Article 6DMRZ Detroit Woman Sues City After Being Falsely Arrested Due To Facial Recognition

Detroit Woman Sues City After Being Falsely Arrested Due To Facial Recognition

by
BeauHD
from Slashdot on (#6DMRZ)
Long-time Slashdot reader ArchieBunker shares a report from NBC News: A Detroit woman is suing the city and a police detective after she was falsely arrested because of facial recognition technology while she was eight months pregnant, according to court documents. Porcha Woodruff, 32, was getting her two children ready for school on the morning of Feb. 16 when six police officers showed up at her doorstep and presented her with an arrest warrant alleging robbery and carjacking. Woodruff initially believed the officers were joking given her visibly pregnant state. She was arrested. "Ms. Woodruff later discovered that she was implicated as a suspect through a photo lineup shown to the victim of the robbery and carjacking, following an unreliable facial recognition match," court documents say. [...] Woodruff was charged with robbery and carjacking and released from the Detroit Detention Center at around 7 p.m. on $100,000 personal bond. Her fiance took her to a medical center, where she was diagnosed with a low heart rate due to dehydration and was told she was having contractions from stress related to the incident. On March 6, the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office dropped the case for "insufficient evidence," according to the lawsuit. In a statement Sunday, the prosecutor's office said the case was dismissed, which emphasizes that a judge made the final decision, not prosecutors. The prosecutor's office said the warrant that led to Woodruff's arrest was on solid ground. "The warrant was appropriate based upon the facts," it said. The office confirmed that facial recognition prompted police to include the plaintiff's photo in a six-pack, or array of images of potential suspects in the warrant package. Detroit Police Chief James E. White said he reviewed the allegations in the lawsuit, which he said are "very concerning." "We are taking this matter very seriously, but we cannot comment further at this time due to the need for additional investigation," he said in a statement. "We will provide further information once additional facts are obtained and we have a better understanding of the circumstances."

twitter_icon_large.pngfacebook_icon_large.png

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

External Content
Source RSS or Atom Feed
Feed Location https://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdotMain
Feed Title Slashdot
Feed Link https://slashdot.org/
Feed Copyright Copyright Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
Reply 0 comments