大陪审团决定不起诉一名被控破坏 Flock 摄像头的俄亥俄州男子。
Grand jury declines to indict Ohio man charged with destroying Flock camera

原始链接: https://san.com/cc/grand-jury-declines-to-indict-ohio-man-charged-with-destroying-flock-camera/

俄亥俄州克莱蒙特县大陪审团拒绝起诉科迪·莫洛克(Cody Morelock)。此前,莫洛克被控在联合镇破坏了一台 Flock 自动车牌识别器,涉嫌重罪破坏公物。尽管警方声称莫洛克的破坏行为造成了超过 1,000 美元的损失,但在大陪审团作出决定后,相关指控已被驳回。 这一事件反映了全国范围内针对 Flock 监控摄像头的破坏行为呈上升趋势。这些摄像头跨越司法管辖区为执法部门追踪车辆数据。甚至有激进组织组织了破坏或遮挡这些设备的行动。 这种抵制情绪主要源于对隐私和该技术被滥用的担忧。司法研究所(Institute for Justice)报告称,执法人员滥用该系统的案例超过 100 起,其中常涉及跟踪个人。尽管 Flock 已经实施了新的安全保障措施,但包括电子前沿基金会(Electronic Frontier Foundation)在内的批评者认为,这些措施尚不足够,并主张警方在搜索所收集的车牌数据前必须获得搜查令。

俄亥俄州克莱蒙特县的一个大陪审团最近拒绝起诉一名被控破坏 Flock Safety 监控摄像头的男子。由于大陪审团历史上超过 90% 的起诉率——常被戏称为“只要愿意,大陪审团连火腿三明治都能起诉”——这一结果在 Hacker News 上引发了热烈讨论。 评论者们探讨了此次“不予起诉”(no true bill)的意义,许多人将其解读为对大规模监控迅速且往往不民主的扩张所采取的一种罕见、有原则的立场。虽然一些用户争论这是否构成了“陪审团无效审判”,但另一些人认为,由于大陪审团主要关注是否有“相当理由”,该决定表明检方的证据极其薄弱,或者带有政治动机。 讨论随后演变为对 Flock Safety 的广泛批评,用户们表达了对隐私侵蚀、数据收集缺乏透明度以及执法部门可能滥用职权等问题的担忧。许多贡献者认为,通过向政客请愿等官方渠道已无法遏制这些监控系统所呈现出的“技术史塔西”本质,这使得一些人将破坏此类设备视为一种必要的、尽管违法的公民抗命形式,以对抗权力过度扩张的监控国家。
相关文章

原文

A grand jury in Ohio has declined to indict a man charged with felony vandalism for allegedly destroying a Flock automatic license plate reader camera.

Police in Union Township, a Cincinnati suburb, accused Cody Morelock of disassembling the camera, its support pole and solar panel on June 13.

Investigators, according to WKRC-TV in Cincinnati, identified Morelock after obtaining surveillance footage from other cameras near the scene as well as information linked to a credit card and a customer rewards account.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the Straight Arrow app today to get the stories that matter free from manipulation, bias or agenda.™

Point phone camera here

Police estimated the damage at more than $1,000. Morelock posted a $10,000 bond and was released from custody shortly after his arrest.

A Clermont County grand jury, however, opted not to indict Morelock, and the charges were dismissed.

Flock resistance growing

While details on the grand jury’s decision are limited, it comes amid a growing backlash against Flock and its cameras.

The company’s cameras record the license plate numbers and characteristics of vehicles that pass by. The data is then hosted in a central database that can be accessed not only by local police but often by law enforcement agencies in other cities and states.

The incident in Union Township is part of an ongoing trend that has seen dozens of Flock cameras vandalized across the country. Earlier this month, police in Winona, Minnesota, reported that someone had cut down and stolen each of the city’s eight license plate reader cameras.

Social media users are promoting a loosely organized event known as “De-Flock America Night,” encouraging people to vandalize or obscure Flock cameras on Halloween.

The backlash against Flock has intensified as a growing number of police officers have been accused of or charged with abusing the technology, often to stalk romantic interests. As of Aug. 12, there had been more than 100 cases of abuse by law enforcement, according to the Institute for Justice.

In response, Flock announced new safeguards designed to prevent misuse by police. Critics, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, argue that the reforms are largely “cosmetic,” and that warrants should be required for searching license plate reader data.

Round out your reading

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com