Man Sues Sunglass Hut After Faulty AI Facial Recognition Tech Led to Wrongful Arrest
Harvey Murphy was wrongfully arrested for robbing a Sunglasses Hut after facial recognition tech identified him as the robber. The 61-year-old says he was brutally sexually assaulted in jail.

Harvey Murphy was arrested in October 2022 for the armed burglary of a Houston-area Sunglass Hut store after a facial recognition device identified him as the burglar. The only problem? Murphy was in Sacramento, California at the time of the crime—thousands of miles away.
Making matters worse, Murphy, now 61, says he was brutally sexually assaulted in jail just hours before he was set to be released after the charges against him were dropped. In a lawsuit filed last week, Murphy claims that his arrest was the result of gross negligence from the facial recognition company—and he demands $10 million in damages to compensate for his wrongful imprisonment.
On January 22, 2022, two men entered a Sunglass Hut store in Houston, Texas, with one threatening the store employees with a gun and forcing them into a storeroom at the back of the business. The two intruders eventually left with the money in the store's cash register as well as several pairs of sunglasses.
According to the complaint, local police began investigating the crime as soon as they arrived on the scene. Soon after, Anthony Pfleger, the head of loss prevention at EssilorLuxottica, Sunglass Hut's parent company, called the police and told them that the armed burglar had been identified. Apparently, facial recognition software had concluded that Harvey Murphy was the criminal—and that he had even been responsible for additional robberies of a different Huston-area Sunglass Hut and a Macy's store.
Police then presented a photo lineup to one of the store employees, who identified Murphy as the robber. However, the complaint alleges that the clerk had been "prepped" by EssilorLuxottica, leading her to incorrectly identify Murphy. Unbeknownst to Murphy, a warrant was issued for his arrest.
In October 2022, Murphy, who had been living in California, returned to Texas for work. After attempting to renew his driver's license at a local DMV, he was arrested and booked into the Harris County jail. According to the complaint, once Murphy learned he was being charged for the January 22, 2022 robbery, he informed his lawyer that he was in a different state at the time of the crime. Soon after, the District Attorney agreed to drop the charges against Murphy.
However, just hours before Murphy was set to be released, he says he was beaten and gang raped in a jail bathroom by three prisoners. According to Murphy's lawsuit, after being brutally attacked, his assailants threatened to kill him if he reported the crime.
"Murphy was released a few hours later, but in some ways, he never left jail," the complaint writes. "His time in jail will stay with him forever. Not an hour goes by without Murphy relieving the brutal attack and rape. Worse than that, the attack left him with permanent injuries that he has to live with every day of his life. All of this happened to Murphy because the Defendants relied on facial recognition technology that is known to be error prone and faulty."
This is far from the first time that facial recognition technology has led to wrongful arrests. In February 2022, a Detroit woman who was eight months pregnant was falsely arrested for robbery and carjacking. That same year, an Atlanta man was falsely arrested for a series of thefts in Lousiana, a state the man had never been to. In November 2023, Miami police used facial recognition technology to arrest a homeless man who had refused to give his name to an officer.
"What companies like EssilorLuxottica and Macy's tell the public is that facial-recognition systems can have near-perfect accuracy," Murphy's suit states. "What they do not tell the public is that 'near-perfect accuracy' only occurs in absolutely ideal conditions … in the real world, accuracy rates are much lower."
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
Good. We need more lawsuits against the companies that power the surveillance state.
Is Sunglass Hut one of those companies?
Any store that only sells "sunglasses" is clearly up to no good.
At the very least... [dons sunglasses]... shady.
Yes.
CB
Huston, Texas?
John Huston, Texas.
[sniggers] Do you mean David M. Huston? [giggles] the same David M. Huston that writes for Education Next? [proceeds to ROFLMAO]
Good luck but not sure sunglass hut is responsible for the police's lack of a thorough investigation before writing up a warrant. They bear some responsibility for the faulty id since they took the steps to use the facial recognition but the police should have pulled cell/credit reports to see if the guy was even in the area. And the judge should be facing a bar review for signing the arrest warrant on such flimsy evidence (at the least).
My guess he gets a nice out of court settlement to make the case go away.
His lawyers know the cops won't pay out. Go after the deep pockets.
Suing the police for an obviously wrongful arrest - yes.
Suing the police for gross failure to protect the people in their custody - obviously yes.
Suing the facial recognition company for making a bad identification that the police relied on - maybe.
Suing the store owner for making what turned out to be a mistaken identification? That's crazy. You can't sue the person who erroneously picks you out of a physical lineup. The use of technology should not change that legal standard.
Suing who has the money -- yes.
Suing the store owner for making a false accusation - defamation.
This wasn't a false accusation so much as mistaken identity. That being said, the parent company SHOULD be sued for negligence for their obviously flawed and unreliable facial recognition software.
But I think the cops are MORE responsible for false arrest by apparently not taking ANY steps to confirm that this guy was even in the same city when the crimes were committed.
Emma, please get out of New York and learn to spell. It's Houston, Texas, pronounced "hew-ston".
More "Huston" LOLing:
Showing 0 of 0 results found for: huthi
Emma "Stupid houssy" Camp
The author is apparently unable to spell the name of the most populous city in the southern United States. It really is pathetic.
To be fair, authors usually are not responsible for typos in published works.
"Huston" was used three times, so upon reading the article I just assumed there was actually a (small?) city in Texas called "Huston"...
That's what I figured too. There's not?
Police then presented a photo lineup to one of the store employees, who identified Murphy as the robber. However, the complaint alleges that the clerk had been "prepped" by EssilorLuxottica, leading her to incorrectly identify Murphy.
Good luck with that one.
After the facial recognition was brought to local police, a Sunglass Hut employee who was present during the robbery was asked to identify the suspect out of a lineup of photos and chose Murphy.
Did Murphy have a criminal record? Did it include robbery? Did the cops ever nab the real crooks?
I'm honestly assuming that he has a criminal history of SOME sort, although this could be from an arrest where the charges were later dropped. How else would the facial recognition software be able to match his face with his name?
Granted, I don't know how facial recognition systems fill their faces/names databases, so my theory about him having a prior arrest might wrong.
It would be nice if the article explained this detail, since it seems kind of relevant to the overall situation.
So, he was raped because of facial recognition software? What exactly are you trying to say here???
Did you SEE how we wiggled his ass in front of the facial recognition software?
What did he expect to happen?
Well, sort of. He wouldn't have been raped without it.
However, just hours before Murphy was set to be released, he says he was beaten and gang raped in a jail bathroom by three prisoners. According to Murphy's lawsuit, after being brutally attacked, his assailants threatened to kill him if he reported the crime.
DID he report the attack? Even if he didn't, is there a medical report about it? Did the jail release him with clear signs that he had more bumps and bruises than he was checked into the jail with? Did they ASK him about it?
A halfway decent reporter would have actually looked into this, rather than treating all claims made by the Plaintiff in a lawsuit as fact.
And what was he wearing?
Classic. Unvetted AI application in the hands of unsophisticated users who have the power to mess up your life.
Remember folks, its not "Terminator" we need to worry about. Rather it is Mabel using an application she doesn't understand.
Who's vetting AI?