Policing's Digital Leap and the Line It Must Not Cross

Andrew Mills, Chief of Police, City of Palm Springs

Last week, a gang-related murder occurred in a city 30 miles away from Palm Springs. The suspected car description was broadcast over a shared frequency. A heads-up: Palm Springs Police officer entered the description into our Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) and bingo, a fresh hit. They tracked the car westbound using cameras and ALPRs. The PSPD real-time crime center deployed two drones to monitor the vehicle as officers closed in on the suspect's Honda Passport. The car pulled over to the side of the road while officers were still a mile away. A third man approached the car and was handed a backpack.

Officers were now a few hundred yards away. The Honda then sped off and the chase began. The drone operator, with a view from overhead, observed the man left behind throw the backpack into a Bougainvillea plant. A second PSPD team stopped the man who threw the backpack into the bushes. The pursuit entered a neighboring jurisdiction and was ultimately captured by Desert Hot Springs PD. The discarded backpack was searched and lo and behold, two guns believed to be the murder weapons were found.

Police departments across the country are adopting new technologies to improve their capabilities, including drones, real-time crime centers, sophisticated intelligence databases and artificial intelligence. In this instance, it proved effective and likely helped solve the case by seizing weapons that might have otherwise gone undiscovered. The benefits of catching suspects faster and recovering evidence are clear. Whether this technology will significantly reduce crime, however, remains uncertain. Police and elected officials must ask the question: Will the enormous cost of technology have a significant impact on crime?

As police departments spend billions to improve their response and prevention efforts, leaders must reassure taxpayers that these investments are justified. This reassurance will require police leaders to collaborate with academics and the private sector to provide well-researched data that supports the new approach.  Assuring the public that the police respect civil rights and personal privacy is a space that many police agencies find uncomfortable transparency and accountability.

“Assuring the public that the police respect civil rights and personal privacy is a space that many police agencies find uncomfortable transparency and accountability.”

Certainly, drones and real-time crime and intelligence centers serve as force multipliers. Some labor groups worry about the impact on police staffing, arguing that if technology effectively reduces crime, elected officials might cut staffing levels. The reality is that most police agencies are in a constant state of hire, with many failing to meet their recruitment goals. Large cities are most affected, as officers feel a lack of support from the community and elected officials, and desire to work in supportive communities. RTCCs should be viewed as tools to enhance police effectiveness and investigations, not as replacements.

Staffing these RTCC centers varies, from Beverly Hills, which relies on a private security firm, to PSPD, which adopts a regional approach involving the local Native American tribe. The police should not worry about staffing cuts due to advanced technology. ALPRs, drones and AI without personnel on the ground are like teaching schoolchildren with a robot. The robot might be smarter, but the human touch remains the most essential part of policing and education.

There are threats to our ability to expand the use of technology in policing. If the community perceives overreach and invasion of privacy, local governments will restrict or eliminate its use. For example, some departments are rapidly and blindly expanding into AI. While AI offers significant potential, it also poses considerable risks. One police official mentioned they are looking to use AI to predict and prevent family violence. How will this be implemented? Will they deploy an algorithm to identify children who miss school, have below-average grades, possess a certain blood type or analyze the parents' criminal history and economic status to determine vulnerability?

In the early 90s, our youngest daughter was at school when a teacher, acting on behalf of child protective services, asked the children to raise their hands they were spanked. Naturally, my kids shot their hands into the air like an Apollo rocket. CPS then followed up with a personal interview to discuss the context of the “physical assaults.” Imagine AI using data like this to decide which children should be removed from their parents. For policing to improve, we must base our use of technology on clearly defined ethical standards and academically proven research that is publicly transparent.

Technologists, police officers, business leaders and elected officials have a vital opportunity to enhance public safety through effective use of technology. The challenge is establishing a clear ethical boundary for its application, transparency and accountability to the public we serve. As we move forward, crime science scholars must remain vigilant in analyzing criminal justice data to assess whether technology truly reduces, prevents and controls crime.

AI

Drone