Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 221 posts

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#101

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

tlogan wrote: post #32

This is a weak or misleading story about AI. First, the detective used the FaceSketchID system, which has been around since around 2014. It is not new or uniquely tied to modern AI. Second, the system only suggests possible matches. It is still up to the detective to investigate further and decide whether to pursue charges. And then it is up to court to issue the warrant. The real question is why she was held in jail…

> The real question is why she was held in jail for four months. That is the part that I do not understand. My understanding is that there is 30-day limit (the requesting state must pick up the defendant within 30 day). Regarding the individual involved, Angela Lipps, she has reportedly been arrested before, so it is possible she was on parole. So maybe they were holding her because of that?

As the article gestures towards, challenging the extradition can greatly extend the timeline, from 30 days after the arrest to 90 days after a formal identity hearing. Which isn't fair and isn't intuitive, but is unfortunately a long-standing part of the system. (Even worse, this kind of mistaken identity can't be challenged in an extradition hearing; the question isn't whether she's the person who committed the crime but whether she's the person identified in the warrant.)

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#102

Post by jqpabc123 »

zephen wrote: post #72
jqpabc123 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Used incorrectly will lead to errors. Only one small little problem --- there is no way to tell if you are using it "correctly". The only way to be sure is to not use it. Using it basically boils down to, "Do you feel lucky?". The Fargo police didn't get lucky in this case. And now the liability kicks in.

Look, I'm generally considered AI's most vociferous detractor. But... > there is no way to tell if you are using it "correctly". This simply isn't true, at least in cases like this. I know common sense isn't really all that common, but why would you give more credence to an untested tool than an untested crack-addled human informant? The entire point of the informant, or the AI in this instance, is to generate leads.…

There is no "correct" way to use AI in order to avoid bad results. The only prudent approach is to assume all results are bad until proven otherwise.

But this approach negates much of the incentive to pay for questionable results.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#103

Post by tlogan »

Supermancho wrote: post #63
strictnein wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I could find the link, but I believe she was in jail on parole violation, unrelated to anything that the "AI" flagged her on.

Her picture was used as part of a fake id card, in the commission of a crime. The fuzzy camera footage looked like her (from stills I've seen) and her picture was on the fake ID. Those 2 circumstantial items were, apparently, enough to have a warrant issued. They picked her up in TN and held her for 4 months, even after: The ND police knew the ID was fake and the person using it was not her. The ND police knew she ha…

Ok. The mistake was made by North Dakota police (and they blame AI - the AI just gave them a possible match. Whatever.).

What I still do not understand is why she spent nearly six months in a Tennessee jail. That part remains unclear and needs further explanation.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#104

Post by lovich »

contrast wrote: post #69
frankharv wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but a judge issued the warrant in the first place. Cops did not do a proper investigation and the judge green-lighted it. It is all on the JUDGE or possibly a magistrate who approved a faulty warrant. The judge failed the poor woman. FIRE him. Then sue Clearview for big bucks.

what's with the weird obsession all over the thread that it is the JUDGE who is the only person at fault here?

It’s the same poster, I assumed they were ai at first but the account is from 2017.

Some people are just weird

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#105

Post by gtowey »

jqpabc123 wrote: post #21
gtowey wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the opposite, it's absolution from liability. "The AI did it" is the ultimate excuse to avoid accepting responsibility and consequences.

Courts are already refusing to accept this excuse. https://pub.towardsai.net/the-air-gapped-chronicles-the-cour...

Good to know it's not a fait accompli yet, but I wont be surprised to see corporations pushing for this hard.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#106

Post by tlogan »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #101
tlogan wrote: post #32

This is a weak or misleading story about AI. First, the detective used the FaceSketchID system, which has been around since around 2014. It is not new or uniquely tied to modern AI. Second, the system only suggests possible matches. It is still up to the detective to investigate further and decide whether to pursue charges. And then it is up to court to issue the warrant. The real question is why she was held in jail…

> The real question is why she was held in jail for four months. That is the part that I do not understand. My understanding is that there is 30-day limit (the requesting state must pick up the defendant within 30 day). Regarding the individual involved, Angela Lipps, she has reportedly been arrested before, so it is possible she was on parole. So maybe they were holding her because of that? As the article gestures t…

That is my assumption. I assume who ever was representing her made a mistake and challenged the warrant and that caused delay in the extradition.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#107

Post by lovich »

rootusrootus wrote: post #58
renewiltord wrote: post #41

[flagged]

Has it not been fairly common to require police officers to have a bachelor’s degree? Or an associate’s? I think recently that has been relaxed but I’ve lived in places where it was absolutely a requirement. I don’t think they’re as stupid as you suggest.

Police departments won the right to discriminate _against_ intelligence in 1997 on the Jordan vs The City of New London case[1].

They literally aim to be dumber than average.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_test

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#108

Post by themafia »

firefoxd wrote: post #30

Without even looking at the AI part, I have a single question: Did anybody investigate? That's it. Whether it's AI that flagged her, or a witness who saw her, or her IP address appeared on the logs. Did anybody bothered to ask her "where were you the morning of july 10th between 3 and 4pm. But that's not what happened, they saw the data and said "we got her". But this is the worst part of the story: > And after her o…

> Whether it's AI that flagged her

It absolutely was. There's no question of this. Now we need to ask how was the system marketed, what did the police pay for it, how were they trained to use it?

> anybody bothered to ask her "where were you the morning of july 10th between 3 and 4pm.

Legally that amounts "hearsay" and cannot have any value. Those statements probably won't even be admissible in court without other supporting facts entered in first.

> we are all guilty until cleared.

This is not at a phenomenon that started with AI. If you scratch the surface, even slightly, you'll find that this is a common strategy used against defendants who are perceived as not being financially or logistically capable of defending themselves.

We have a private prison industry. The line between these two outcomes is very short.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#109

Post by hnuser123456 »

rcvassallo83 wrote: post #94
firefoxd wrote: post #30

Without even looking at the AI part, I have a single question: Did anybody investigate? That's it. Whether it's AI that flagged her, or a witness who saw her, or her IP address appeared on the logs. Did anybody bothered to ask her "where were you the morning of july 10th between 3 and 4pm. But that's not what happened, they saw the data and said "we got her". But this is the worst part of the story: > And after her o…

The thing about the legal system is there's no incentive to investigate to find the truth. The incentive is to prosecte and prove the charges. Speaking from the experience of being falsely accused after calling 911 to stop a drunk woman from driving. The narrative they "investigated" was so obviously false, bodycam evidence directly contradicted multiple key facts. Officials are interested only seeking to prove the c…

I would absolutely never call the police on a woman. Simply walk far away and let her be someone else's problem.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#110

Post by p_l »

tlogan wrote: post #103
Supermancho wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Her picture was used as part of a fake id card, in the commission of a crime. The fuzzy camera footage looked like her (from stills I've seen) and her picture was on the fake ID. Those 2 circumstantial items were, apparently, enough to have a warrant issued. They picked her up in TN and held her for 4 months, even after: The ND police knew the ID was fake and the person using it was not her. The ND police knew she ha…

Ok. The mistake was made by North Dakota police (and they blame AI - the AI just gave them a possible match. Whatever.). What I still do not understand is why she spent nearly six months in a Tennessee jail. That part remains unclear and needs further explanation.

From the first time the story surfaced, for spurious reasons[1] she was booked as fugitive, and that made it so that there was "no need" for normal timeframe of hearing.

[1] The reason being that she was found in Tennessee while being searched for a crime in another state, thus allowing them to treat it as interstate fugitive from a crime scene

Post reply on HN