6 ms·
Cleveland police used AI to justify a search warrant. It derailed a murder case
- intelVISA 2y agoIt begins...
- nostradumbasp 2y agoIt's definitely not looking good. Now that we have more open source models, for better and for worse, we have to worry about politically motivated amateur's and vigilantes too.
- ttyprintk 2y agoThe most dangerous use of deepfakes is the workflow for manipulating those kinds of people.
- nostradumbasp 2y agoMostly agree. We all know how awful swatting has been for many victims. Also personalized scams and deception at scale. I also worry about homebrew automated weaponry used for cowardly terroristic purposes and how that could imaginably be around the corner. It's a pretty scary topic to consider the depths of what can be done by individuals using these tools without regulations.
- kjkjadksj 2y agoThat was always a risk for justice in calling witnesses.
- nostradumbasp 2y agoIt's a little different now. Someone can deepfake or even face swap videos/images/audio and send an angry mob to someones house. Or be convinced to handle matters themselves... "Pictures/videographic evidence doesn't lie" isn't as true now as it was 30 years ago at the amateur level. Especially with coercion and human flaws.
- kjkjadksj 2y agoIt lied then too. Darkroom magic is how we got star wars to look like star wars and not people standing on a plywood ledge.
- nostradumbasp 2y agoIt couldn't lie at scale though. The amount of effort it took to doctor someones face believably onto film in the star wars era was tremendous. Now it can be done on the terabyte per second scale in an individualized fashion. Ring camera feed could show your actually nice neighbor kicking your dog. Could show a lowly employee that pissed off a manager stealing the company stapler. Could show a spouse having an affair, fake messages (one of the highest incidents of murder in the US is due to this). Swatting on a new level by impersonating your voice. All of these are things a somewhat motivated highschooler can now do. Imagine what an agency or enterprise could do? Especially if they intercepted your network activity to turn you into any level of puppy kicker you could imagine because of your politics, your position, or for testing out the success rate of such a program.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- boxed 2y agoThe US system of evidence is so weird.
- jazzyjackson 2y agoYa it's a bit of a meta-justice system, throwing out the case doesn't seem like an ideal outcome but it punishes the prosecutors for being sloppy. Sends the message, If you want to send someone to jail for 20 years, don't be sloppy.
- 542354234235 2y agoThe case isn’t thrown out. The evidence obtained through an illegally obtained warrant is suppressed. They can still gather and use any other evidence to prove his guilt.
- Clubber 2y agoThat will only work if they prosecute the detectives for falsifying information on a warrant application, which they won't. The really scary part is how many innocent people could have been jailed because of sloppiness that wasn't caught.
- philipov 2y agoDon't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
- Clubber 2y agoI don't think police really care what happens after the arrest most of the time, unless it was someone they feel wronged them. I could be wrong. Point being, letting the guy get off, the police will just blame the lawyers and not themselves a lot of the time. You always hear, "they got off on a technicality," which means the police were sloppy and didn't do their job the right (constitutional) way, but it infers someone did something wrong in the courtroom and not the police.
- 2y ago
- cainxinth 2y agohttps://archive.ph/5LJor https://archive.ph/5LJor
- Isamu 2y agoHere’s the crux: >At a Jan. 9 hearing, McMonagle agreed with defense attorneys, saying the AI identification of Tolbert was akin to an anonymous informant, which is not enough to establish probable cause. Face matching can be used but it is not admissible evidence in court, and so you can’t use it for a search warrant, you have to find other probable cause.
- loloquwowndueo 2y agoAI = anonymous informant. I see what the judge did there :)
- ttyprintk 2y agoHe’s retired and I thought it might be accidental.
- mingus88 2y agoParallel construction is the term for using a covert, inadmissible method to get your suspect, then using that illicit information to build a legitimate case that you can present in court. Perhaps the fact that they were unable to build that legitimate case means he is innocent. Or perhaps they just got too lazy with the wrong judge this time.
- duxup 2y agoI think there's a difference from "parallel construction" and what could have happened in this case. If they felt this guy was their suspect, there's nothing against using AI to determine that they should focus on that guy and look closer. They could instigate further, even (for example) run across someone who actually told them "yeah he said he shot a dude that day" and establish other facts and legally get a warrant.
- ThrowawayTestr 2y agoThat's parallel construction.
- voidUpdate 2y ago> Your experience is important to us. For optimal functionality on cleveland.com, please disable your ad blocker before continuing. "Optimal Functionality" my ass, just say you want to make money by trying to sell me stuff I don't want
- malfist 2y agoThat's the best case. With the state of ads these days you're lucky if an ad doesn't drop some malware on you
- ryukoposting 2y agoI did not see an anti-ad blocker prompt on Firefox Mobile with uBO.
- kjkjadksj 2y agoOh how I envy android users sometimes
- gwd 2y agoWorks fine for me in Brave -- neither warning nor ads shown.
- lexicality 2y agoIt's interesting that this article seems to be written under the assumption that the AI was entirely correct and Qeyeon Tolbert is the murderer, but the pesky fact that the police used a magic guessing box to identify him is a mere formality that's getting in the way of justice. Innocent until proven guilty eh?
- mingus88 2y agoThe court of public opinion has never held that standard
- add-sub-mul-div 2y agoThe court of public opinion isn't supposed to. The state can put you in jail, so the state requires a higher standard. A random person only needs to use their best judgement. Which is how it has to be. A random person can't spend their time substantively investigating everyone who comes across their path, and doesn't have the same powers as law enforcement to do so if they wanted.
- renewedrebecca 2y agoThis kind of nonsense is very much on brand for the Cleveland PD.
- robertlagrant 2y agoTrue, although if you read the article, they found the murder weapon in the suspect's home. The (correct) problem is the warrant issued to allow them to search the home was not issued legally.
- pjc50 2y agoIf you read really carefully, they mention a gun found in the suspect's home. The article does not provide other evidence that would link the gun or the suspect with the victim. There might be such evidence, but it's not mentioned.
- bell-cot 2y agoSounds like the police got their warrant by rather blatantly lying to the judge. In a quality police department, that would be career-ending. "AI" or not.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jazz9k 2y ago[flagged]
- philipov 2y ago> luigi So you're suggesting a family member murder the judge or some powerful individual whose wealth puts them above the law? That's a weird take.
- jazz9k 2y agonot any more 'weird' than the majority of the community here supporting the murder of an innocent ceo. Its very telling with the downvotes. You support an innocent person getting murdered and dont support the same thing happening to a murderer.
- RadioactiveMan 2y agoPeople's fundamental rights and freedoms are not technicalities.
- pjc50 2y agoI'd also be pretty outraged if a member of my family was misidentified, acquitted, and then murdered by a vigilante wrongly convinced they knew who the murderer was.
- jazz9k 2y agoso finding the murder weapon in the home definitely means the suspect didn't do it. Right?
- icehawk 2y agoIt's not a 'technicality.' The person got off because the police didn't do their job. Nobody else calls not doing your job right a 'technicality.'
- SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
- duxup 2y ago>Legg’s affidavit did not disclose that police used facial recognition as part of their identification. He failed to say that Clearview AI issues a disclaimer saying its facial recognition reports are not admissible in court, according to testimony. >He also did not indicate that the facial recognition report returned several photos of people other than Tolbert. The affidavit simply says the fusion center matched Tolbert to “the unidentified male suspect, based on recovered surveillance video.” The filing adds that police also conducted interviews in the case, but it does not say who was contacted or the information provided. AI or not it seems like they got caught lying.
- caseysoftware 2y agoI have zero compassion for prosecutors when the State lies. The State has near-limitless resources, therefore they MUST be held to the highest of standards. I'd even be in favor of censuring/firing the investigator involved who left information out of the warrant. Future defense attorneys will be able to bring this up on every affidavit or testimony he gives and some portion of cases will fall apart as a result of this.
- duxup 2y agoI agree with the sentiment but Local prosecutors and police do not have limitless resources… poorly used and a lot maybe, but I think people would be surprised what the constraints are.
- caseysoftware 2y ago> Local prosecutors and police do not have limitless resources Technically true but just a lawyer's time (for "free") is significant. Throw in other prosecutors, investigators, etc and it begins to look "limitless". And beyond that, with a gun charge, it could be escalated to the state level pretty quickly. Alternatively, if he illegally possessed it - common if there are drugs - it could qualify for Federal charges. It's up to the prosecutor(s) to decide what the charges are and at what level, therefore they get to decide what resources to expend.
- feverzsj 2y agoIn old days, it's called the instinct of detective.
- probably_wrong 2y agoClearview AI, the AI in question, doesn't come out of it looking great: > Clearview AI, a Delaware-based technology company, boasts that its facial recognition programs can be used to fight child exploitation, investigate crimes, exonerate the innocent and even identify Russian spies working in Ukraine, according to its website. > A statement at the bottom of the facial recognition report (...), reads, in part: “These search results are not intended or permitted to be used as admissible evidence in a court of law or any court filing.” It seems to me that Clearview AI overpromised, tried to pull a Tesla with their "this car can't legally drive itself so don't try it, wink wink" strategy, and now they have turned themselves into a liability. Usually I would be happier about news like that, but then I wonder: who are Clearview AI's customers? Which type of entity "investigates crimes" and "identifies Russian spies" in such a way that they don't need the results to be "admissible evidence in a court of law"?
- Cthulhu_ 2y agoSomeone else mentioned Parallel Construction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction); in this case, Clearview could be used to find the suspect's social media, get better pictures, which could then be matched with other surveillance footage. or something. There's ways and means.
- scintill76 2y agoI assume spies in a warzone are often captured/killed without court-admissible evidence. The existence of facial recognition SW probably doesn't change that.
- miohtama 2y agoIf you murder someone, you would probably keep the same gun at home, no?
- bombcar 2y agoRemember that the average criminal isn't the smartest, and then realize that the smart ones likely never get caught. (Also, to be fair, it can be part of the evidence presented that the suspect was known to own a 9mm Glock, say, and that he has no reasonable explanation as to why it couldn't be located. This is usually circumstantial but that can be used to explain deficiencies in the case vs used as proof.)
- lazycog512 2y agoThis needs to be top level since a lot of people aren't even looking at where it happened. The neighborhood it occurred in is 95% black. This isn't racial profiling. Is the existence of such a neighborhood awful and downstream of prior generations of racial issues? Sure is. Don't invent things out of thin air to match your priors, that doesn't help your cause at all.
- ahupp 2y agoSay they, hypothetically, the police just looked at every drivers license photo of people living in a 1 mile radius. And they find the suspect, and go to a judge saying a combination of appearance, perpetrator in suspects driveway, and criminal history gives probable cause for a search. I don’t think that’s any different. If they came to the judge and said “an informant said we’ll find the gun here” and the informant was actually Clearview, thats obviously a problem.
- hermannj314 2y agoAre anonymous tips admissible? Can the police launder AI results through an anonymous tip line? "Here is a picture of a guy, do you know who he is, please don't use AI (wink wink), but if you call this number apparently we can then use whatever you tell us. Wink wink." I am clearly not a lawyer but if anonymous tips exist in police work why can't wacky flailing AI guessing machine also exist? [Another post clarifies it is not wrong to use AI or anonymous tips, it just can't be used to establish probable cause, so the police skipped some important steps]
- advisedwang 2y agoPer the article: "At a Jan. 9 hearing, McMonagle agreed with defense attorneys, saying the AI identification of Tolbert was akin to an anonymous informant, which is not enough to establish probable cause." So no, a tip (which is an informant) is not enough for a warrant.
- diamond559 2y agoReject "AI" at all levels. Time for this useless cancer to go. Research AGI sure, but forcing this slop on us has got to stop.
- ycombinatrix 2y agoThey identified him based on his home address... it looks like they just used AI to narrow it down the suspects.