Two Cities, Two Views On Facial Recognition Technology

SALEM, MA —On Friday, Salem Police and Essex County prosecutors used facial recognition technology to work with authorities in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic to identify a man who had been living under an assumed identity for 15 years. That helped prosecutors convince a judge set bail at $15,000 and order the man to turn over his passport. One day earlier in Somerville, a bill was introduced in City Council that would bar government agencies from using facial recognition technology in the way it was used in the Salem case.

Meanwhile, state lawmakers are considering a bill introduced by state Sen. Cynthia Creem (D-Newton) earlier this year that would make it illegal for any state entity to "acquire, possess, access, or use any biometric surveillance system." While Creem's measure has bipartisan support, the public debate on privacy right versus security enters a new realm as more jurisdictions try to figure out what to do with the powerful new facial recognition technologies.

"Biometric surveillance is an important and powerful tool that can be used to protect us by those in law enforcement and homeland security," Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), a co-sponsor of Creem's bill, said when it was introduced in February. "Yet, its use must be properly governed, and the information it generates must be properly secured, so that what is gathered to protect us can’t be abused to harm us."

In Somerville, Councilor Ben Ewen-Campen, who introduced the bill, conceded that he sees the value of the technology in emergencies, such as terrorism attacks. But, he told the Boston Globe, he believes the technology has a long way to go and that the public needs to be better informed about all of its implications.

"I think large numbers of the public may eventually be convinced that there is a useful need for this kind of thing," he told the newspaper. "But to use cases like that as the thin edge of a wedge to allow the government to just, in real time, surveil every person in every public space in our community, I think that’s where the real danger is."

The Salem case was not a case of terrorism, or a serious emergency. On Monday, two police officers became suspicious during a traffic stop when a driver claiming to be Francisco Robles, originally from Puerto Rico, had two FBI identification numbers. He also could not describe the Puerto Rican flag when questioned by the officers, according to the Salem News.

During the arraignment on charges of identity fraud, public assistance fraud, texting while driving, use of a false vehicle document and driving without a registration Tuesday, a Salem District Court judge gave prosecutors three days to prove Robles wasn't who he said he was, or the defendant would be released on the original bail of $1,000.

Salem Police worked with officials in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic used facial recognition to compare a photo of Robles against a database. That allowed them to determine the man they arrested was actually Adolfo Richard Severino Santos, 49, of Marblehead. The deception prompted the judge to raise bail to $15,000 and order Santos to turn over his passport when he appeared in court Friday.

The ACLU has applauded the Somerville proposal and is backing Creem's bill, as well as a separate bill introduced by House Majority Leader Ronald Mariano (D-Quincy), which would expand the state's data security law to add biometric data to the list of information private entities are required to protect.

In 2016, a Georgetown Law School study found that 117 million Americans — or more than one in three — can be identified using facial recognition databases like Salem Police used this week. Coupled with cameras in public places, the databases could radically change law enfrocemen. Earlier this month, the ACLU released emails showing a company called Suspect Technologies targeted Massachusetts police departments for a system that could track people across time and space. The firm also wanted to access driver's license photos from the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicle Database to test the accuracy of its system.

"These technologies are not ready for prime time," Kade Crockford, director of the Technology for Liberty Program at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, told the Eagle-Tribune earlier this year. "Even if it worked perfectly, it facilitates a form of government control that is inconsistent with a free, open and democratic society."

Dave Copeland can be reached at dave.copeland@patch.com or by calling 617-433-7851. Follow him on Twitter (@CopeWrites) and Facebook (/copewrites).