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

Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

timesofsandiego.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 54 posts

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#21

Post by wombatpm »

garyfirestorm wrote: post #13
SoftTalker wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this reads like the cops simply didn't properly identify the vehicle. If anything, the Flock camera photo proves he was miles away.

But flock hit is the entire reason for the cops to go arrest them. And you’re right if they did careful assessment of other flock camera data, even the data of this particular flock camera they would have known this car was 5 miles away 23 seconds later. The whole point being misusing/abusing flock data to wrongly jail people and that is precisely what happened here. Flock is the center of this story.

Police would just argue that the second datapoint was wrong.

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#22

Post by 4MOAisgoodenuf »

throwaway87557 wrote: post #17

[flagged]

I don’t think someone should be thrown in jail for a month for having polarized windows on their car.

Red is a very popular color for the Giulia and window tint is not an uncommon item.

Any random person on the street could be described as able to be “caught without enough evidence to convict”

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#23

Post by pixl97 »

bryan0 wrote: post #7

> Their tort claim notes that the path the men took to the cigar lounge passed by several other Flock cameras, which could have corroborated their story, as well as the location data on their cell phones. It seems like if the police actually looked at the Flock data it would have exonerated them?

Quite often the cops job is to find someone close enough and then toss them into the jaws of the criminal justice system. We like to say "innocent until proven guilty", but you goddammed better be ready to prove yourself innocent unless you want to find yourself imprisoned.

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#25

Post by Wingy »

bhickey wrote: post #18
garyfirestorm wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But flock hit is the entire reason for the cops to go arrest them. And you’re right if they did careful assessment of other flock camera data, even the data of this particular flock camera they would have known this car was 5 miles away 23 seconds later. The whole point being misusing/abusing flock data to wrongly jail people and that is precisely what happened here. Flock is the center of this story.

> [T]hey would have known this car was 5 miles away 23 seconds later. Tack on a reckless driving charge and a speeding ticket.

782.6mph is way too fast.

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#26

Post by throwaway87557 »

4MOAisgoodenuf wrote: post #22
throwaway87557 wrote: post #17

[flagged]

I don’t think someone should be thrown in jail for a month for having polarized windows on their car. Red is a very popular color for the Giulia and window tint is not an uncommon item. Any random person on the street could be described as able to be “caught without enough evidence to convict”

.

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#27

Post by pixl97 »

OutOfHere wrote: post #14
variety8675 wrote: post #2

I'm no fan of flock, but I dislike how these articles are blaming the technology when the real issue is the police not bothering to check the information they're given

It is Flock's responsibility to grant access only to trained professionals who undergo routine training and testing in how to and how not to use the system.

So they can't show it to the police in the US?

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#28

Post by aaomidi »

variety8675 wrote: post #2

I'm no fan of flock, but I dislike how these articles are blaming the technology when the real issue is the police not bothering to check the information they're given

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#29

Post by crooked-v »

throwaway87557 wrote: post #17

[flagged]

> Trying to say it was 5 miles away 23 seconds after an unknown reference is being intentionally obtuse.

The article specifically says:

> just 23 seconds after San Police Officers in Golden Hill tried stopping the suspected carjacker

> Their tort claim notes that the path the men took to the cigar lounge passed by several other Flock cameras, which could have corroborated their story, as well as the location data on their cell phones.

Your argument is that, what, this guy you argue has no money also hacked the phone company to fake their records while driving at 100 mph through San Diego under an invisibility cloak so no other cameras or people saw anything?

Re: Flock license plate reader wrongly linked a San Diego man to a violent crime

#30

Post by OutOfHere »

pixl97 wrote: post #27
OutOfHere wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is Flock's responsibility to grant access only to trained professionals who undergo routine training and testing in how to and how not to use the system.

So they can't show it to the police in the US?

Every police officer with access to the system must ideally have to undergo mandatory annual training and testing in using it to protect the rights of innocents. If they don't pass the testing, they ideally should not be granted access.

Flock should be held accountable for ensuring adequate protections exist to prevent misuse.

Post reply on HN