by Donald Eng
MILFORD, CT — When police officers end their shift and take the uniform off, they are ordinary citizens, subject to the same laws and, importantly, deserving of the same privacy as everyone else – including from license plate-reading cameras that have come under scrutiny in Connecticut in recent weeks.
“We understand the fact that people are concerned about privacy. We’re concerned about privacy,” said Groton Police Chief L.J. Fusaro. “We’re private citizens, too. When we take off the uniform, our officers go home. We have families, and people that go out and about around the community. They’re subject to the same rules and laws and camera equipment.”
Fusaro and Farmington Police Chief Paul Melanson, who last month penned an open letter citing the effectiveness of license plate readers when used with appropriate privacy protections, held a media availability at the Milford police academy. Joined by representatives of Flock Safety, a vendor of such technology, the two cited the benefits of the technology and also addressed concerns.
First, though, Melanson clarified what exactly the plate readers are – and what they aren’t. License plate readers are not the same thing as the traffic enforcement cameras that ticket drivers who fail to stop at traffic lights or exceed the speed limit, he said.
“There seems to be some conflation between automated license plate readers, which have been part of the technology package in law enforcement for many years,” Fusaro said. “But now with the advent of speed cameras and traffic light cameras … they’re two totally different issues. We’ve seen them kind of merge and we’re hoping we can clear the fog on that.”
Privacy concerns have led to a number of municipalities pausing their license plate readers. In addition, Senate Democratic leaders and Gov. Ned Lamont have also advocated a timeout from new installations and use of existing ones.
Melanson pointed out that a new series of protections and limitations – which the state Police Chiefs Association helped craft – will go into effect Oct. 1. Among the changes are limiting the states Connecticut towns can share data with to three — New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island — and mandating that the shared data not be used in a way that violates Connecticut law. The data also cannot be used for federal immigration, gender affirming or reproductive care. Data also will have a shortened 21-day storage before being automatically deleted, unless it is part of an active investigation.
Officers using the system to search for a plate must log in and acknowledge that legal requirements, Melanson said. And the data is not available to the public except for a specific circumstance – car owners can request the data for their vehicle if all of that car’s regular users also agree. That caveat is intended to prevent situations such as where a person may be trying to use the system to locate a former spouse or a romantic partner who may have fled an abusive relationship.
If privacy is properly protected, Melanson said the readers can be invaluable.
“We’ve had three homicides this year,” he said. “The (LPR) was instrumental in solving all three.”
Other examples of plate readers aiding investigations include a company dumping medical waste in town that was identified with the plate information, and a Silver Alert case where the person was found and returned home after being identified by a plate reader.