnance can be nulled by federal law

Well. The workaround is they requested a different agency to do it that wasnt affected by the ordnance. Unless it explicitly states they cant do it, then they didnt actually break a city ordnance. Its like going to a different state where something is legal where your home state its not.

Guess it depends if you are okay with that

1. Why would federal law nullify it?
2. Why would Austin Tx obey a federal law?

Beside that point, it seems they're skirting a law.

So an armed robber was caught by facial rec and hes mad? Theres no expectation of privacy in public. Not jsut from law enforcement. Just assume youre always on camera when you leave the house these days. Casinos use facial rec and a lot of popular tourist shopping areas do as well

So, this is a really interesting case. I had to look it up. Heres the actual section of what was put out. From what I read, it doesnt seem like its an actual law but rather a policy for the department the city created. I have to keep reading to make sure

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/9/9780fe7f.jpg

So they are disobeying the Chief's order or thr Mayor's order. Either way what usually happens when an officer does this? Probably not good.

Nothing happens. Cops are immune to just about every form of punishment.

So an armed robber was caught by facial rec and hes mad? Theres no expectation of privacy in public. Not jsut from law enforcement. Just assume youre always on camera when you leave the house these days. Casinos use facial rec and a lot of popular tourist shopping areas do as well

You have 4th amendment protection from unlawful seizures and searches. I dont think facial rec would count as those. What it would fall under, I dont really know

It does. If theyre using software to analyze an image and comparing it to other images from a database, that implicates the fourth amendment. Its just like when cops use your ID to run you for warrants and criminal history. They cant legally do that without reasonable articulable suspicion.

It does. If theyre using software to analyze an image and comparing it to other images from a database, that implicates the fourth amendment. Its just like when cops use your ID to run you for warrants and criminal history. They cant legally do that without reasonable articulable suspicion.

You have 4th amendment protection from unlawful seizures and searches. I dont think facial rec would count as those. What it would fall under, I dont really know

Is this different than licence plate cameras and databases?

You are cop and you...don't know. Not surprised.
For the record I don't blame you, this just shows how low the standards are for the typical PD. It is quite sad.