As police turn to surveillance technology, critics raise questions about privacy concerns

Police departments all around the country say surveillance technologies like cameras, drones, and license plate readers have proved invaluable in tracking and arresting violent criminals.

But critics say they sometimes go too far, invading privacy and violating civil rights.

Police praise license plate readers 

Police say in early August, three men from Texas robbed Wendy's restaurants in Monroeville, Penn Hills, Scott Township and Peters Township as well as a McDonald's in Castle Shannon.  

During the spree, automatic license plate readers tracked their Hyundai Tucson across state lines. Less than 24 hours later, police outside Indianapolis arrested all three and confiscated $13,000 — something Monroeville Police Chief Doug Cole says wouldn't have been possible without license plate readers.

"We wouldn't have recovered the money," Cole said. "We wouldn't have been able to make a good case. We probably wouldn't have solved it. It's a great law enforcement tool, almost on the level of fingerprints and DNA."

Critics worry about abuse

Police departments across the country say these plate readers have become invaluable in tracking and arresting violent criminals, hit-and-run drivers and the rest. But critics and civil libertarians call their use unconstitutional mass surveillance prone to abuse.

"There's nobody watching the watchers, and that's the problem," said John Biedrzycki, known as Steel City Lawyer.

Biedrzycki cites cases of stalking across the country where police officers — like Michael McSherry of Allegheny Township — have been accused of using the plate readers to keep tabs on ex-romantic partners and others. The high-profile cases raise broader concerns about who has access to the data and how it's being used.

While the technology is marketed by several private companies, most of the recent criticism has been leveled against Flock, the nation's largest, with a network of 120,000 cameras. Flock cameras are used by several municipalities in the Pittsburgh area, including Castle Shannon. 

Unlike other ALPRs, which are generally used in small geographic areas, each Flock camera is tied into a nationwide, searchable database, allowing what Biedrzycki calls warrantless searches across the country.

"A national database that can be accessed by any subscriber anywhere in the country. So police in Hawaii can watch Flock cameras in Pittsburgh if they wanted to," Biedrzycki said. 

Pittsburgh police don't use Flock

Responding to criticisms, Flock recently announced new guardrails, including auditing for improper searches and shortening its standard data retention from 30 days to seven days. 

The Allegheny County District Attorney's Office and the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police share concerns about Flock and don't use it. Pittsburgh Police Chief Jason Lando says Pittsburgh doesn't share it's data with out-of-state law enforcement. 

"We're not part of a national sharing network," Lando said. "We have no Flock cameras, and these cameras we do employ are closely monitored and tightly regulated. 

Pittsburgh Police Chief Jason Lando is a big proponent of ALPRs and other tools in fighting crime but believes there need to be tight controls over the access to and use of all of this technology.

"We go to great lengths to make sure that we are using this responsibly, and we're following the rules," Lando said. 

Inside Pittsburgh police's real-time crime center

In a secure and secluded room at police headquarters, just about the entire city is under 24-hour surveillance, with designated bureau employees monitoring all of the latest state-of-the-art crime-detecting technology all in one place. 

"From drones to license plate readers to ShotSpotter, it takes all of that technology," Lando said. "It ties it together and allows us to monitor that from one central hub." 

At headquarters, they can access 1,600 surveillance cameras, view drone flights, receive ShotSpotter alerts and employ license plate readers, all of which can be used to direct officers in the field responding to crime scenes. In the case of a homicide, for instance, ShotSpotter will give a location of gunfire and surveillance cameras will immediately survey the scene. If a fleeing vehicle is seen, license plate readers may identify the suspect's car and tell police their route of escape. 

Lando says the technology has been a game-changer, giving police real-time reconnaissance information, enabling them to render aid and capture suspects who otherwise may be gone for good, and centers like this are helping departments across the nation do more with less, contending with fewer recruits and a dwindling number of officers.

Access to the crime center and that data is restricted to designated employees, detectives and supervisors like Commander Brian Schmitt, who says the bureau does not retain the data the center generates.  

"All our cameras are ten days," Schmitt said. "If we don't bookmark it or save it, it gets written over."

Lando said it falls back on supervisors to make sure that technology is being used responsibly. 

"This is not about Big Brother watching," Lando said. 

"As long as the technology is being used in an ethical manner, not being used to spy on people but to help people, I have no problems with it, and I think most of the public would agree," Lando added.