SAN JOSE, Calif. - A San Jose police officer was fired after the chief said he used a personal phone to access Flock camera data to help his cousin, who was accused of domestic violence.
The department said the officer accessed the Flock data while off duty on his personal cell phone to track down the woman who accused his cousin.
State law makes it illegal for an officer to access confidential criminal databases without a legitimate law-enforcement purpose, but the law does not currently cover data covered by Automated License Plate Readers.
San Jose police officer termination over Flock camera data abuse
What we know:
In response to the incident, the department said policy was changed to restrict ALPR and law enforcement-sensitive systems from being accessed on personal devices.
"When an officer violates the public’s trust this severely, my responsibility is clear: that person cannot remain in a position of police authority, and they cannot wear the San Jose badge. This technology is new; the standard is not," Chief of Police Paul Joseph said in a statement on Friday.
The Mercury News reported the officer was fired in April after a yearlong investigation.
Joseph told the Mercury News that he chose to make the firing public now because he issued a memo last week banning officers from accessing any law-enforcement databases from personal electronic devices.
The department says it will be conducting monthly audits to ensure proper protocols are followed, though officials noted that does not prevent real-time surveillance abuse.
Northern California cities end Flock contracts over privacy concerns
In Northern California, the cities of Santa Cruz, Los Altos Hills, and Mountain View all terminated their Flock contracts this year due to privacy concerns surrounding Flock Safety data across the nation.
The American Civil Liberties Union and Electronic Frontier Foundation are suing San Jose police — on behalf of the immigrant-rights group SIREN and the Bay Area chapter of the Council on American–Islamic Relations — on the grounds that the ALPR systems’ "retrospective" monitoring of people’s movements without warrants violates the Constitution.
What we don't know:
Questions remain regarding when the officer accessed the data, how long the officer went undetected prior to termination, or why data considered that sensitive was ever available to off-duty officers or allowed to be accessed on personal phones.
KTVU has reached out to the San Jose Police Department for additional details.
The Source: SJPD chief, prior KTVU reporting