Thread by @gmhales

"Two people have lost a High Court challenge against the Metropolitan Police over its use of live facial recognition technology (LFR) in London" #livefacialrecognition
bbc.co.uk/news/articles/…

Link to the ruling judiciary.uk/judgments/shau…

From the press summary - I don't think I have seen these details reported before - Mr Thompson was mistakenly identified as a match to his brother, who was on the watchlist.

This speaks for itself

Interesting further detail from the full judgment: "Although officers doubted whether the first claimant was the person on the watchlist,
they nevertheless scrutinised him, asked questions and made him prove his identity."

Para 137 seems significant: "There was no challenge to that description [of no statistically significant differences in matching rates] and no evidence to contradict it."

"the claimants do not raise any issues in relation to the Public Sector Equality Duty under s.149 of the Equality Act 2010"

No punches pulled

"We pause here to note that the EHRC’s concerns may be important but they do not concern the question with which the court is concerned in this claim."

On expert evidence presented by the claimants: "To the extent that Mr Squires relied on Professor Utley’s
evidence to impugn the geographical reach of LFR and its use in crowded areas of London, his submissions missed any proper target for judicial review".

"We are not able to accept, on the thin submissions advanced before us, that concerns about discrimination infect the legality of the Policy."

I stuffed up the thread, which continues here

"the Policy provides the claimants with an adequate indication of the
circumstances in which LFR will be used"

"the Policy contains adequate and lawful constraints on where LFR may be deployed."

"the guidance to officers on proportionality... acts as an effective safeguard against arbitrary outcomes."

"the claim is dismissed"

Ps, Mr Thompson's brother was "subject of an outstanding arrest warrant issued by a court for breach of bail following an allegation that he had caused grievous bodily harm to Mr Thompson."