When gunshots rang out at Maurice Ferré Park in downtown Miami on Sept. 21, it wasn’t a 911 call that alerted City of Miami Police officers to the scene.
Instead, surreptitiously placed acoustic sensors picked up a loud barrage, relaying the bursts to a non-law enforcement team in a dark, out-of-state restricted-access control room that quickly deciphered the sound.
(Bianca Marcof for Biscayne Times)
The Real Time Crime Center at the Miami Police Department.
Upon confirming the gunshots, the team alerted the Real Time Crime Center inside Miami Police headquarters. From there, cops rushed to the waterfront park where they found two gunshot victims, one of whom died, according to a Miami Police incident report.
More and more, police departments in Miami, Miami Gardens and elsewhere in Miami-Dade County are relying on the acoustic sensor technology provided by ShotSpotter Inc. – based in a Newark, Calif. – to beef up response times to crime scenes involving gunfire.
Miami Police Assistant Chief Raul Aguilar, who oversees the investigation division, told the Biscayne Times that ShotSpotter has become a necessary tool on the cop beat.
(AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)
ShotSpotter equipment overlooks the intersection of South Stony Island Avenue and East 63rd Street in Chicago.
“There are instances when gunfire is not reported to 911 at all or there is a little bit of lag time between the time someone hears gunshots and the time they decide to call 911,” Aguilar said in a phone interview. “ShotSpotter alerts us faster to shooting incidents, allowing our officers to arrive on the scene faster, render aid faster and find who did the shooting faster.”
Yet, in recent years, ShotSpotter has drawn intense scrutiny over its effectiveness and its potential for abuse in criminal investigations, as well as the publicly traded company’s claims that its technology has contributed to dramatic reductions in gun violence in cities where it is deployed. Between 1999 to 2016, ShotSpotter did not reduce gun violence or increase community safety in 68 large metropolitan counties where the technology is deployed, according to a study published in the April issue of the peer-reviewed Journal of Urban Health.
Further complicating ShotSpotter’s efficacy is that the sounds picked up by its sensors have to be deciphered by employees stationed inside two incident review centers located in California and Washington. The employees in the 24-hour facilities are then responsible for alerting police departments to a gunfire’s location. As a result, human bias plays a role in determining what is an actual gunshot and where it originated from.
In an email statement, a ShotSpotter spokesperson said its acoustic experts go through a rigorous two-month training program.
“In addition, the company continuously monitors the performance of human reviewers to ensure that they maintain high standards of accuracy,” the spokesperson said. “For example, if a reviewer dips below 99% accuracy, the company provides the reviewer with additional training.”
Millions Spent & A False Murder Charge
The Urban Health study raises concerns about the amount of taxpayer funds Miami, Miami Gardens and the county spend on ShotSpotter. Since 2018, Miami has paid $2.2 million to use its technology, according to a spreadsheet provided by the police department. In 2012, Miami Gardens signed a three-year contract with ShotSpotter for $270,000. In 2015, the city entered into another three-year deal for $540,000 with an option to add coverage at $180,000 for additional square miles. That contract was renewed in 2019.
Miami-Dade initially abandoned ShotSpotter after a one-year trial program ended in 2013 because it was unreliable, according to a 2017 mayor’s memo to county commissioners.
“Some of the issues reported by officers in 2012 include a delay with alerts being dispatched, location inconsistency and false positive alerts being received,” the memo states. “A few of the false alerts were determined to be caused by the lack of a victim at the scene and others were attributed to cars backfiring or a general loud noise.”
(Miami Times Illustration)
In 2016, Miami-Dade brought back ShotSpotter because the company had improved its sensors to react only to gunfire and deliver precise location accuracy, the memo states. That year, county commissioners approved a five-year contract for $2.6 million. In 2019, Miami-Dade moved up the contract’s renewal and increased the amount by $2 million, according to county commission meeting minutes. The county also has the option to renew the ShotSpotter deal for another five years and pay the company an additional $5.2 million.
Aguilar said it is still possible ShotSpotter could pick up a false positive like a firecracker going off, but that the system rarely does. Between Sept. 11-17, Miami Police received 44 ShotSpotter alerts that were confirmed as gunshots.
“Even if there is no victim, you arrive at the scene and find shell casings,” Aguilar said. “It is not something where officers are bogged down with false positives.”
Requests for an interview with Miami Gardens Police Chief Delma K. Noel-Pratt, made through Public Information Officer Carolyn Frazier, were denied, as Frazier asserted that Noel-Pratt was too busy for even a five-minute phone interview.
In a troubling development, an August Associated Press investigation found that ShotSpotter data was the primary evidence used in charging a Chicago man, Michael Williams, with murder last year.
The Cook County State Attorney’s Office relied on a theory that security footage of Williams’ car driving through an intersection and a loud bang picked up by ShotSpotter sensors were enough proof that he had shot and killed his 25-year-old passenger, according to the AP. Williams maintained it was two individuals in another car who committed the murder. Prosecutors dropped the case after they “concluded that the totality of the evidence was insufficient to meet our burden of proof,” the AP reported.
The investigative report found other problems with ShotSpotter such as sensors missing live gunfire and misclassifying fireworks and backfiring cars as gunshots. The AP also noted that forensic reports prepared by ShotSpotter employees were improperly used to claim a defendant shot at police, and other instances of evidence manipulation.
‘Hasn’t Played A Significant Role’
(AP Photo/Josh Edelson)
Ralph Clark, ShotSpotter CEO
A ShotSpotter spokesperson provided the Biscayne Times with company President Ralph Clark’s published remarks in response to the AP report. In his written statement, Clark defended ShotSpotter’s work product.
“We know our solution saves lives and, without it, there would be no police response to the vast majority of gunfire incidents,” Clark wrote. “As you know, our solution allows police to rapidly and precisely respond to criminal gunfire, leading to deterrence, increased evidence recovery to enhance investigations and, most importantly, saving the lives of gunshot wound victims.”
Clark said what happened to Williams “was horrible and should never happen to anyone,” but he asserted a ShotSpotter forensic report may have contributed to his release from jail in July. The report, which prosecutors did not request until six months after Williams’ arrest, made “it clear that this court-admissible evidence is for instances of outdoor gunfire, not indoor or in-car weapon discharges.”
In Miami-Dade, ShotSpotter hasn’t played a significant role in criminal shooting cases, according to Aguilar, Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle and criminal defense lawyers.
Sophia Montenegro, spokeswoman for Miami-Dade Public Defender Carlos Martinez, said she has not encountered any cases involving ShotSpotter and only recently learned about the technology. Montenegro said the Public Defender’s Office does not have anyone on staff who could research if there have been any recent shooting cases that introduced ShotSpotter data as evidence.
Michael Catalano, a private criminal defense lawyer, said he briefly represented a defendant earlier this year who is charged with shooting two people. Catalano said the criminal file includes a report that police responded to the scene as a result of a ShotSpotter alert, but that the data wasn’t introduced as evidence.
“ShotSpotter didn’t change anything,” Catalano said. “It didn’t matter.”
In an email statement, Fernandez Rundle said ShotSpotter is an investigative tool that at times is the sole notification that gun violence has occurred in Miami-Dade, providing law enforcement the chance at timely collecting on-the-scene evidence crucial to obtaining leads.
“My prosecutors rely on evidence collected from the actual scene and the totality of the investigation before deciding whether a criminal case can be filed in court,” Fernandez Rundle said. “No criminal case in Miami-Dade would be filed in our courts based exclusively on ShotSpotter.”
Aguilar said he is concerned about officers becoming overly reliant on surveillance technology. When he assumed his position in February of last year, he concluded that some detectives needed to work on their interviewing skills.
“Just talking to people in our society is becoming a lost art,” Aguilar said. “There is a danger in over relying on technology. We don’t want to embrace it at the expense of the human element. Before anything else, it starts with building relationships with members of the community, victims, witnesses and even suspects.”