Miami Police Used Clearview AI Facial Recognition in Arrest of Homeless Man
Facial recognition technology is increasingly being deployed by police officers across the country, but the scope of its use has been hard to pin down.

Facial recognition technology is increasingly being deployed by police officers across the country, but the scope of its use has been hard to pin down.
In Miami, it's used for cases big and exceedingly small, as one case Reason recently reviewed showed: Miami police used facial recognition technology to identify a homeless man who refused to give his name to an officer. That man was arrested, but prosecutors quickly dropped the case after determining the officer lacked probable cause for the arrest.
The case was barely a blip in the daily churn of Miami's criminal justice system, but it shows the spread of facial recognition technology and the use of retaliatory charges against those who annoy the police.
Lisa Femia, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which advocates for digital privacy rights, calls the case "a particularly egregious example of mission creep with facial recognition technology."
"It's often advertised as a way for law enforcement to solve the worst of the worst crimes," Femia says. "And instead we have law enforcement here using it to harass the homeless."
According to a police incident report, a man, who Reason is not identifying because he was ultimately not prosecuted, was sleeping on a bench in a parking garage at Miami International Airport on the morning of November 13, 2023, when he was approached by a Miami-Dade County police officer.
"While on routine patrol at the Miami International Airport I observed defendant sleeping on a bench in the Dolphin garage, covered with a blanket and unbagged personal items on airport luggage cart," the officer wrote in his report. "The bench is provided for passengers waiting for vehicles to and from the airport. It is not designated for housing."
The report notes that Miami-Dade police have been directed to address homelessness at the airport and that the officer initiated contact to see if the man had been previously issued a trespass warning.
The man didn't have an ID, and he gave the officer a fake name and 2010 date of birth.
"Defendant was obviously not a 13-year-old juvenile," the report says. "I provided defendant several opportunities to provide correct information and he refused."
Under Florida law, police can demand identification from a pedestrian only when there is reasonable suspicion that they have committed a crime. For example, two Florida sheriff's deputies were disciplined in 2022 after they arrested a legally blind man for refusing to show his ID.
This officer had other means at his disposal, though. "I identified defendant via facial recognition from Clearview, with assistance from C. Perez, analyst at the MDPD real time crime center," the report says.
Clearview AI is a facial recognition technology company that created a massive database by scraping social media sites like Facebook and YouTube. It first came to public notice in 2020 after a New York Times investigation revealed the company's questionable methods and its partnerships with numerous local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies around the country.
As the Marshall Project reported recently, real time crime centers have also popped up in police departments around the country, allowing departments to harness both public and private surveillance networks to feed information to officers in the field.
"Further investigation revealed defendant was not on the airport trespass list," the police report continues. "However, his failure to truthfully identify himself resulted in an unnecessary delay of investigation and required additional resources for a proper identification."
The officer arrested the man on a single charge of "obstruction by a disguised person," a first-degree misdemeanor crime in Florida.
However, the Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office dropped the charge the same day it was filed. A spokesperson for the office said in a statement to Reason that "the case was dropped due to the legal determination that there was insufficient probable cause to justify the arrest."
In other words, his arrest was unlawful.
The Miami-Dade Police Department did not respond to a request for comment.
Facial recognition technology has been controversial. Reuters reported that about two dozen state or local governments banned it between 2019 and 2021, although many jurisdictions have repealed or chipped away at those bans in the years since.
Groups like the EFF argue that, while facial recognition technology may have many useful applications, it's a privacy nightmare when combined with rapidly proliferating surveillance camera networks.
"Taken together, you've got a system that can quickly, cheaply, and easily ascertain where people have been, who you've been with, what you've been doing," Femia says. "It changes what it means to leave your house and be just a private citizen going about your day."
Femia says it's not hard to imagine facial recognition technology being used to track people engaged in protected free speech activity, such as whistleblowers, union organizers, and protesters. The latter is not hypothetical; several major cities used facial recognition technology to identify Black Lives Matter protesters in 2020.
The BBC reported last year that Clearview's database now includes 30 billion images and has been used by law enforcement nearly 1 million times:
In a rare interview with law enforcement about the effectiveness of Clearview, Miami Police said they used the software for every type of crime, from murders to shoplifting.
Assistant Chief of Police Armando Aguilar said his team used the system about 450 times a year, and that it had helped solve several murders.
In one case, facial recognition technology was used by a Florida defense lawyer to identify a key witness who was able to clear his client of vehicular murder.
But like other police technology, equipment, and tactics developed for extreme situations —cell-site simulators, armored personnel carriers, SWAT teams—the typical use will regress to the mean of police work.
The Miami case, Femia says, is "just another example of how the use of facial recognition technology can expand beyond solving murders or extreme crimes and be used to mass surveil the population."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
More bullshit forensics. The false positive rate is insanely high.
Read the following report to learn how a single-mom with 3 kids was able to generate $89,844 of annual income working in her spare time online from her home without selling...
For More Visit Here....> http://Www.Smartcareer1.com
>>"Defendant was obviously not a 13-year-old juvenile,"
copper also a biologist?
Copper has two eyes, is over 20 years old, and can tell the difference between a 13 year old and a 31 year old.
"The officer arrested the man on a single charge of "obstruction by a disguised person," a first-degree misdemeanor crime in Florida."
So if a maskhole is slowing up the line (obstructing) at the store or gas station, it's a misdemeanor?
Cool.
But like other police technology, equipment, and tactics developed for extreme situations —cell-site simulators, armored personnel carriers, SWAT teams—the typical use will regress to the mean of police work.
Don't forget asset forfeiture, which was sold as a tool to stop drug kingpins, but is now used for literal highway robbery.
True dat. It was asset forfeiture, George Waffen Bush Faith-Based asset forfeiture foisted by Executive Order not so different from lame duck Bert Hoover's EO 5970. Hoover's exploited prohibition and taxation to wreck the banking system. Bush used his to turn cops into asset-forfeiture looters with unintended consequence. As homes were confiscated over a plant or baggie of weed, mortgage-backed derivative securities became worthless, hence the 2008 Crash. See faith-based (https://bit.ly/3MhrpKw)
If the leo did not have reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime the person is not required to provide their name.
He did. Specifically County Ordinance 25-1.5.
There needs to be a good way to clean up the vagrant riff-raff.
Christian National Socialism is the ticket in North Carolina. Felony convictions and White Supremacist racial collectivism are practically a requirement for Republican or Democrat candidacy to the State House. Just ask Joseph Gibson III. Herbert Hoover, developer of Hoovervilles and Hoovercarts, single-handedly elected Adolf Hitler by exporting drug prohibionism and banking panics to Germany along with the 1931 Moratorium on Brains. Faith-based concentration camps did the rest. See Key to rearming Germany (https://bit.ly/3eeRgpU)
"And instead we have law enforcement here using it to harass the homeless."
How is it harassment when they've been specifically directed to go deal with vagrant trespassers and he literally finds a vagrant on a bench that the airport and city have made it very clear they don't want vagrants?
And then the guy gives him the runaround. Sounds to me like it was the bum harassing the cop, not the other way around. Why? Because, as you say:
Under Florida law, police can demand identification from a pedestrian only when there is reasonable suspicion that they have committed a crime.
Which there was. Specifically, County Ordinance 25-1.5. "Trespassing. Whoever, without being fully authorized, licensed or invited, willfully enters or remains at an Airport, or portion thereof, or having been authorized, licensed, or invited to an Airport, or portion thereof, is warned or ordered by authorized Department personnel or a law enforcement officer to depart, and refuses to do so, commits the offense of trespass."
So he asked for ID. Patiently. Repeatedly. Even after being glaringly lied to. This cop was actually giving him a break. He was clearly going to give him a warning unless this dude had already been warned before.
But the bum just HAD to escalate things. Which put him in violation of Florida Statute 843.03. "Obstruction by disguised person.—Whoever in any manner disguises himself or herself with intent to obstruct the due execution of the law, or with the intent to intimidate, hinder, or interrupt any officer, beverage enforcement agent, or other person in the legal performance of his or her duty or the exercise of his or her rights under the constitution or laws of this state, whether such intent is effected or not, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083."
A spokesperson for the office said in a statement to Reason that "the case was dropped due to the legal determination that there was insufficient probable cause to justify the arrest."
In other words, his arrest was unlawful.
Or, in other words, the case was dropped because the State Attorney's Office didn't want to waste their time pushing a silly obstruction case against some jerkwad airport bum who wasn't even on the trespass list in the first place.
Which, had he just been slightly cooperative, could have saved everyone a whole lot of time and energy on a case that was never going to go anywhere.
Also, if you're going to cite a "spokesperson for the office," how about you name them so we can go fact-check that huh Ceej?
You've hit pretty much everything before I got a chance to. Only things I can add: A successful prosecution in this case would most likely result in a minor jail sentence, all of it suspended beyond time served, and/or a fine which would never be paid. If he couldn't be released on recognizance, the state would then have to pay money to keep him in jail. On top of which, I'd consider it at least plausible that the Miami-Dade state attorney's office rarely prosecutes obstruction charges without either a primary arrestable offense or an arrest on a warrant.
And according to the report, every step of this arrest was 100% legal. The officer lays out Reasonable Articulable Suspicion that the subject was not one of the patrons for whom this piece of property is intended. Once the subject is legally detained, he orders him to identify himself, which at this point he is legally obligated to do. The subject provides a false name and clearly false DOB. The officer gives him several opportunities to come clean-the subject doesn't do so. The officer uses the facial recognition program to id the subject, and then arrests him for the obstruction charge. If someone can point out where the officer lied, I'll be happy to eat crow, but as it stands, this is a lawful detention, resulting in a lawful arrest, in which the prosecutor decided not to pursue the charges in court.
Yeah, it's pretty clearly a case of selective enforcement where it wasn't worth the States time to actually pursue the case.
Frankly, while I'm pretty jaded on law enforcement, this particular officer seems like one of the good ones to me. He did everything in his power to remove the guy peacefully, and literally followed the law and ethical guidelines to do it. I'm not fan of 'papers please', but I don't really feel like this particular case draws a parallel to Nazi Germany either.
The DA deciding not to charge is obviously because they already had the result they were looking for. The bum was no longer at the airport, where he frankly wasn't allowed to loiter in the first place.
If, say, the TSA was involved the guy would probably be on his way to Guantanamo. He should thank his lucky stars the Fed didn't get involved. I fully acknowledge that's gross, but it's the world we live in like it or not (and I don't like it myself).
"Taken together, you've got a system that can quickly, cheaply, and easily ascertain where people have been, who you've been with, what you've been doing," Femia says.
That's only true when, in Clearview's case, folks have been openly plastering all that information all over the internet for anyone to see.
Maybe don't do that?
You don't get to whine about privacy after you completely abdicated it by uploading your smiling mug to social media to inform the world how much you liked your spaghettios with a selfie to memorialize the meal. That picture was there for ANYONE to find.
The objection that it can now be done "quickly, cheaply, and easily" by means of computerized assistance is disingenuous. Before this, it was libraries of cataloged mugshots for witnesses to flip through pretty much at random. This is no different just because it's quick, cheap, and easy now.
So he was trespassing, but apparently not trespassing often enough to be on a list?
First time is a warning. And they keep track of the people they've warned.
Second time has actual consequences, for those who continue to be a problem.
It's actually a great courtesy that the cops are doing the vagrants. Like a five-second head start. "Get outta here, go anywhere else that's NOT the airport, and we won't take this any further. But if we catch you here again, after you've been warned, then that's on you - not us."
The stupid bum in this story decided to FAFO, when the cop was literally handing him an exit. No pity for dumb bad guys.
Second time has actual consequences, for those who continue to be a problem.
el oh el.
Folks with luggage at airports are usually customers bumped or forced by the Airport Gestapo to miss their flight.
The use of Clearview AI facial recognition technology by the Miami Police in the arrest of a homeless man raises important ethical and privacy concerns. While law enforcement agencies may argue that such tools aid in solving crimes, there is a need for a transparent and accountable framework to govern their use. The potential for misuse and the impact on vulnerable populations, like the homeless, highlights the importance of striking a balance between public safety and individual rights in the deployment of advanced surveillance technologies. This case underscores the ongoing debate surrounding the responsible use of facial recognition tools by authorities.
Thanks for the input ChatGPT.
How about an article on how the Biden DoIJ and FBI got the banks to turn over records on millions of Americans based on searches using "Trump", "MAGA", sporting goods store names, etc.
Nope, no interest from Reason on that violation of privacy rights.
The case was barely a blip in the daily churn of Miami's criminal justice system, but it shows the spread of facial recognition technology and the use of retaliatory charges against those who annoy the police.
So this small blip, where charges were dropped due to lack of probable cause wasn't "too local" to report on the use of facial recognition technology to nab potential law violators.
What's the particular issue here? Is the issue that this crime was petty, and the use of SkyNet is disproportional? Is it that we have general opposition to SkyNet, regardless of how its used? Or that SkyNet was used to nab a Homeless person, someone who falls into the 'disenfranchised' category on the DEI Intersectional matrix? And I'm genuinely curious as to what the issue is here... because if it's the second one in my list (as I would hope it would be for a Libertarian magazine) then I would ask: You know where else facial recognition was used to nab potential lawbreakers in an event that even the most cynical of Libertarianism Plus adherents would have trouble calling "too local"?
"... his failure to truthfully identify himself resulted in an unnecessary delay of investigation and required additional resources for a proper identification."
So now delaying a police "investigation" can be added to "being rude to a police officer;" and "failing to comply with a lawful order" that the deaf person facing away from the officer couldn't hear; "I thought he had a gun and I feared for my life;" and "a non-functioning left rear vehicle signal light;" and "refusing to give consent to a requested search;" and "Oops! We had the wrong address on our no-knock boilerplate search warrant;" as probable cause for the police to arrest you and punish you up to and including the death penalty with summary execution at the scene. Sigh! So now I have to cross Miami off my shrinking list of cities it's safe to visit or pass through on my way to somewhere else ...
"Contempt of Cop" is the easiest way to get arrested in this country.
A spokesperson for the office said in a statement to Reason that "the case was dropped due to the legal determination that there was insufficient probable cause to justify the arrest."
As someone else put it, "You can beat the charge , but you can't beat the ride."