Police Sued After Imprisoning Innocent Man Placed Near Violent Crime By Flock License Plate Reader (timesofsandiego.com)
- Reference: 0183654866
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/26/06/07/2357243/police-sued-after-imprisoning-innocent-man-placed-near-violent-crime-by-flock-license-plate-reader
- Source link: https://timesofsandiego.com/crime/2026/06/07/a-flock-license-plate-reader-linked-a-san-diego-man-to-a-violent-crime-he-was-five-miles-away/
> San Diego police had a description of the Alfa Romeo car he was riding in [but no license plate number] and a witness who identified him during a curbside lineup as the man who brandished a handgun in Golden Hill. They had also checked the city's automatic license plate camera system, run by the private company Flock, and got a "hit," substantiating the claim. The problem, says attorney Alex Coolman, was that Parra was five miles away from Golden Hill at the time of the crime, and the so-called hit from the license plate reader was captured before any police pursuit began. "This Flock hit was obviously the wrong car, as it could not have been in both places simultaneously," said Coolman, who represents Parra and the driver, 23-year-old Ariel Beltran.
>
> Despite the signs pointing to it being a different Alfa Romeo, police arrested Beltran and Parra... [An officer had informed dispatch that one of the men "matched the victim's description, other than having a different-colored hooded sweatshirt."] Parra spent nearly one month behind bars, missing Thanksgiving and other special events with his family, before the assault with a firearm and evasion charges were dropped.
Parras says he was incarcerated with actual murderers, according to the article, and Parra and Beltran are now preparing to sue the city, seeking $1.5 million each in damages for civil rights violations and negligence. Their claim notes they'd driven past several other Flock cameras which officers could've used to corroborate their story (not to mention location data on their cell phones).
Meanwhile, the article also notes that last month the Institute for Justice "identified at least 17 cases in the United States of officers allegedly using Automated License Plate Reader technology to keep tabs on partners, exes, and strangers who had caught their eye..."
[1] https://timesofsandiego.com/crime/2026/06/07/a-flock-license-plate-reader-linked-a-san-diego-man-to-a-violent-crime-he-was-five-miles-away/
says he was incarcerated with actual murderers... (Score:2, Interesting)
Hey! Didn't you learn anything? Those gentlemen are innocent until proven guilty.
Add Flock to the case (Score:1, Insightful)
And add a couple of zeros to the demand.
Re: Add Flock to the case (Score:3, Insightful)
But why do that if the summary which states other Flock cameras proved the guy was not there and the police ignored it is correct? If the summary is wrong, okay, but if it is right - why sue the tool instead of the tool user who used it incorrectly?
Re: (Score:2)
The reason why he was detained was due to an error with the camera or software. Had the cameras never existed (or been operating correctly) he would never have been arrested.
1.5 million? (Score:2)
If I was him I'd be suing for a lot more. He's letting them off cheap.
SDPD: Tenaciously Stupid (Score:1)
San Diego Police Department absolutely can officially believe a car, a person, the Sun, or anything else can be in two places at once.
Having made this assessment, they are blandly impervious to any evidence to the contrary. It's like The Naked Gun but without the humor. Poorly recruited, poorly trained, and poorly led, they are to be avoided like day-old Taco Bell leftovers.
Destroy Them (Score:1)
Literally nothing good has come from ALPRs existing.
Re:Destroy Them (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds to me the cameras are working just fine, but law enforcement is using them incorrectly (and there's no recourse or oversight).
The data should have cleared him as a suspect.
Re: Destroy Them (Score:3)
I say they'll only learn after they've been successfully sued for a few billion dollars because of lazy/negligent work. Let the lawsuits continue!
Re: (Score:2)
You arent wrong
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F_0iIaXGqA [youtube.com]
And if you want to see real incompetent use of police cameras attempting to "gather data" for "precrime", you should watch this
[2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfD_2fVqEMk [youtube.com]
These are high school diploma morons attempting to use technology to do their job for them. It would be ignorant to continue to allow not only this, but corporate owned cameras access to our streets and data.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F_0iIaXGqA
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfD_2fVqEMk
Re: (Score:2)
The summary says the data was wrong, and the camera system reported he was present when he was not.
Re: (Score:2)
> Sounds to me the cameras are working just fine
Then why was he arrested?
Re: (Score:2)
When I was implementing ALPR almost 2 decades ago, the projects were funded by insurance companies as long as the ALPR scans were linked to a database of expired insurance.
The cops couldn't keep up with the hits the system generated.
While I am not happy with the inevitable authoritarian creep of the system, I'm fine with my role in what happened to every uninsured driver who was pulled over.
Good came out of them... just not net good.
Re: (Score:2)
First, they came for the uninsured... Slippery slope. You did not have the foresight to understand your role. I mean, really, you were setting up surveillance. Was it your job to care what they did with it? Well, yes. Hand a lighter to a child and it is your fault he burns the world.