8 AMERICAN POLICE BEAT: AUGUST 2017 If you own stock in Mc- Donald’s, you were prob- ably pretty happy about the recent increase in value on your investment. McDonald’s shares ral- lied 26 percent this year after the corporation an- nounced plans to fire hu- mans and replace them with “ordering kiosks,” where you take your own order and ring yourself up. It’s not a question of whether robots will be re- placing human workers – that’s obviously already happening. The real question is which industries will lose the most workers as the result of ef- ficiency and automation. Driverless cars have cab and truck drivers nervous already. And cops should be nervous too. The fact is that the crimi- nal justice system is cur- rently being automated. We’re not talking simply red-light cameras and LPRs here. Automation and particu- larly artificial intelligence programs are changing everything from patrol to investigations, from evi- dence to sentencing, and just about everything else. The implications of pub- lic safety automation can’t be underestimated. For one thing, AI systems and other technologies sold in the law enforcement industry are made by pri- vately-owned companies and sold to make a profit – not fight crime. And because many of these manufacturers view their proprietary technol- ogy as a trade secret, they frequently have customers sign non-disclosure agree- ments and refuse to pro- vide defense attorneys the necessary documentation about how a given product works. Consider the fact that the algorithms used to generate likely matches for latent fingerprint analysis and to search ballistic information databases for firearm and cartridge hits are treated as trade secrets. They remain inaccessible to indepen- dent auditors, and more importantly, to defense attorneys. Or how about a state de- cides to use an AI program to identify problem cops who are likely to commit crimes or generate law- suits. Let’s say an officer is identified by that system as someone that cannot be hired by a law enforcement agency in the state in ques- tion. Odds are if the officer is a member of a police union, the union will file a lawsuit and seek information about how the technology used to target the officer actually works. But that information will not be forthcoming if the state officials that signed the contract also signed a non- disclosure agreement or the manufacturer or vendor argues that such informa- tion is a “trade secret.” We might get some clar- ity on some of this as the result of a case the Supreme Court is considering taking up. In Wisconsin v. Loomis, the court could make a rul- ing on whether it violates due process to sentence someone based on a risk-as- sessment instrument whose workings are protected as a trade secret. No ask, no tell Run for the Badge Saturday, October 14 | Washington, DC Join us for a 5K Run and Walk in honor of our law enforcement heroes on October 14, 2017, in Washington, DC. Help us support law enforcement officers by registering today to run, walk, or participate virtually. The Run for the Badge will begin and end at the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial, which benefits from the proceeds of this fundraising event. RegisterToday www.RunfortheBadge.org