Across US, Police Officers Abuse Confidential Databases (ap.org)

Sadie Gurman and Eric Tucker, reporting for Associated Press:Police officers across the country misuse confidential law enforcement databases to get information on romantic partners, business associates, neighbors, journalists and others for reasons that have nothing to do with daily police work, an Associated Press investigation has found. Criminal-history and driver databases give officers critical information about people they encounter on the job. But the AP's review shows how those systems also can be exploited by officers who, motivated by romantic quarrels, personal conflicts or voyeuristic curiosity, sidestep policies and sometimes the law by snooping. In the most egregious cases, officers have used information to stalk or harass, or have tampered with or sold records they obtained. No single agency tracks how often the abuse happens nationwide, and record-keeping inconsistencies make it impossible to know how many violations occur. But the AP, through records requests to state agencies and big-city police departments, found law enforcement officers and employees who misused databases were fired, suspended or resigned more than 325 times between 2013 and 2015. They received reprimands, counseling or lesser discipline in more than 250 instances, the review found.

Comments

Wherever data is collected, it is abused

[sl3xd]

Am I just paranoid, or does it seem that everywhere personal data is collected, it is abused?

Re:Wherever data is collected, it is abused

[HBI]

Of course it is.

My grandmother was arrested several times during the Second World War on morals charges. Prostitution. Her mother (a very hard nosed woman indeed, battleaxe) ran a bar in Hoboken, NJ. She had three daughters who worked in the bar. During the war, they apparently supplemented their income working in the bar by providing services for custom for all the sailors passing in and out (ha) of the port doing convoys and such. There were fines and they were paid. When the war was over, she stopped making money that way, and got married shortly afterward*.

Now, you may wonder how I know about this, since my grandmother was definitely not forthcoming about this. My mom doesn't know either. But I do. I know because an uncle (by marriage), a real busybody cop on the Hoboken force, went searching through old arrest records and found this. Then, he started talking about it to people. It takes a special kind of douche to tell someone's grandson that their beloved grandmother was a hooker, but there you have it. I literally pissed on the guy's grave when he died (he had other sins unrelated to this).

So, while not all cops are all about this, a lot of them are. My grandfather was on the force and he never had anything to say about anyone. So there is a counter-example. But if the information is juicy, and it often is, people will make efforts to find it and use it in negative ways.

* I think my grandfather knew because of the cryptic comment he made to me, "I married your grandmother to give her some class!"

Re:Wherever data is collected, it is abused

[Anonymous Coward]

probably none...

Probably. 9 Horrifying Botched Police Raids

Re:Wherever data is collected, it is abused

[Anonymous Coward]

What's wrong is the social stigma that makes you feel bad that your dear nana did a bit of hoing around when she was younger - total cultural double standard where if your grandpa got money for hooking up he'd be awesome. There's nothing wrong with being a ho, in fact your grandma sounds cool.

Re:Wherever data is collected, it is abused

[HBI]

She was. Her CB handle in the 70s was "Two Big Guns", a reference to her breasts.

Re:Wherever data is collected, it is abused

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Your grandmother and her daughters didn't do anything wrong; we all do what we have to do to survive.

As a friend once said to me, "We all have the ethics we can afford." In other words, would I steal food if my family was starving? Damn right I would. I'd lie, cheat, and steal to feed my family.

As for prostitution, personally I don't think it's wrong in any way (unless it's forced). It should be completely legal, and not viewed as immoral or "sinful" or whatever label the authoritarians and bluenoses want to put on it.

Again, your grandmother and her daughters didn't do anything wrong. Your uncle is the shitbag in this scenario, and feel free to piss on his grave for me if you happen to have the chance.

Re:Pay your fair share!

[Anonymous Coward]

"the browns"

what you got against Cleveland?

Look to Healthcare

[Anonymous Coward]

I work at a hospital. We audit people's access to medical records. You can be, and people have been, fired for looking at their own medical record or the medical records of their minor children when that access was made in a way that does not directly relate to their job. You are required to ask for the information the same as any other patient.

If only we could spread that kind of accountability and auditing...

Simple fix, just requires money

[Tablizer]

The solution is pretty simple, but often skipped:

1) The reason for every search should be required and logged by the searcher. Example: "Related to case 12345, this person was a close match to the suspect description given by clerk at robbed market, who was interviewed by officer 84923 on Aug 7th." (In practice short-cut lingo can be used to reduce typing.)

2) The logs be randomly spot-checked by an auditor(s) who verifies the reasons given by interviewing the person(s) who searched.

3) The depth of the investigation will vary such that some will be pretty thorough. (Not every spot-check can be deep, but make enough deep to keep users on their toes.)

4) Those who've failed past audits or enter poor records are audited more often.

This won't catch every violation, but greatly reduces it because the search-user doesn't know which search will be audited and how deep the audit will be.

The reason this is not implemented is that governments and/or tax-payers don't want to pay for logging features and auditors.

Re:Would you rather they SHOOT YOU DEAD?

[gurps_npc]

You display ignorance and a misunderstanding of statistics.

Police are not angels, they are human beings. They are almost EXACTLY as honest as your average employed civilian. Studies show that 96% of them are not criminals, with another approximately 10% doing unethical but not clearly illegal things (such as 'not following protocal').

You look at that and stupidly say wow, 96% is great.

The rest of us look at that say 4% crooked means one in every 25 cops is an outright theif, and 10% shadey means that if you walk in to a police station and you will see a shady cop in every single squad room.

We realize we need to write the laws based on those 4%, not the 96%.

We also realize that that 96% - they are not the ones that end up shooting unarmed civilians. When a cop hits the news for questionable behavior, the odds are not 4% crooked or even 10% shady, but more like 30% crooked and 70% shady.

Re:The most most seriously needed LEO database

[alexo]

While it is true that there are a few officers that deserve jail time (and the do get it most of the time) 99.99% of the LEOs our there are the good guys.

No, they are not.

Because if they were, they would be fighting nail and tooth to get the 0.01% off the force and behind bars, where they belong.

As things are, there are three kinds of cops:
1. Dirty
2. Complicit
3. On the way out

If you are looking for a group to fawn over, I suggest that volunteer firefighters are much more worthy of your respect.