It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pre-Crime: Man Arrested And Beaten For Being In "Computer Predicted Crime Hot Spot"

page: 1
92
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+59 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   



Hello again ATS!

Over the years I have occasionally posted about my concerns that a rising trend known by various names, including Predictive Behavior Modeling possesses a great, great potential for being abused by those in power, particularly in regards to law enforcement.

It appears now that my fears were not simply “conspiracy” based flights of fancy or paranoid delusion. An eighteen year old man named Connor Deleire has been arrested in New Hampshire on charges that began from nothing more suspicious than parking in an area flagged by computer analysis as being a “hot spot” for potential crime.

Before the law enforcement cheerleaders chime in… The actual charges this young man faces are trespassing and resisting. Only I challenge the veracity of those charges wholesale. The young man was in a public parking space, not at all trespassing by any stretch of the imagination and how can one resist an arrest that has no basis to begin with?

The Manchester PD is defending the action by stating that the victim could not provide a “legitimate reason for being in the area.”

The fact of the matter is that, by all metrics, it appears this young man was targeted simply because a computer told the police to watch an area and he happened to wander into that area. All aspects of his arrest occur absolutely and totally because of this singular fact.

In a very real sense, he appears to be the first American citizen on record being arrested for a minority report style “pre-crime”.

Oh, and the young man was also pepper sprayed, Tased, handcuffed, beaten and had his head “bashed against the ground”.



Seriously. What have we become, as a nation, when looking like this, after dealing with cops, is as common as it is now? That many of us are probably thinking “He got lucky I guess. At least they didn't kill him.” I mean think about it folks, Lee Harvey Oswald killed ( or was believed to have killed ) the most popular human being on the planet and HIS mug shot didn't look as rough as this kids does.

That's truly saying something. Anyway…

Here are some excerpts from a local article about this particular event as well as a link to another article that is more opinion based and focused:


The father of an 18-year-old man who was Tased and pepper-sprayed during a center-city confrontation with police said his son had a very good reason for being in the area, but police ignored it and insisted on searching and handcuffing him.

Connor DeLeire, 18, of Hampton Falls was diagnosed with a concussion at Portsmouth Regional Hospital and will visit his physician today...

“They bashed his head against the cruiser, they bashed his head against the ground. They dragged him around,” said John DeLeire...

DeLeire’s father said his son gave the police officer a legitimate reason for being in the area. His friend was picking up a niece who lived a block away, and Connor DeLeire was sitting in the car waiting for them.

According to the initial police statement, Connor DeLeire was sitting in the driver’s seat of a parked 2000 Honda Accord on Merrimack Street. When police approached and started speaking to him, he started shaking.

He grew agitated, objected to any searches and tried to prevent police from accessing his pocket, where a fully loaded gun magazine was eventually found, police said in a statement.

Police charged DeLeire with resisting arrest.

“The police officer’s doing his job. He’s trying to change the crime pattern in that neighborhood,” Willard said.

He said DeLeire was from out of town and sitting in a parked car, behavior typical of a customer looking for a prostitute. And he was glancing down at his lap, which is a sign of potential drug use, Willard said.


Link to local news story

Link to secondary, opinion based piece

Read through that all again carefully. It is truly chilling. Apply that kind of BS to something you, yourself, might do…

Imagine that you're driving through town and a family member, friend, client, co-worker… whatever… texts you with an important message. The kind of message you really need to reply to. It's a conversation that is important for whatever reason. So, being a law abiding citizen, you quickly look for a spot to pull over and legally park in as texting and driving is both illegal and dangerous.

So, there you are, parked, holding your phone and texting. As it happens I think most of us put our phones near to our laps while doing this. It's the natural position for texting.

Guess what folks? If some computer program happened to show that the random place you parked happens to be near a corner where crimes are more likely to happen than other places? You are now in exactly the same situation as this young man was.

What's to stop somebody with a badge from doing the same to you – all in the name of “changing the crime pattern”?

We bought into the idea of giving up Rights for the sake of national security. Sad but true. But do you recall accepting the idea that the Bill of Rights is out the window in the name of stopping hookers???

Low level drug dealers???

In the name of lowering crime in some specific neighborhood???

Because some analytic program predicted that a specific parking lot or section of street has a higher likelihood of being where a criminal might statistically park???

To be clear, I am not at all in the camp that feels that cops are inherently bad people. I do support the idea of law enforcement vigorously. I also fully understand and defend that the behavior of some does not at all condemn an entire group in any situation. However patterns of behavior are emerging, and have been for some time now, that clearly indicate that law enforcement has some very, very deeply ingrained cultural flaws that simply have to be addressed and corrected. Plainly put, we are CITIZENS and not an INSURGENCY. They are PUBLIC SERVANTS and not AN OCCUPYING FORCE. I cannot state it any more clearly than that.


edit on 11/2/15 by Hefficide because: (no reason given)



+17 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:27 AM
link   
We have a ton of problems in the United States right now – and most of them, sadly, seem to be growing exponentially worse and at an alarming rate. The idea that the results of a computer analysis is now grounds for violation of Rights? That's just more than I can digest or accept.

Cops have always ( or at least as long as I've been aware ) had a bit of wiggle room with certain neighborhoods or known problem areas. It's just a fact of life. In my own town there is a street and a specific motel, that I can think of just off of the top of my head, where nearly everyone knows there are problems. They are places that you just don't go. BUT it's also common knowledge that there are people in those areas who are ABSOLUTELY NOT CRIMINALS!

This sort of implied guilt based upon statistical analysis is dangerous. Are you too poor to live in a nicer neighborhood than you currently do? Well, then pray that YOUR neighborhood doesn't see a spike in break-ins, prostitution or drug sales. Given the way things are headed, just LIVING in the wrong place and being of the wrong social class, as this article suggests, could be used as an excuse to deprive you of your Civil Rights, Constitutional Rights, freedom and health.

Further, how far is this sort of predictive modeling away from something like cops saying that a specific hairstyle, brand of shoes, make of car, etc. is indicative of justifiable suspicion? A world where your new sneakers could be used as a reason to assault and arrest you – under the premise that x percentage of drug dealers also wear the same shoes?

“Hyperbole!” you say?

I reply, “Pray that it is.”

Thanks for reading.


+38 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 04:54 AM
link   
Implied guilt based on statistical analysis suggests cops should not be armed with lethal weapons - ever. This is because they are NOT Judges, the Judges and courts enforce the law - not cops. Cops are to apprehend those that apparently break the law and allow others to determine guilt or innocence.

If we are to move into pre-crime social science then cops are the last gang to be tasked with enforcing it. Also, politicians and alphabet agencies should be the primary focus of pre-crime misdemeanors as they are the instigators of all world wars - thanks to their elite bloodline puppet-masters.

This technology is further evidence of the Department of Homeland Securities Patriot Act New World Order total population control agenda.

Rage against the machine of oppression and #### the NWO.


+12 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:01 AM
link   
This could be the best thing to ever happen to this kid. I smell a multi-million dollar lawsuit.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide


“You have to prove that you are in an area for a legitimate reason? Since when?” wrote Laura Levasseur on UnionLeader.com.

This is a very good point, maybe he was "loitering" or something? And why would they claim he was trespassing? It seems unlikely they would just jump him as soon as he entered the area just because a computer told them to. There must be more to it than that.


+23 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:03 AM
link   
The Sixth amendment guarantees an individual the right to confront your accuser...

How the hell do confront a computer..?




posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

This incident you are using as an example is not actually fully associated with the pre crime computer prediction. The computer has, based on statistics, identified a hotspot, so the police have maintained a presence there. The guy's attitude is what got him into trouble. He should have allowed them to search him and told them why he was there. I would say to anyone don't mess with the police. Be polite and forthcoming from the word go. It is pointless to challenge and is the first step of escalation into an incident that could end up like this or even worse.

I think you have been a little imaginative here and making it fit your theories like a square peg in a round hole. You are using hype and exaggeration to make a point. The computer only reported statistics. This allows the police to focus their resources better. It is not predicting crime, just informing about problem areas.


+7 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Revolution9

The basis for the interaction was fully and totally the computer prediction. That was the catalyst for the entire interaction. In comparison to that fact, everything else is secondary.

Square peg, round hole? I do know that a kid was beaten and arrested based upon nothing more than being in a place that a computer supposedly deemed to be problematic. Such vapid and wholesale things are expressly forbidden by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments.


+15 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Revolution9


It is pointless to challenge and is the first step of escalation into an incident that could end up like this or even worse.

Challenging nothing is also the first step to becoming a slave. If everyone just followed your advice police could do anything they want. It's how they've managed to get so much power already; everyone is too scared of confrontation to challenge police even when they are wrong, and they take advantage of that fear to violate our rights.


+4 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Revolution9




The guy's attitude is what got him into trouble. He should have allowed them to search him and told them why he was there.


Never let the police search you voluntarily. But, don't physically resist either. "I don't consent to searches" are the only words a person should ever need to tell police in a confrontation other than "I'd like to speak with my lawyer".

Aside from that, this is a precursor(even if a small one) on how cops are willing to take orders from an algorithm. "Patrol this area" will evolve into more targeted orders over time as people lose the shock factor of police precrime systems.

This initial algorithm to patrol an area isn't what's frightening, it's that we all know what it will evolve into that is.



Ghost
edit on 2-11-2015 by ghostrager because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   


Well there goes our freedom! He was in the wrong place at the wrong time so he must of deserved it! Welcome to the future!

What will people do about this. . . . ABSOLUTLY NOTHING LOL! As usual!


+5 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:10 AM
link   
"papers, please"

I'm sorry, but I'm not agreeing to a search just because I'm hanging out in a certain public area.

If he had simply refused the search politely, they'd arrest him.
How the hell is it fair that one can get arrested for simply being?

the law enforcement in this country is way out of hand.


+9 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Revolution9
The guy's attitude is what got him into trouble.


Why do you feel that people should give up their Constitutional rights when someone else either does not understand them, or worse, looks to abridge them?



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide

Was not the basis for police to be present due to the computer, but the presence of the young man had nothing to do with the computer at all?
Indeed he may have had a legit reason for being there, but it appears his response to the questions asked caused the reaction of the police.

I feel the police asking questions of anyone in a public area is well within their authority. Your actions when they do question, speak to the course of events to follow. It is true, however, that the tone of questions and how they are asked will affect the response.

I am not saying the officers actions were 100% right or the actions of the young man were 100% wrong. There is questionable REACTION from both sides.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

How do you see this young man's constitutional rights were "abridged"?


+14 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: NewzNose
How do you see this young man's constitutional rights were "abridged"?


The poster I was responding to stated, 'He should have allowed them to search him...'

He does not have to do any such thing. The Constitution provides against illegal search and seizure.

To answer your question, he was in a consensual encounter and was under no obligation to let them search him. He was not being detained under suspicion of having committed a crime but instead under the pretext of being in a predictive-crime area.




edit on 2-11-2015 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn


+5 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:31 AM
link   
A reaction is that- an action in response to an action.

If I was sitting in my car in a parking lot and an officer came over and asked to search my car, I'd be offended and tell them no. They'd inevitably then have a reason to arrest me, and do so- I'd be pretty upset about that and likely protest their idiotic decision to arrest me for simply minding my own business.
At which point I'd be beaten, tazed, pepper sprayed, and thrown around for "resisting"

Of course I'm going to resist being arrested for nothing- it's unacceptable.
Besides, I probably wasn't just killing time- chances are arresting me is seriously screwing up my schedule.

It's just a new form of mafia- but this time they are the law.


+1 more 
posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Revolution9

Never mind the police need probable cause to bother anyone at all hey?. He should have allowed them to search him?, really?, just because a computer said he was in a crime hot spot?.

How about you do some research and go to the same spot and see how it works out for you?. Go see if you find it an agreeable sensation to be assumed as being a criminal just for being where you are.

Are you from the U.S. or the former Soviet Union?.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:42 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

We don't have constitutional rights as we do not need them. The constitution is a limit on what government representatives can do to us. Once more of us understand this, more of us will understand what is happening.

Using a computer is a way of totally eliminating those who would exceed their constitutional limitations while not having to be responsible for doing so as it was a machine making the decision/prediction.

Welcome to the limited liability corporate police state.

The LLCPS.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
Further, how far is this sort of predictive modeling away from something like cops saying that a specific hairstyle, brand of shoes, make of car, etc. is indicative of justifiable suspicion? A world where your new sneakers could be used as a reason to assault and arrest you – under the premise that x percentage of drug dealers also wear the same shoes?


Not hyperbole at all. My sister used to own a Chevy Impala. Her husband was pulled over twice while going to work with a full car of car poolers. Some of which worked with him. No speeding, nothing illegal.

Reason for being pulled over........drug dealers in the neighborhood drive Chevy Impalas.




top topics



 
92
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join