The software was used to identify the shooter in the Capital Gazette shooting.
In late June, a man walked into the Annapolis office of the Capital Gazette and began shooting. He ultimately killed five people, and wounded two more. When he was taken into custody, the shooter was not cooperative, and his fingerprints were not immediately returning a result through a search of the database. The Anne Arundel County police decided to use a relatively new software program that utilizes facial recognition technology to identify the man as Jarrod Warren Ramos. The Maryland Image Repository System scanned a database of millions of images from driver’s licenses, mug shots and other records from both state and federal repositories in order to identify him.
While many people applauded the use of this technology to identify a suspect in this deadly shooting when other methods failed, others continued to question whether this type of technology is appropriate. According to a San Bernardino criminal defense attorney, facial recognition programs may be used to invade citizens’ right to privacy — in the same way that cellphone tracking and aerial surveillance do. The difference is that the government is generally required to get a warrant to track citizens in those other ways — but not to use facial recognition technology.
In Maryland, there have been specific concerns about the use of this software because so many state employees (6,000 to 7,000) have access to it. The database has been used to monitor protesters, and has been accessed as many as 175 times in a single week. That suggests that it may be used for more than just identifying suspects when traditional routes like fingerprinting are not available.
As an experienced San Bernardino criminal defense attorney can explain, one of the major issues with the use of facial recognition technology is that there are few rules governing it. Technology is evolving faster than lawmakers can create rules and regulations to ensure that law enforcement agencies are not abusing the use of this new type of tech — leaving citizens vulnerable. For example, Amazon created a system for the city of Orlando, Florida to build a system that finds “persons of interest” in real time using public security cameras. Orlando has no formal guidelines written around the system’s use. Some cities — including Berkeley and Oakland here in California — have moved to limit the use of surveillance, requiring transparency and oversight.
While this may all seem like something out of a science fiction novel or movie, it is happening in cities across the United States — and here in California. That is why having a knowledgable San Bernardino criminal defense attorney is so important. Your lawyer should understand these types of issues, and be able to challenge the legality of identifying suspects based on this type of technology in court. Because these technologies raise serious constitutional questions, a skilled San Bernardino criminal defense attorney may be able to have evidence suppressed or even a case dismissed if a court finds that law enforcement used it illegally to make their case.
At the Chambers Law Firm, we aggressively defend our clients, and explore each aspect of our clients’ cases to put together the best possible defense. Contact our firm today at 714-760-4088 or dchambers@clfca.com to schedule a free initial consultation with a San Bernardino criminal defense attorney.
