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

a reply to: Hefficide

Thats some pretty scary stuff right there.

I'm glad the man was white and I'm not saying that as a joke or to derail the thread. In all seriousness , had the man been black the focus would have LIKELY been placed on racism and not on the underlying issues that our law enforcement appear to have.

Its pretty evident to me that we need to re access our law enforcement procedures and power as it appears to be broken at its core. As long as the focus is on racism the real problem will not be fixed.

Hopefully this will get the appropriate attention, although I doubt it.

“The police officer’s doing his job. He’s trying to change the crime pattern in that neighborhood,” Willard said.
- See more at: www.unionleader.com...

Doing his job to steal somebody's money to pay himself, or imprison someone in one of those non-profit facilities that claims a business loss annually, and once again, pays himself and his handlers.

...Changing the crime pattern only to wait for the next VICTIM of the scheme to be fed into the revenue generation scheme....

Lather, rinse, repeat.

Just business as usual, and that is the problem.

I hope he sues and gets a bunch of people fired or thrown in jail. Police brutality at its finest. The US police force is falling apart.

a reply to: Hefficide

Fascinating topic. There was a whole t.v. show about this recently. Its very interesting. I think it was on Aljazeera. Turns out they use computer analysis as to "hot spots" and they focus on the loci of known probationers and recent parolees.

Things seem to have gone sideways in this case. But I have reason to believe this will be the newest hot trend in Policing in the US. Its set to replace the old "community" policing procedures and the old "broken windows" paradigm for eliminating crime hotspots.

I think its becoming increasingly popular with LEO's because they can target certain areas and with facial recognition technology, they can target known prior offenders. It saves on resources and manpower in an era where its getting ever more difficult to recruit police officers. Plus, it takes cops off the streets and thus reduces the likelihood that cops will be "charged" by suspects in traffic stops in an attempt to take the cops gun thus provoking a shooting incident.

The work around for the "rest of us" is to go to the internet, search on "crime statistics...your town". Typically you'll be directed to a website that lists crimes recently committed in your town and sites where arrests were made. There's often times a map with neat flags or bubbles that show the locations of these incidents. That way, you know where "not to go". And of course, all responsible "adults" know not to be out and about after night fall.

a reply to: TonyS

Would " Predicted Crime" have been called profiling a few years back?.

Profiling is now considered unlawful after a few higher profile incidents pissed off people who could secure adequate legal representation, so they simply change the name and the same old # becomes something different than it was before?.

Nope.

The scariest aspect of this story is, how does one hold a machine accountable?, who is responsible if the machine is mistaken?.
The machine, I suppose, wouldn't be bound by anything resembling a constitution either.

Somewhere, somehow, somebody agreed to this without realizing it.

These types of things that are actually sso completely WRONG are usually agreed upon by enough people accepting it as most american sheeple seem to be too busy not to "aquiesce" because they have to get to work to pay off the loans for all that crap they bought that they don't need.

Materialists deserve to be ruled by a thing.

Assumedly, as an arrest was made, the incident will be record as a statistical success to the computer and we can expect to see the same story again in future.

They're feeding the computer false positives.

there's a heavy ' vere are your paperz? ' (click jackboot heels together) vibe about modern american policing.

originally posted by: Revolution9
a reply to: Hefficide

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.

Why would you give consent to search? For what possible reason? Once you do that, police with bad intentions can plant things or make things up.

a reply to: Hefficide

We don't agree about much heff but, here is a good example.

I think it is safe to say that this entire situation could have been avoided if drugs and prostitution were not illegal thus enabling the local police to focus on violent criminals as is their presumed societal charge.

Heck, it is very likely that this young man would have stayed safely at home and 'ordered out'.

a reply to: Hefficide

So is your issue with this the fact that a computer analysis identified this area as a "crime hot spot" rather than a conventional human analysis?

That's quite a leap to Minority Report type technology if you ask me.

If this is allowed to stand, it sets a very scary precedent. What's at risk is nothing short of predictive algorithms becoming an accepted means for determining probable cause.

Imagine a world where existing profiling techniques — based on factors of age, race, gender, etc — are coupled with information amassed in databases — credit history, employment history, criminal history, travel history, associations determined from telephone call metadata, spending habits and whatever else — and piped into one or more predictive algorithms to generate a score. Then imagine that system tied to image recognition technology so that the score is generated instantly when a dash cam reads a license plate or when a body cam identifies a face.

It's the predictable confluence of several existing technologies and programs and the longstanding use of predictive algorithms in multiple areas like determining insurance risk or credit worthiness. Except in this case, we're not talking about whether or a person will get a loan from a bank or a policy from an insurance company — if we're not careful and we don't push back now, we could be facing a future where a person can be denied 4th Amendment protections based on a score!

originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: Hefficide

So is your issue with this the fact that a computer analysis identified this area as a "crime hot spot" rather than a conventional human analysis?

That's quite a leap to Minority Report type technology if you ask me.

I think the concern was a innocent man got beaten half to death for being in a public area in a supposedly so called "free" country because a computer said to some oink without a brain he was in a "risk" zone.

Doesnt the property owner have to press trespassing charges?

a reply to: Bone75

No.

My issues with this case and the ideas behind it are numerous.

The young man was stopped based upon correlated data that had nothing to do with him personally. At all.

That the notions of presumption of innocence, a need for probable cause both were absolutely absent from the pretense used to harass, violently beat and arrest this young man. Simply because he was physically in a location that the cops were power tripping about.

That numerous Constitutional protections were ignored. Including, but not limited to, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments as well as - in a very direct manner - Article Iv, Section 2, Clause 1 as it has been historically and staunchly stated by the SCOTUS and Congress.

That this sort of pretense has no discernible boundaries and could be used to justify nearly any violation of ones Rights.

originally posted by: Revolution9
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.

Are you flipping kidding?

Explain why you are doing a perfectly legal thing, and let them seach you, and don't have an attitude about either of the jackboot violations of your rights or you will deserve this or worse?

when I have been pulle over I have been asked lots of times "what am I out doing" like its there business what I have been up to prior to getting pulled over.

I always answer "whatever I want " This is America..

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Bone75

No.

My issues with this case and the ideas behind it are numerous.

The young man was stopped based upon correlated data that had nothing to do with him personally. At all.

That the notions of presumption of innocence, a need for probable cause both were absolutely absent from the pretense used to harass, violently beat and arrest this young man. Simply because he was physically in a location that the cops were power tripping about.

That numerous Constitutional protections were ignored. Including, but not limited to, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments as well as - in a very direct manner - Article Iv, Section 2, Clause 1 as it has been historically and staunchly stated by the SCOTUS and Congress.

That this sort of pretense has no discernible boundaries and could be used to justify nearly any violation of ones Rights.

Okay, so basically the whole Minority Report/future crime bit was just drama fluff for the fact that you don't like the idea of tighter policing in higher crime areas... why didn't you just say so lol.

a reply to: Bone75

Because that is not what I said at all. In fact it's the opposite.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I have no problem with a machine assisting an official with things they have a right and responsibility to do. I don't see the police paying extra attention to a hot-spot as the problem here. What is a problem is after they ask what he's doing and he tells them he's just minding his own business, instead of moving on, they take his wish for them to respect his rights as an excuse to violate them. I doubt this guy is totally innocent, but that's beside the point. The cops have to respect the law themselves.