zlacker

>>vermon+(OP)
He wasn't arrested until the shop owner had also "identified" him. The cops used a single frame of grainy video to pull his driver's license photo, and then put that photo in a lineup and showed the store clerk.

The store clerk (who hadn't witnessed the crime and was going off the same frame of video fed into the facial recognition software) said the driver's license photo was a match.

There are several problems with the conduct of the police in this story but IMHO the use of facial recognition is not the most egregious.

>>ghostp+g5
It is not clear to me that the person who identified him was shop owner or clerk. From the nyt article: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/technology/facial-recogni...

"The Shinola shoplifting occurred in October 2018. Katherine Johnston, an investigator at Mackinac Partners, a loss prevention firm, reviewed the store’s surveillance video and sent a copy to the Detroit police"

"In this case, however, according to the Detroit police report, investigators simply included Mr. Williams’s picture in a “6-pack photo lineup” they created and showed to Ms. Johnston, Shinola’s loss-prevention contractor, and she identified him. (Ms. Johnston declined to comment.)"

>>busine+vF
I think you're correct that the person was not an owner or clerk. IMHO the salient point is that the person was not any sort of eyewitness but merely comparing the same grainy photo as the algorithm.