Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy AI Technology

Milwaukee Police Consider Trading Millions of Mugshots For Free Facial Recognition Access (jsonline.com) 69

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Milwaukee police are mulling a trade: 2.5 million mugshots for free use of facial recognition technology. Officials from the Milwaukee Police Department say swapping the photos with the software firm Biometrica will lead to quicker arrests and solving of crimes. But that benefit is unpersuasive for those who say the trade is startling, due to the concerns of the surveillance of city residents and possible federal agency access. "We recognize the very delicate balance between advancement in technology and ensuring we as a department do not violate the rights of all of those in this diverse community," Milwaukee Police Chief of Staff Heather Hough said during an April 17 meeting.

For the first time, Milwaukee police officials detailed their plans to use the facial recognition technology during a meeting of the city's Fire and Police Commission, the oversight body for those departments. In the past, the department relied on facial recognition technology belonging to neighboring police agencies. In an April 24 email, Hough said the department has not entered into an agreement with any facial recognition and the department intends to continue engaging the public before doing so. The department will discuss it at a future meeting of the city's Public Safety and Health Committee next, she said. "While we would like to acquire the technology to assist in solving cases, being transparent with the community that we serve far outweighs the urgency to acquire," she said in an email.

Officials said the technology alone could not be used as probable cause to arrest someone and the only authorized uses would be when there's basis to believe criminal activity has happened or could happen, or a threat to public safety is imminent. Hough said the department intended to craft a policy that would ensure no one is arrested solely based on facial recognition matches. That reassurance and others from police officials came as activists, residents and some public officials voiced concern.

Milwaukee Police Consider Trading Millions of Mugshots For Free Facial Recognition Access

Comments Filter:
  • I do not consent (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Monday April 28, 2025 @05:41PM (#65338069)

    I do not consent

    • I do not consent

      You where not asked.

      And yeah... I'm being facetious. But this is the whole problem with this sort of tech. We aren't being given an opt-out and with law enforcement its so easy to just say "Hey we arent going after citizens, were going after bad guys". Then why the fuck do you need my photo/dna/biometrics/tap my phone/etc.

      And these same tech-bro mootherfuckers that are telling us this is all fine, and wont be used for authoritarianisml are meanwhile backing governments around the world hell

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by drnb ( 2434720 )
        There is an opt-out. You can petition a judge to seal your mugshots, or maybe its the arrest record in general. Whatever the details, opting out requires getting a judge involved.
        • So you get to spend money on a lawyer and a couple months time waiting for a judge to decide on your case.

          Meanwhile, the police have already sent your data to the third party on the very first day of your attempt to opt-out and the third party has no incentive to delete your data.

          So much for opting out.

          • by drnb ( 2434720 )

            So you get to spend money on a lawyer and a couple months time waiting for a judge to decide on your case.

            If the judge throws out the case pre-trial, or if you are found innocent at the end of a trial, you can simply ask the judge to seal records as part of those proceedings.

      • Do you have a smart phone? Do you use a car? Do you travel in public? Do you use social media? Apps? Smart home widgets? If you do, then youâ(TM)ve handed and continue to have an ocean of your data over the brokers who can and do sell it to law enforcement. You have no privacy. You have no hope of privacy. Privacy does not exist. All this tech is about 1 thing: collecting your data so that companies can market crap to you so you consume more. Thats all.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          Do you realize that none of that is anything like an indexed database of mugshots? Sure there's an ocean of semi-connected data about you out there, usually held in various companies that don't want to share it without compensation. It's not like the cops (yet) have a tap into everyone's database.

          And I really want this "privacy doesn't exist, so don't bother" bullshit to die. Sure if you're in public, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy, but that is not what this is about!

          Please pick a different h

        • by Anonymous Coward

          > Privacy does not exist

          Privacy is not a boolean

    • Tell it to the judge (Score:2, Informative)

      by drnb ( 2434720 )

      I do not consent

      Tell it to the judge. Mugshots are general a public record unless you can convince a judge to seal them.

      • by flink ( 18449 )

        Something being public record and giving your likeness rights to a 3rd party company are two different things.

      • Not only are they a public record, many police departments go out of their way to publicize and distribute the photos on an ongoing basis. The AI companies have already been scraping Milwaukee PD's website for mug shots. What they're asking for now is a formality, to provide the appearance that they got the data legitimately. The cops call this technique "parallel construction" when they employ it in an investigation.

        But it's beside the point too, they already have your mugshot from social media, DMV, DHS,

        • Hey guys! I can scrape 10 mugshots each day from your website automatically, at this rate I'll have scraped 3 million mugshots in 822 years! It's really just a matter of time until I've got them all, you might as well give me everything I want now!
        • The AI companies have already been scraping Milwaukee PD's website for mug shots.

          That's impressive considering that Milwaukee doesn't seem to have a website for mugshots (unlike Florida and some other locations).

      • by Ogive17 ( 691899 )
        Mugshots are taken and kept even when people are found innocent. It's unfortunately those are kept.
    • Who cares if you consent? You are a farm animal. Nobody cares about what the cows want.

  • How many criminals do they have in Milwaukee, anyway?

    Surely to have your mugshot taken, you have to at least have been arrested.

    • by Rinnon ( 1474161 )

      How many criminals do they have in Milwaukee, anyway?

      Who knows how many years they have been collecting those mugshots though.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      That doesn't mean you actually did something illegal. There's a whole lot of "nope" going on here and this is probably very illegal.
      • by davidwr ( 791652 )

        Unfortunately, it probably is legal if, as in many if not all states, mugshots are considered "public record."

        • I think correct. Maybe its changed but a few years ago I was looking for someone I knew via google to see if I could find an email for them. Name was middle of the road common, so I had hopes. Top of search results were mug shots of various people with the same name. What I heard was these companies would get the records, and extort people to get the mugshot removed. Pretty disgusting biz, but I guess I've seen worse. Cough, LexisNexis Cough.
    • How many criminals do they have in Milwaukee, anyway?

      Two. Maybe three. Let's go with: some number less than 2.5 million. (Especially if there are multiple pictures per criminal and especially when you consider recidivists.) But let's go with it-doesn't-matter...

      Surely to have your mugshot taken, you have to at least have been arrested.

      Correct. Which is not a crime.

      They're offering to exchange pictures of people who may or may not have committed a crime in exchange for access to software which may or may not tell them who has committed a crime. On both sides of the equation there's an imperfect dataset, which algebra tells us

    • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Monday April 28, 2025 @06:40PM (#65338285)

      How many criminals do they have in Milwaukee, anyway?

      Including or excluding the crime of drinking the local beer? :-)\

      • In perhaps the most blatant display of two-tiered justice ever seen, the local beer is quite legal in Milwaukee, while serving someone septic gray water isn't- even though it tastes better.
      • by mjwx ( 966435 )

        How many criminals do they have in Milwaukee, anyway?

        Including or excluding the crime of drinking the local beer? :-)\

        Shirley it cant be much worse than the gnats urine that is called "beer" in the rest of the US?

    • I'm not in Wisconsin, but my first mugshot was taken when I was 11 years old. My FBI file was opened about the same time.

    • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Monday April 28, 2025 @06:53PM (#65338327)

      Surely to have your mugshot taken, you have to at least have been arrested.

      No. Some law enforcement background checks can involve mug shots and fingerprinting. However there is a separate system, and repository or tagging. For example fingerprint cards labeled "Employee Background Check" or something like that to differentiate from the arrest fingerprint cards. Similarly photos of employees wouldn't be public like those of the arrested.

      Note "employee" is used in a general sense. Volunteer with local law enforcement, for example Search and Rescue, and it's all the same "employee" paperwork for the most part. Your ID card will probably use a different color scheme in order to differentiate from sworn officers.

    • How many criminals do they have in Milwaukee, anyway?

      Surely to have your mugshot taken, you have to at least have been arrested.

      We know there is at least one felon in the white house. Is the white house near milwaukee?

  • And every year we convince everybody over the age of 45 that it's still going up.

    That means every year we put more cops on the street.

    So every single year there's more cops and less crime. It doesn't take a mathematical genius to see a problem there.

    It's a cop's job to arrest people. But what do they supposed to do if there aren't enough people to arrest for real crimes?

    They start hassling regular citizens. You get pulled over for a DUI and the cop lies and says you didn't pass one of the te
    • I work in a city where the annual police department budget exceeds total property tax revenue by (c) 16%. Crime is virtually non-existent, yet the notion of any reduction in LEO's, despite a "fiscal emergency" causes the citizenry to loose their collective minds. Yes, it's on old town full of old retired people.
      • By having the state and federal government pay for at least half of it. So your average city is spending 50% of its Budget on police but half of that technically comes from the state and federal government. I suppose if you're in a red state where you get more federal taxes back then you pay it's not that bad of a deal but honestly even then that money could have gone somewhere else.

        And if we spent more money on schools and housing and feeding hungry kids we wouldn't be spending much of anything on poli
      • by Anonymous Coward
        Sounds like they have an effective policing policy. You might prefer to be where you have to leave your car unlocked with a sign that says "no radio" while at work but those old retired people are happy with their way.
        • And I had an old Honda stolen. In all three cases the cops were completely fucking useless. Except they were worse than useless because they told my car to an impound lot where I had to pay $300 to get it back. It's not like they didn't have my mother fucking address on file with the state and couldn't have just looked at the fuck up.

          I can't think of a single time in my life the police have been legitimately useful. I can't think of many many times when the billions and billions and billions of dollars
      • by sound+vision ( 884283 ) on Monday April 28, 2025 @07:54PM (#65338457) Journal

        Where I live, cities are not allowed to reduce the police budget for any reason. The state has made that illegal. An initiative championed by the party of freedom, small government, and local governance.

        • It's a phrase they like to use. The libertarian twits like to think it means government small enough that they can fight it effectively but they never cut the military budget enough that they could do anything about their government. Hell fuck the military the militarized police could put them down like puppies.

          But what the phrase really means is small almost feudal governments that billionaires can control.

          Large Central governments get too big for the oligarchs to just buy off and control. They nee
      • Let me guess: They also have a SWAT team using an MATV or similar military vehicle(s) where the maintenance costs in a year or two could buy a new cruiser, and they also have enough military weaponry to qualify as a military company?

        One of my friends lives in a town where the police were all happy to ask for a military vehicle, until he brought up exactly how much the maintenance was for that vehicle and asked the village if they were going to cut police salaries. Considering they have almost nonexistent
    • Or, if you observe that violent crime is going down and cop numbers are going up, it could alternately be that the increase in policing is causing the decrease in crime.

      I find the left's insatiable desire to increase the reach, power, and authority of the state curiously disappears when it comes to, you know, actually stopping crime.

      • by kackle ( 910159 )
        I was going to say the same thing: In our small city, I don't know the numbers, but officers have decreased in visibility (i.e., squad cars). 'Surprise, petty crimes has increased, making it less pleasant. And I worry about how those perpetrators will proceed/progress.
  • If you must use facial recognition, use a private database that doesn't allow anyone outside of your department access to the mugshots or related data. This means paying for it with dollars, not with other people's information.

  • by Monoman ( 8745 ) on Monday April 28, 2025 @06:02PM (#65338139) Homepage

    What about everyone that had mugshots taken but had the charges dropped or were never convicted? I doubt any of them consent.

    • by drnb ( 2434720 )

      What about everyone that had mugshots taken but had the charges dropped or were never convicted? I doubt any of them consent.

      Their option is to ask a judge to seal the records.

      • What about everyone that had mugshots taken but had the charges dropped or were never convicted? I doubt any of them consent.

        Their option is to ask a judge to seal the records.

        The actual option is you have none.

    • How many of them were, as one lawyer called it, "ticky tack charges to harass people or get the ability to conduct a search". Most of those searches he noted, turned up nothing.
    • Why do you think it matters? You will do what you are told or you will find yourself without food or shelter with no way for society to cooperate with you. You will be hounded by police and random strangers endlessly. Shut the fuck up and do what you are told. Freedom is only for the owners.

  • by jenningsthecat ( 1525947 ) on Monday April 28, 2025 @06:16PM (#65338175)

    "While we would like to acquire the technology to assist in solving cases, being transparent with the community that we serve far outweighs the urgency to acquire".

    "We're going to acquire the technology at some point, and we'll continue to let the public know what we're doing. But to be clear, we ARE going to acquire facial recognition capability - public sentiment be damned".

    As an aside, I wonder how many of those mugshots are of people innocent of any crime at all. Not that it matters: it's 'do the crime, do the time', not 'do the crime, do the time and also have your face in a mugshot database, completely beyond your control, for the rest of your natural life and beyond'.

    The psychopathic robber barons sure are turning the planet and our societies into steaming piles of dystopian shit at an alarming rate these days.

    • The idea behind mugshots being public data is very transparent. And taxpayer funded data should be free. But public shouldn't mean open access. Just the slightest bit of human interaction required per record viewed would eliminate the privacy concerns while not getting rid of public data access. Privacy laws are not in line with the technology of even 30 years ago.

  • How exactly would they ensure this? Can they pass some law that says that if anyone is arrested purely based on facial recognition, they will receive $1M compensation, the arresting officer is fired, and any evidence that stemmed from that arrest becomes fruit of the poisonous tree? That ought to be at least some deterrent, officers making sure they don't arrest based just on facial recognition, their bosses also caring as $1M is not a small sum from their budgets (or insurance claim). Politicians will neve
  • Laverne & Shirley would not approve!

"Imitation is the sincerest form of television." -- The New Mighty Mouse

Working...