Many people use databases in their line of work, be they librarians or law enforcement. However, what if these databases contain incorrect or false information?
In this recent article, a man was arrested after a warrant was found for him in an adjoining county. Meth and a gun were found in his car. However, there was no actual warrant and the information was never removed from the database. Nevertheless, he was indicted, unable to throw out the evidence, and sentenced to 27 months in jail. This is a violation of his fourth amendment right, which guards against unreasonable search and seizure.
False information can spread from source to source, like the one bad apple adage. “In these interlinked databases, one error can spread like a disease, infecting every system it touches and condemning the individual to whom this error refers to suffer substantial delay, harassment, and improper arrest,” EPIC director Marc Rotenberg states in a friend of the court brief. I’ve read many sources while researching that were incorrect—and they shared sources. Obviously, these sources aren’t reliable—but they were written for academic journals. If all of those sources are able to link and be regarded as professional, what kinds of bogus information could the government be sharing as accurate?
This information is not solely available to the government—though the Information Sharing Environment (ISE), data is shared between federal, state, local, tribal and commercial entities. The ISE seems to be mainly about preventing terrorism, which makes it all the more dangerous. If the shared information is erroneous, it affects the credibility of such investigations when conducted with authentic data, not to mention the wrongly affected citizen. It also affects the credibility of professionals who are required to cooperate with the authorities.
While some may think this problem exists mainly in the government sector, this is not the case. The Supreme Court reviewed whether arrests made using inaccurate information are lawful. If the Supreme Court decides it is legal, the ramifications are far-reaching. In an age where citizens are constantly under surveillance by the government, where will they draw the line? How will this affect the Patriot Act? Although libraries would still probably choose to require a court order, what if the court order is drawn up on false charges?
For more information, check out EPIC's Web page about the court case.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I'm surprised that the man found with meth was unable to get that evidence thrown out of the court proceedings. Perhaps it is just too much Law and Order, but that seems like a technicality that would result in a mistrial. I do think that flawed information like this example could have huge ramifications on a libraries ability to protect the privacy of patrons. If there is bad information the first question I want to ask is where is it coming from. It could be just be outdated and therefore easily proven so, (court records etc.) but what if the information was completely fabricated? We have read about the FBI abusing its power in the name of the war on terror, I guess I worry that fabricating incriminating information could be the next desperate step.
It’s horrible that the judge didn’t throw the evidence out. Maybe a better lawyer would have made the difference. It should be up to the constitution to protect us, however, not well paid lawyers. This is definitely a problem in America where it seems only the rich can afford competent legal protection. Though this fellow may seem like a bad guy, law enforcement cannot be allowed to disregard our rights, ever. Sure mistakes will happen but that’s where a technicality comes in and the case is dismissed. Of course I am no lawyer.
While out this weekend, I mentioned I was in school for MLIS. One person responded that the library is a great place because you can rely on the information there as being fact unlike the internet. I decided not to press the issue of the errors in encyclopedias (for starters) although it is definitely a problem when government errors affect our freedom. If errors are made, which is bound to happen they need to be corrected.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." - English jurist William Blackstone.
The unreliable information on databases and internet is a common problem. However I was surprised that a governmental database which is supposed to be updated and reliable in fact was not.
As a circulation librarian, I work on a database that records the borrowing history of the patrons. Mistakes can happen, but we should make sure to reduce mistakes to the minimum and to have the right policy that covers any possible mistake. A patron may pretend that he returned an item while the system shows that it is still borrowed by him, others may believe that they never borrowed some book.
The first thing to think about is that we should never believe that the system is perfect. When facing a problem with a patron we should always be serious and take his assumptions into consideration, since the data is entered and released from the system by humans and mistakes can happen. Also, from my experience I learned that we should not give full access on the system for every staff member. For example, circulation staff can only have access on checking the book in and out, they should not be able to change the status manually from “available” to “on-loan” or change the returning date. This will reduce their responsibility in case of a probable mistake.
When facing a problem with the patron we should always have appropriate policy that can manage the situation. Applying the policy will give us time to investigate where the real problem reside and to take appropriate decisions.
In this world where everything is relying on technology and databases we begin to trust the computer systems more than people even if they are professionals. People claim that systems is more accurate which is wrong since they are made and managed by human and the human mistakes can be reflected in the systems. Yet, we should train our mind not to take the information on databases as guaranteed.
This is absurd. Of course the evidence should be thrown out; even the government agrees this situation is unconstitutional. The police are just trying to secure the bust and make the felon pay. The “system” is a flawed system and there should be a price to pay for poor police work even if it means letting a person go. If anyone else screws up in their employment that employee will have some form of sanctions levied against them. Why shouldn’t that apply in this case? Just because it’s the police?
The law is basically threats supported through force. This is a pretty serious responsibility we entrust people in our society with and the people involved on the police end of it failed completely. There is something just not right about this situation. What’s to say that this wasn’t a trumped up charge for some reason in order to get the “bad guy off of the street”? Personal vendetta? We’ve seen government power used to settle personal scores many times in the country. This situation smells of abuse of power and the people who inputted the bad information (and pressed for it) into the database should be investigated.
A couple of months ago my friend was on his way to work at 3AM and he was pulled over by the police. It turns out he fit the description of a breaking and entering in the neighborhood he was driving through. He happened to have a well used bowl sitting on his seat. The cop laughed it off, took the bowl, and let my friend go. THAT was good law enforcement. THIS story provides a good example of poor law enforcement followed by questionable courtroom practice.
I think this case really illustrates information overload. We have access to so much information that we are finding that we are unable to utilize it properly and, in this case, even have it turn against us.
I agree with what everyone here is saying -- the evidence should have been thrown out. With the increased use of computerized databases and shared information, it seems that we are at a crucial point for setting precedents. I think that it is important for law enforcement and judges to consider the ramifications of faulty information being used as the basis for arrests and, especially, convictions.
It seems that basing a case on evidence that was not obtained lawfully would red flag the case. In the future, when the courts may overthrow the decision to allow such evidence, people will be released from prison. If there is a real reason that the person should be in prison, the police should be looking to prove it lawfully now, so they are not scrambling to prove it later.
Is anyone here slightly disturbed by the fact that the Supreme Court is even considering whether or not arrests made with inaccurate information is lawful? I can understand the fact that mistakes happen, but we need to look at the big picture. There are a ton of innocent people who are locked up in prison because they were wrongly accused. If it’s ever passed that an arrest made on inaccurate information is indeed lawful, what’s to say that it won’t be abused? These kinds of mistakes have huge ramifications and it needs to stay that any arrest with ‘bad information’ needs to be thrown out. Maybe it will help law enforcement make sure their information is credible first.
I think this article really emphasizes that we, as future information professionals, need to be aware of the information we're managing. I recently read an article, "The Information Specialist: A Malpractice Risk Analysis" by Theresa Pritchard andMichelle Quigley, which touched somewhat on this issue. They stated that legally the database provider and the person who provided the information could be held responsible in a court of law. I think it is similar to this case. The database provider and the officer (although unknowingly) is at fault. Although the officer did not intend to infringe on the man's constitutional rights, he did because of the unupdated database.
Post a Comment