Sadly, the mechanisms for feeding data into these various databases are held as confidential under the auspices of protecting the TTPs. This makes it impossible to have proper oversight from people who understand data lifecycles (I am not counting myself in that category). The courts, the usual remedy for this sort of things, aren't as helpful, because a) they rely on a specific case to be brought (see: Stingray devices and coirt cases being dropped to protect them), and because "parallel construction" is, sadly, a thing.
While keeping TTPs (tactics/techniques/procedures) isn't, on it's face, invalid as a reason, for public law enforcement that seems to be iffy. There is already a whole list of things which slews the power dynamic towards the gov't, the public LE agencies should not be allowed to claim secrecy as one of them.
They want to be secret agent? Sure. But the rules are waaay different, and you don't get all the nice comfy protections already codified into law, then.
The sherrif's deputies in this particular story are in an inenviable position. Odd that a stole car (rather than a carjacking) required a response involving threats of lethal force to ensure compliance, but aside from that, they had no way to know what the specific circumstances were until they investigated. Wonder if there wasn't a more effective way to determine innocence (was the car search necessary, or just conducted because they could, while they already had the car pulled over and people in custody?)
Doubt anything will happen from the suit. Maybe that particular database's procedure for data accuracy will be examined, but probably not.
2 comments
[ 2.0 ms ] story [ 20.8 ms ] thread(US-centric view, YMWcV)
Sadly, the mechanisms for feeding data into these various databases are held as confidential under the auspices of protecting the TTPs. This makes it impossible to have proper oversight from people who understand data lifecycles (I am not counting myself in that category). The courts, the usual remedy for this sort of things, aren't as helpful, because a) they rely on a specific case to be brought (see: Stingray devices and coirt cases being dropped to protect them), and because "parallel construction" is, sadly, a thing.
While keeping TTPs (tactics/techniques/procedures) isn't, on it's face, invalid as a reason, for public law enforcement that seems to be iffy. There is already a whole list of things which slews the power dynamic towards the gov't, the public LE agencies should not be allowed to claim secrecy as one of them.
They want to be secret agent? Sure. But the rules are waaay different, and you don't get all the nice comfy protections already codified into law, then.
The sherrif's deputies in this particular story are in an inenviable position. Odd that a stole car (rather than a carjacking) required a response involving threats of lethal force to ensure compliance, but aside from that, they had no way to know what the specific circumstances were until they investigated. Wonder if there wasn't a more effective way to determine innocence (was the car search necessary, or just conducted because they could, while they already had the car pulled over and people in custody?)
Doubt anything will happen from the suit. Maybe that particular database's procedure for data accuracy will be examined, but probably not.