9 ms·

>But the next steps, where investigators first confirm the match, then seek more evidence for an arrest, were poorly done and Williams was brought in. He had to

>But the next steps, where investigators first confirm the match, then seek more evidence for an arrest, were poorly done and Williams was brought in. He had to spend 30 hours in jail and post a $1,000 bond before he was freed. // Seems more like "why lack of rigour in policing has lead to false arrests". Facial recognition is evidence, not proof. They clearly didn't view the video and compare it to the person's photo if during post-arrest interview they could immediately tell it was the wrong person? Do they also just arrest people based on other 'witness' reports without any effort towards corroboration?

faitswulff 6y ago
If the people in question are black, then yes, arrests or worse happen quite regularly without due diligence.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  Do you have support for shortcutting of police processes based on skin colour? Like, they arresting officer fills out the 'corroborating evidence' part of the paperwork and says 'none, suspect is black' and that's fine? Or, you just suppose that to be true? AIUI certainty of march is much higher for light-skinned people: do officers get data on match certainty? Forgive my suspicion, but flagrant assumption of racism fuels societal division and strong evidence can avoid unnecessary animosities.
  - faitswulff 6y ago
    There are a preponderance of YouTube videos of encounters like this: > In one especially notorious encounter, police in 2009 arrested a distinguished black Harvard professor, Henry Louis Gates Jr., at his own home in Cambridge, Mass., after a white woman called the police to report a possible break-in. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/public-outrage-legislation-follow-white-womans-call-to-police-about-black-man-in-central-park/2020/05/27/94b219a6-a049-11ea-9590-1858a893bd59_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/public-outrage-legis... Breonna Taylor was not only shot to death in her sleep, but was also not given critical aid for twenty minutes after they discovered she was injured: > Mr. Walker told investigators that Ms. Taylor coughed and struggled to breathe for at least five minutes after she was shot, according to The Louisville Courier Journal. She received no medical attention for more than 20 minutes after she was struck, The Courier Journal reported, citing dispatch logs. https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html That, I would say, is a "shortcutting" of police procedure. "Avoiding unnecessary animosity" is less important than facing the problem American society has with racism headlong. Given the evidence that we have, where is the data that it is not happening?
    - rbecker 6y ago
      Before listing those two anecdotes, did you check that there's not also a large amount of similar incidents victimizing whites? And then compared the amounts? Or did you simply see it on the news, and assumed it was representative of a larger trend, just like someone watching Fox would assume blacks are more likely to be criminal, because (I'm assuming) the crimes Fox chooses to report on feature black perpetrators? Wouldn't it be better to rely on statistics, rather than cherry-picked anecdotes? For example, the number killed by police, normalized to some difficult to fudge measure of crime incidence, such as the homicide rate? How do those two examples measure up against the 406 whites and 259 blacks killed by police in 2019 [1]? [1] https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends
      - faitswulff 6y ago
        Well, black people constitute ~13% of the population versus white people's 73%. So there should be almost 6x as many white people, or ~1,500, killed by police as black people. Police brutality is a leading cause of deaths among young men, but especially so for young black men: > Among men of all races, ages 25 to 29, police killings are the sixth-leading cause of death, according to a study led by Frank Edwards of Rutgers University, with a total annual mortality risk of 1.8 deaths per 100,000 people. Accidental death, a category that includes automotive accidents and drug overdoses, was the biggest cause at 76.6 deaths per 100,000, and followed by suicide (26.7), other homicides (22.0), heart disease (7.0), and cancer (6.3). > [...] > For a black man, the risk of being killed by a police officer is about 2.5 times higher than that of a white man. “Our models predict that about 1 in 1,000 black men and boys will be killed by police over the life course,” the authors write. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/08/08/police-shootings-are-leading-cause-death-young-american-men-new-research-shows/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/08/08/police-sh... There are plenty of statistics if you look for them. Which is why, in my mind, the onus is on skeptics to prove that police brutality does not especially affect the black population.
        rbecker 6y ago
        > black people constitute ~13% of the population versus white people's 73% https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends looks at whites and Hispanics separately. Non-hispanic whites are only 60% of US population: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Sta... You also failed to normalize to the crime rate. That kind of analysis would lead you to conclude that the police are shockingly biased against males, to a far, far greater degree than against blacks.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
The answer, unfortunately, is likely yes. An entirely uncorroborated witness report isn't probable cause, but the standard for corroboration required is very low. There was a case Draper v. United States where an informant said "the guy's coming back from Chicago wearing suchandsuch clothes on September 9", and the police arrested him based on matching that description, with no corroboration of the underlying accusation that he was in Chicago to buy drugs.
numpad0 6y ago
People read “99.97% match” and take it as “basically 100%”, where it means “could be one of these 100k Americans of 330 mil population” in actuality
- ticviking 6y ago
  I wonder if actually making that explicit would reduce automation bias. Something like, "99% match, statistically this person is one of 10,000 out a million people in our city who would match"
  - monocasa 6y ago
    Or better yet, actually teaching proper statistics to cops, so that they can figure out p values of data as they collate evidence.
    - mindslight 6y ago
      Heh. It's seemingly impossible to teach cops to care about basic things like not to kneel on people's necks or how to respect cries for mercy, and you think they're going to care about statistics? All the training and education in the world can't fix bad incentives. What is needed is automatic compensation for everyone falsely arrested by the police, and for criminal laws (eg "no murder") to be enforced for police officers.
treis 6y ago
>Do they also just arrest people based on other 'witness' reports without any effort towards corroboration? Pretty much. They will investigate for alibis and if there are fingerprints/DNA they will do that test. But absent other physical evidence a single eyewitness is good enough. Unsurprisingly they often are wrong. Netflix's Innocence Project has an episode where this happened. A woman was raped and thought she saw her assailant some time later. He was subsequently convicted and eventually exonerated due to DNA evidence. Practically speaking there is going to be at least something else pointing to an accused. Otherwise, they wouldn't be showing that picture to a witness. But once you're suspected the standard is the witness picking the correct photo out of a line up of 6. That's enough to be arrested and often enough to be convicted.
humanistbot 6y ago
This is what social psychologists call "automation bias," which has been empirically observed in all kinds of situations from all kinds of people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation_bias When we are told that a prediction is from an automated system, most people are more likely to believe it and not subject it to the same skepticism and critical thinking that we do to predictions from humans. Even if there is a human-in-the-loop system that requires a human to confirm it, that's often just laundering the machine's prediction through a human. When we are primed by being told this is what The System predicted, we're more likely to override our normal processes. This is especially the case when The System has worked 99% of the time --- which is still a lot of false positives. Although this can also be the case with priming from predictions or judgments by other humans. The Asch conformity experiments involved planting fake test subjects in a group activity where subjects had to give answers to a very obvious perception question, and the real test subject could hear everyone else's answers. The fake subjects went first and all gave the blatantly wrong answer. The percent of people who conform varies with how you run the experiment, but typically a majority of the subjects end up giving the obvious wrong answer that everyone else did: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  I can see it happening when checking takes a long time - but they're probably man-days into an arrest at the point they're sitting in an interview room post-arrest. Against, the LEO looking at their tablet screen prior to arresting the guy, seeing he looks different and not arresting him? Are the LEOs getting bonuses for raw number-of-arrests?
  - WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
    > Are the LEOs getting bonuses for raw number-of-arrests? There may be a subconscious bias here... if you spend your entire year looking at murder suspects, you probably see the guy on the other side as just another scumbag... and probably want to make sure the victim gets justice (even if it's wrong)
Spooky23 6y ago
The police get all of the grief for bullshit like this. Prosecutors, despite their high minded idealism when they move on from that role, are a bigger issue. Witnesses are easy to address at trial, and if you're lucky enough to have a competent lawyer, it's often possible to neutralize them even if they are telling the truth. Systems are harder to cross-examine. Once successfully litigated, prosecutors can use precedent to avoid any scrutiny of the methods, operational processes, or other aspects. I use a jury I served on as an example -- the police found a person who was almost certainly guilty of running over a person in a park late at night. The key piece of information was when it happened due to surrounding events. The key witness was out of play because he was arrested for perjury -- evidence came out immediately before trial indicating that he was driving a car after stumbling out of a bar, and he had testified that he was a passenger to the grand jury. So they had to scramble to use traffic light cameras (which are synced to GPS/cellular time) to establish a window when the defendant was in a particular area. Because of the events, the defense was able to cross-examine someone from the camera vendor, who was ripped up on the stand -- evidence thrown out and case settled for a reckless driving misdemeanor. That event, where the vendor was questioned (and in this case failed to satisfy the court) is pretty rare. It's often assumed that systems work perfectly, while they often do not. For example, DNA matching is sound science, but forensic labs sometimes have unsound practices and controls. If police are under pressure to close cases, and prosecutors are incentivized towards collecting scalps, the natural outcome with automated systems is going to be people going to jail because of bullshit tech.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  AIUI, and AFAIR, DNA matching has a false positive rate of 1 in a million; making a lot of false matches at the level of population of a country. That statistic is probably a few years old, but I'm not sure they've changed the tests used ?
98codes 6y ago
This certainly fits with the police folks that pulled over an SUV and arrested the driver due to a supposed plate match—with a plate belonging to a stolen motorcycle.
roywiggins 6y ago
> Facial recognition is evidence, not proof The cops don't need proof for an arrest. That's why the standard is called probable cause. The cops just need a reason, not proof. [0] (I don't think a facial recognition match should be enough for probable cause either) [0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause
heavyset_go 6y ago
> Seems more like "why lack of rigour in policing has lead to false arrests". The worst part of this is that police are often very well, often more than software engineers, and this is the quality of work they put out. The median salary for cops is more than $105,000 a year[1] and some cops can make over $250,000+ a year[2] with over time. They can retire with full benefits and a pension after only 20 years of working. This level of laziness and ineptitude shouldn't be accepted from what are often the highest paid government workers on the books. [1] https://www.nj.com/news/2017/05/how_much_is_the_median_cop_salary_in_your_town.html https://www.nj.com/news/2017/05/how_much_is_the_median_cop_s... [2] https://www.nj.com/somerset/2019/11/4-cops-in-this-nj-town-earned-250k-last-year-heres-how-they-gamed-the-system.html https://www.nj.com/somerset/2019/11/4-cops-in-this-nj-town-e...
- rcoveson 6y ago
  > The median salary for cops is more than $105,000 a year[1]... From what I can tell 105k a year is the highest median police salary for any state in the country. Why bring up New Jersey specifically and act like it's representative? Either use the number for the whole country or the number for Michigan, which is where the events in the article took place (and where the median salary is less than half the NJ amount).
  - heavyset_go 6y ago
    > Why bring up New Jersey specifically and act like it's representative? Either use the number for the whole country or the number for Michigan No, I'll use New Jersey because it's the state that I'm most familiar with. New York City, which is across a river from NJ and is the largest city in the US and has the largest police department, has similar rates for their police force. You will find that police officers are some of highest paid government employees in towns, counties and states, and are the highest paid government employees in some cases. In places where the median salary for police officers are lower, median salaries for software engineers are much lower, too. My point is that police officers often make more than a lot of software engineers on this site do, and they're rewarded with benefits that are better than most engineers', along with a full pension after working for only 20 years. Yet we expect higher quality of work from junior engineers working on dating apps than we do the cops whose lazy investigative work costs people their freedom.
sokoloff 6y ago
> Seems more like "why lack of rigour in policing has lead to false arrests". I agree with this. > Facial recognition is evidence, not proof. I don't think facial recognition is even evidence. At most, it's filtration/highlighting.
vkou 6y ago
If policing was rigorous, we wouldn't need judges or juries. Police should be assumed to not be rigorous in pursuit of their duties. They should be assumed to look for positive pieces of evidence, not exculpatory ones. Given those two facts about the world, giving them more tools that are only capable of producing positive pieces[1] of evidence (within a confidence level below 100%) will result in more false arrests. [1] These facial recognition systems point them at suspects - they never exonerate a pre-supposed suspect.
oefnak 6y ago
In my language, evidence and proof translate to the same word: "bewijs".

faitswulff 6y ago

If the people in question are black, then yes, arrests or worse happen quite regularly without due diligence.

pbhjpbhj 6y ago
Do you have support for shortcutting of police processes based on skin colour? Like, they arresting officer fills out the 'corroborating evidence' part of the paperwork and says 'none, suspect is black' and that's fine? Or, you just suppose that to be true? AIUI certainty of march is much higher for light-skinned people: do officers get data on match certainty? Forgive my suspicion, but flagrant assumption of racism fuels societal division and strong evidence can avoid unnecessary animosities.
- faitswulff 6y ago
  There are a preponderance of YouTube videos of encounters like this: > In one especially notorious encounter, police in 2009 arrested a distinguished black Harvard professor, Henry Louis Gates Jr., at his own home in Cambridge, Mass., after a white woman called the police to report a possible break-in. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/public-outrage-legislation-follow-white-womans-call-to-police-about-black-man-in-central-park/2020/05/27/94b219a6-a049-11ea-9590-1858a893bd59_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/public-outrage-legis... Breonna Taylor was not only shot to death in her sleep, but was also not given critical aid for twenty minutes after they discovered she was injured: > Mr. Walker told investigators that Ms. Taylor coughed and struggled to breathe for at least five minutes after she was shot, according to The Louisville Courier Journal. She received no medical attention for more than 20 minutes after she was struck, The Courier Journal reported, citing dispatch logs. https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/breonna-taylor-police.html That, I would say, is a "shortcutting" of police procedure. "Avoiding unnecessary animosity" is less important than facing the problem American society has with racism headlong. Given the evidence that we have, where is the data that it is not happening?
  - rbecker 6y ago
    Before listing those two anecdotes, did you check that there's not also a large amount of similar incidents victimizing whites? And then compared the amounts? Or did you simply see it on the news, and assumed it was representative of a larger trend, just like someone watching Fox would assume blacks are more likely to be criminal, because (I'm assuming) the crimes Fox chooses to report on feature black perpetrators? Wouldn't it be better to rely on statistics, rather than cherry-picked anecdotes? For example, the number killed by police, normalized to some difficult to fudge measure of crime incidence, such as the homicide rate? How do those two examples measure up against the 406 whites and 259 blacks killed by police in 2019 [1]? [1] https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends
    - faitswulff 6y ago
      Well, black people constitute ~13% of the population versus white people's 73%. So there should be almost 6x as many white people, or ~1,500, killed by police as black people. Police brutality is a leading cause of deaths among young men, but especially so for young black men: > Among men of all races, ages 25 to 29, police killings are the sixth-leading cause of death, according to a study led by Frank Edwards of Rutgers University, with a total annual mortality risk of 1.8 deaths per 100,000 people. Accidental death, a category that includes automotive accidents and drug overdoses, was the biggest cause at 76.6 deaths per 100,000, and followed by suicide (26.7), other homicides (22.0), heart disease (7.0), and cancer (6.3). > [...] > For a black man, the risk of being killed by a police officer is about 2.5 times higher than that of a white man. “Our models predict that about 1 in 1,000 black men and boys will be killed by police over the life course,” the authors write. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/08/08/police-shootings-are-leading-cause-death-young-american-men-new-research-shows/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/08/08/police-sh... There are plenty of statistics if you look for them. Which is why, in my mind, the onus is on skeptics to prove that police brutality does not especially affect the black population.
      - rbecker 6y ago
        > black people constitute ~13% of the population versus white people's 73% https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/nationaltrends looks at whites and Hispanics separately. Non-hispanic whites are only 60% of US population: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_Sta... You also failed to normalize to the crime rate. That kind of analysis would lead you to conclude that the police are shockingly biased against males, to a far, far greater degree than against blacks.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

The answer, unfortunately, is likely yes. An entirely uncorroborated witness report isn't probable cause, but the standard for corroboration required is very low. There was a case Draper v. United States where an informant said "the guy's coming back from Chicago wearing suchandsuch clothes on September 9", and the police arrested him based on matching that description, with no corroboration of the underlying accusation that he was in Chicago to buy drugs.

numpad0 6y ago

People read “99.97% match” and take it as “basically 100%”, where it means “could be one of these 100k Americans of 330 mil population” in actuality

ticviking 6y ago
I wonder if actually making that explicit would reduce automation bias. Something like, "99% match, statistically this person is one of 10,000 out a million people in our city who would match"
- monocasa 6y ago
  Or better yet, actually teaching proper statistics to cops, so that they can figure out p values of data as they collate evidence.
  - mindslight 6y ago
    Heh. It's seemingly impossible to teach cops to care about basic things like not to kneel on people's necks or how to respect cries for mercy, and you think they're going to care about statistics? All the training and education in the world can't fix bad incentives. What is needed is automatic compensation for everyone falsely arrested by the police, and for criminal laws (eg "no murder") to be enforced for police officers.

treis 6y ago

>Do they also just arrest people based on other 'witness' reports without any effort towards corroboration? Pretty much. They will investigate for alibis and if there are fingerprints/DNA they will do that test. But absent other physical evidence a single eyewitness is good enough. Unsurprisingly they often are wrong. Netflix's Innocence Project has an episode where this happened. A woman was raped and thought she saw her assailant some time later. He was subsequently convicted and eventually exonerated due to DNA evidence. Practically speaking there is going to be at least something else pointing to an accused. Otherwise, they wouldn't be showing that picture to a witness. But once you're suspected the standard is the witness picking the correct photo out of a line up of 6. That's enough to be arrested and often enough to be convicted.

humanistbot 6y ago

This is what social psychologists call "automation bias," which has been empirically observed in all kinds of situations from all kinds of people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation_bias When we are told that a prediction is from an automated system, most people are more likely to believe it and not subject it to the same skepticism and critical thinking that we do to predictions from humans. Even if there is a human-in-the-loop system that requires a human to confirm it, that's often just laundering the machine's prediction through a human. When we are primed by being told this is what The System predicted, we're more likely to override our normal processes. This is especially the case when The System has worked 99% of the time --- which is still a lot of false positives. Although this can also be the case with priming from predictions or judgments by other humans. The Asch conformity experiments involved planting fake test subjects in a group activity where subjects had to give answers to a very obvious perception question, and the real test subject could hear everyone else's answers. The fake subjects went first and all gave the blatantly wrong answer. The percent of people who conform varies with how you run the experiment, but typically a majority of the subjects end up giving the obvious wrong answer that everyone else did: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments

pbhjpbhj 6y ago
I can see it happening when checking takes a long time - but they're probably man-days into an arrest at the point they're sitting in an interview room post-arrest. Against, the LEO looking at their tablet screen prior to arresting the guy, seeing he looks different and not arresting him? Are the LEOs getting bonuses for raw number-of-arrests?
- WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
  > Are the LEOs getting bonuses for raw number-of-arrests? There may be a subconscious bias here... if you spend your entire year looking at murder suspects, you probably see the guy on the other side as just another scumbag... and probably want to make sure the victim gets justice (even if it's wrong)

Spooky23 6y ago

The police get all of the grief for bullshit like this. Prosecutors, despite their high minded idealism when they move on from that role, are a bigger issue. Witnesses are easy to address at trial, and if you're lucky enough to have a competent lawyer, it's often possible to neutralize them even if they are telling the truth. Systems are harder to cross-examine. Once successfully litigated, prosecutors can use precedent to avoid any scrutiny of the methods, operational processes, or other aspects. I use a jury I served on as an example -- the police found a person who was almost certainly guilty of running over a person in a park late at night. The key piece of information was when it happened due to surrounding events. The key witness was out of play because he was arrested for perjury -- evidence came out immediately before trial indicating that he was driving a car after stumbling out of a bar, and he had testified that he was a passenger to the grand jury. So they had to scramble to use traffic light cameras (which are synced to GPS/cellular time) to establish a window when the defendant was in a particular area. Because of the events, the defense was able to cross-examine someone from the camera vendor, who was ripped up on the stand -- evidence thrown out and case settled for a reckless driving misdemeanor. That event, where the vendor was questioned (and in this case failed to satisfy the court) is pretty rare. It's often assumed that systems work perfectly, while they often do not. For example, DNA matching is sound science, but forensic labs sometimes have unsound practices and controls. If police are under pressure to close cases, and prosecutors are incentivized towards collecting scalps, the natural outcome with automated systems is going to be people going to jail because of bullshit tech.

pbhjpbhj 6y ago
AIUI, and AFAIR, DNA matching has a false positive rate of 1 in a million; making a lot of false matches at the level of population of a country. That statistic is probably a few years old, but I'm not sure they've changed the tests used ?

98codes 6y ago

This certainly fits with the police folks that pulled over an SUV and arrested the driver due to a supposed plate match—with a plate belonging to a stolen motorcycle.

roywiggins 6y ago

> Facial recognition is evidence, not proof The cops don't need proof for an arrest. That's why the standard is called probable cause. The cops just need a reason, not proof. [0] (I don't think a facial recognition match should be enough for probable cause either) [0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause

heavyset_go 6y ago

> Seems more like "why lack of rigour in policing has lead to false arrests". The worst part of this is that police are often very well, often more than software engineers, and this is the quality of work they put out. The median salary for cops is more than $105,000 a year[1] and some cops can make over $250,000+ a year[2] with over time. They can retire with full benefits and a pension after only 20 years of working. This level of laziness and ineptitude shouldn't be accepted from what are often the highest paid government workers on the books. [1] https://www.nj.com/news/2017/05/how_much_is_the_median_cop_salary_in_your_town.html https://www.nj.com/news/2017/05/how_much_is_the_median_cop_s... [2] https://www.nj.com/somerset/2019/11/4-cops-in-this-nj-town-earned-250k-last-year-heres-how-they-gamed-the-system.html https://www.nj.com/somerset/2019/11/4-cops-in-this-nj-town-e...

rcoveson 6y ago
> The median salary for cops is more than $105,000 a year[1]... From what I can tell 105k a year is the highest median police salary for any state in the country. Why bring up New Jersey specifically and act like it's representative? Either use the number for the whole country or the number for Michigan, which is where the events in the article took place (and where the median salary is less than half the NJ amount).
- heavyset_go 6y ago
  > Why bring up New Jersey specifically and act like it's representative? Either use the number for the whole country or the number for Michigan No, I'll use New Jersey because it's the state that I'm most familiar with. New York City, which is across a river from NJ and is the largest city in the US and has the largest police department, has similar rates for their police force. You will find that police officers are some of highest paid government employees in towns, counties and states, and are the highest paid government employees in some cases. In places where the median salary for police officers are lower, median salaries for software engineers are much lower, too. My point is that police officers often make more than a lot of software engineers on this site do, and they're rewarded with benefits that are better than most engineers', along with a full pension after working for only 20 years. Yet we expect higher quality of work from junior engineers working on dating apps than we do the cops whose lazy investigative work costs people their freedom.

sokoloff 6y ago

> Seems more like "why lack of rigour in policing has lead to false arrests". I agree with this. > Facial recognition is evidence, not proof. I don't think facial recognition is even evidence. At most, it's filtration/highlighting.

vkou 6y ago

If policing was rigorous, we wouldn't need judges or juries. Police should be assumed to not be rigorous in pursuit of their duties. They should be assumed to look for positive pieces of evidence, not exculpatory ones. Given those two facts about the world, giving them more tools that are only capable of producing positive pieces[1] of evidence (within a confidence level below 100%) will result in more false arrests. [1] These facial recognition systems point them at suspects - they never exonerate a pre-supposed suspect.

oefnak 6y ago

In my language, evidence and proof translate to the same word: "bewijs".