ACLU of Minnesota’s Post

Whenever I get a chance to avoid Facial Recognition cameras or software I do (sadly I'm sure I end up in a lot of them anyway). This article shows why. Facial Rec is not something we should be using for stuff like this creepy digital lineup thing the Brits are doing. Clear is a creepy American software company doing the same stuff in the name of "convenience" and "security", so don't believe that this isn't going on here also. https://lnkd.in/gnYgqgwQ

How Law Enforcement Can Track Persons of Interest Without Relying on Facial Recognition - The sheer volume of video evidence available for investigative teams has reached unprecedented levels. According to the Bureau of Justice Assistance, approximately 80% of crimes involve some form of video evidence, and this trend shows no signs of slowing down. Various sources contribute to this influx of video evidence, ranging from security cameras and traffic footage to body cameras, dashcams, and handheld devices. With 97% of Americans owning a mobile device, the availability of such footage has become ubiquitous in both public and private sectors. Moreover, the widespread deployment of body-worn cameras by local police departments and sheriff's offices further […] - https://lnkd.in/gTMh4MRR

How Law Enforcement Can Track Persons of Interest Without Relying on Facial Recognition - The sheer volume of video evidence available for investigative teams has reached unprecedented levels. According to the Bureau of Justice Assistance, approximately 80% of crimes involve some form of video evidence, and this trend shows no signs of slowing down. Various sources contribute to this influx of video evidence, ranging from security cameras and traffic footage to body cameras, dashcams, and handheld devices. With 97% of Americans owning a mobile device, the availability of such footage has become ubiquitous in both public and private sectors. Moreover, the widespread deployment of body-worn cameras by local police departments and sheriff's offices further […] - https://lnkd.in/gTMh4MRR

Interesting case out of Dayton, OH, where they typically do not use facial recognition technology, but did so in this instance due to the exigency of the circumstances. Drop us a comment below and let us know your thoughts on how this case was handled. #FacialRecognition #LawEnforcement #PublicSafety

On any given day, Los Angeles police officers record roughly 8,000 interactions with the public on body-worn cameras. Most of the footage goes unseen. The city spent millions on the cameras to help provide transparency and accountability, but LAPD officials say they don’t have enough personnel to monitor the countless hours of recordings. The department has also struggled to keep tabs on whether officers are turning off their cameras in violation of department rules — as members of a disbanded gang unit from the Mission division are suspected of doing in order to cover up thefts, unlawful searches, and other alleged misconduct. A recent internal report suggested lapses in body-cam activation are more widespread than the department has previously let on, and that its system for auditing compliance falls short. In the aftermath of the Mission scandal, LAPD leaders have been eyeing a potential solution: artificial intelligence, which can analyze vast troves of body camera footage with a few keystrokes. Police agencies across the country hope that new advancements with the technology will help identify officer misconduct that is captured on camera. Note - The above content was taken directly from the posted article with no edits.

Law enforcement faces mounting challenges handling the surge in video evidence from public surveillance and doorbell cameras. Forensic tech tools like Amped FIVE and MotionDSP automate editing and enhance efficiency. Veritone Redact ensures privacy, while Veritone Evidence and Visual Labs act as comprehensive evidence management systems. These solutions streamline workflows, save time, and prioritize privacy. Explore the future of video analysis for law enforcement with International Association of Chiefs of Police here: https://lnkd.in/gknwWxQf

Automated facial recognition technology is expanding in Australia, with various applications in retail, sports, and government services. A recent survey revealed a lack of public knowledge about the technology, with mixed attitudes towards its use. While there is support for certain applications, concerns about privacy, accuracy, and consent remain. Policymakers must consider public opinion and implement regulations to ensure responsible and democratic use of facial recognition technology.

Can body-worn cameras benefit people’s trust in the police? The question was at the center of Friday's debate at Kunstforeningen Gammel Strand, hosted by Milestone Systems. In Denmark, unlike in many other countries, body-worn cameras are not widely used by the police. However, in the wake of a series of controversial arrests in the fall, there has been a renewed debate about the need for ways to increase transparency and documentation of the encounters between police officers and citizens. Here are some key takeaways from the debate. A big thank you to the excellent panel Anja Møller Pedersen, Danish Institute for Human Rights, Frederik Jepsen and Ole Sønder, Politiforbundet: 💡 Everyone, both the police and the citizens, have an interest in transparency and objective documentation of an incident to build and maintain trust in the police 💡 Research suggests, that in 70 percent of complaints against the police in Denmark, within certain types of cases, there is no objective documentation of what occurred. 💡 If a complaint against the police ends up at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), reverse burden of proof is a principle that often comes into play. Data from body-worn cameras can help provide this documentation. 💡 Body-worn cameras in the police can both support and challenge the adherence to human rights, depending on how they are implemented. 💡 An implementation needs to consider and balance the rights of both the police officers and the citizens. For example, the right to privacy. 💡 To secure trust and protect human rights there is a need for clear guidelines for data storage, privacy protection, and camera activation. 💡 Sufficient and secure storage of data will pose an economic burden. This, along with undecided guidelines for camera activation, seems to be the largest barrier to the implementation of body-worn cameras today. Also, big thanks to the audience for engaging and taking part in the debate. #responsibletech #security #police #trust

Can body-worn cameras benefit people’s trust in the police? The question was at the center of Friday's debate at Kunstforeningen Gammel Strand, hosted by Milestone Systems. In Denmark, unlike in many other countries, body-worn cameras are not widely used by the police. However, in the wake of a series of controversial arrests in the fall, there has been a renewed debate about the need for ways to increase transparency and documentation of the encounters between police officers and citizens. Here are some key takeaways from the debate. A big thank you to the excellent panel Anja Møller Pedersen, Danish Institute for Human Rights, Frederik Jepsen and Ole Sønder, Politiforbundet: 💡 Everyone, both the police and the citizens, have an interest in transparency and objective documentation of an incident to build and maintain trust in the police 💡 Research suggests, that in 70 percent of complaints against the police in Denmark, within certain types of cases, there is no objective documentation of what occurred. 💡 If a complaint against the police ends up at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), reverse burden of proof is a principle that often comes into play. Data from body-worn cameras can help provide this documentation. 💡 Body-worn cameras in the police can both support and challenge the adherence to human rights, depending on how they are implemented. 💡 An implementation needs to consider and balance the rights of both the police officers and the citizens. For example, the right to privacy. 💡 To secure trust and protect human rights there is a need for clear guidelines for data storage, privacy protection, and camera activation. 💡 Sufficient and secure storage of data will pose an economic burden. This, along with undecided guidelines for camera activation, seems to be the largest barrier to the implementation of body-worn cameras today. Also, big thanks to the audience for engaging and taking part in the debate. #responsibletech #security #police #trust

Can body-worn cameras benefit people’s trust in the police? The question was at the center of Friday's debate at Kunstforeningen Gammel Strand, hosted by Milestone Systems. In Denmark, unlike in many other countries, body-worn cameras are not widely used by the police. However, in the wake of a series of controversial arrests in the fall, there has been a renewed debate about the need for ways to increase transparency and documentation of the encounters between police officers and citizens. Here are some key takeaways from the debate. A big thank you to the excellent panel Anja Møller Pedersen, Danish Institute for Human Rights, Frederik Jepsen and Ole Sønder, Politiforbundet: 💡 Everyone, both the police and the citizens, have an interest in transparency and objective documentation of an incident to build and maintain trust in the police 💡 Research suggests, that in 70 percent of complaints against the police in Denmark, within certain types of cases, there is no objective documentation of what occurred. 💡 If a complaint against the police ends up at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), reverse burden of proof is a principle that often comes into play. Data from body-worn cameras can help provide this documentation. 💡 Body-worn cameras in the police can both support and challenge the adherence to human rights, depending on how they are implemented. 💡 An implementation needs to consider and balance the rights of both the police officers and the citizens. For example, the right to privacy. 💡 To secure trust and protect human rights there is a need for clear guidelines for data storage, privacy protection, and camera activation. 💡 Sufficient and secure storage of data will pose an economic burden. This, along with undecided guidelines for camera activation, seems to be the largest barrier to the implementation of body-worn cameras today. Also, big thanks to the audience for engaging and taking part in the debate. #responsibletech #security #police #trust