Met Police's Palantir deployment has its own officers watching their backs

London cops are being told by their staff association to be "extremely cautious" about carrying work devices off duty, after the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) deployed Palantir's technology to investigate hundreds of its own officers. The Metropolitan Police Federation, which represents more than 30,000 MPS officers, is …

[Aladdin Sane]

Courageous colleagues across London

The same courageous colleagues who didn't report David Carrick?

[Aladdin Sane]

Re: Courageous colleagues across London

I can only assume the downvote is from somebody who thinks I should mention Wayne Couzens as well.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Courageous colleagues across London

> I can only assume the downvote is

One of them is from me. Not because you're wrong, those people should have, and in a healthy forceservice would have been reported, but because you seem to think that two wrongs make a right.

That those in power distrust even those who are supposed to protect them, and go as far as resorting to the services of a foreign, self-serving mercenary, is a very serious problem. That the police forceservice have clearly lost the public's trust is also a very serious problem, but not one that this company is going to solve.

Lastly, you hear about the bad apples but, whatever your opinion of the police, it can be an extremely thankless job. I was never a copper but I've worked alongside them (even the enemy's police forces) during my time in the emergency services, so there is an element of mutual respect through shared adversity, not to mention the uncomfortable moral ambiguity of having to report a comrade, something that is only realistically possible if the leadership is strong (and moral).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Courageous colleagues across London

> I can only assume the downvote is from somebody who thinks I should mention Wayne Couzens as well.

Perhaps it is because you should have mentioned Ian Tomlinson?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10728685

Quoting from the fine article:

Scotland Yard now acknowledges Mr Tomlinson did come "into contact with police" before he died, but denies it had earlier tried to mislead the public by suggesting officers' first contact with him was when they tried to administer first aid.

In other words, the police lie and lie and lie and lie repeatedly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Courageous colleagues across London

Coincidentally, last week I was having a chat with a Met employee who is using Palantir for internal investigations and they made much the same point about some of the staff really needing a bit of scrutiny and you that you really shouldn't be taking you work home with you - for everybody's benefit.

[tony72]

... is highly intrusive and risks monitoring officers when they are off duty, on rest days, or at home. This presumption of wrongdoing and attack on officer's personal lives is unacceptable.

Yet somehow running facial recognition on everyone walking past a camera and stop-and-searching anyone on the flimsiest of pretexts is okay. Oh, how the turn tables.

[Anonymous Coward]

But how could they have known the leopards would eat their faces!

[elsergiovolador]

> stop-and-searching anyone*

*only if they look non-threatening and minding their own business.

[Christoph]

Or are Walking while Black.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

But if they have done nothing wrong why should they fear 24x7 Police surveillance?

[M.V. Lipvig]

Because fuck you, that's why.

Nothing personal, that's just how I feel about all privacy nudists. My business is my business, even if I'm just sitting around watching TV. You don't need to know what I'm up to.

[Anonymous Coward]

You seem to miss the point: they are the same people that want to watch what you do 24x7x365

Perhaps now they will stop pushing their Stasi agenda?

[jake]

Here's a handy conversation starter for your government officials:

"Why do you have a door between your toilet and the rest of the house? Why don't you have a plate-glass window to the street in your shower? Why do you have curtains on your bedroom windows? What are you hiding? Are you a criminal/terrorist/ paedophile?" (Delete any of the final three words as applicable. If applicable. Or insert your own, based on whatever today's which hunt includes ... )

[MachDiamond]

"Here's a handy conversation starter for your government officials:"

I don't have a handy link, but Cory Doctorow did a very good talk on the difference between privacy and secrecy that's worth finding a version on youtube or podcast.

We don't walk around with our bank account numbers and PIN numbers on printed cards to hand out. They are private and it's a damn good idea to keep them secret. We might not want to discuss a major health issue with our employer until there is a reason to do so. If everybody wasn't there to hear the roommate getting mauled by Holly Hogger one night when he got a wee bit pissed, it would have been the friendly thing to do to keep that private. I know it's something he would have preferred to not be widely known if it could have been helped.

[StewartWhite]

Face recognition is nowhere near accurate enough

The old "if you've done nothing wrong then you've nothing to fear" canard rolled out again.

Answers to your facile response:

1. Face recognition technology is nowhere near accurate enough to prevent arrests and miscarriages of justice, even if you accept the highly dubious claims of the manufacturers and the Met (best described as employing a "few good apples" rather than a few bad). People have already been arrested, charged and detained for offences that were committed by somebody else but hey, let's just nick whoever the tech says did it then blame that rather than the cops being too lazy to do their job properly. It's no better than saying "CoPilot made us invent these fictitious reasons why Aston Villa vs Maccabi Tel Aviv couldn't go head. Damn, we were meant to carry on pretending that we hadn't used it". People are already being banned from shopping at supermarkets because they've been incorrectly found to be shoplifters thanks to this same technology. If you really think tech is 100% accurate all of the time, please can you confirm that you've never had to reboot a PC to get it working again.

2. The government de jour (no matter the political persuasion, they're all essentially the same) loves nothing more than weaponising legislation for purposes that are clearly unacceptable in the minds of anybody sane (obviously this doesn't include MPs as being a sociopath is a requirement for the role) such as Jack Straw (aka the hypocritical sanctimonious prig who accepted cash to ask questions in the House of Lords) and other Labour goons having police arrest an 82 year old man under the Prevention of Terrorism Act for daring to shout "nonsense" when Straw was spouting his usual drivel re the invasion of Iraq invasion having been a complete success. See https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/sep/29/uk.labourconference for more info on this disgraceful incident. Anybody who says that the Police are "non-political" in their actions is either a fool or a knave as this fully demonstrates.

[Sherrie Ludwig]

Re: Face recognition is nowhere near accurate enough

Every time I hear the "a few bad apples" quote I want to scream. Nobody remembers the entirety of the adage: A few bad apples SPOIL THE BARREL. If you, as an "apple", can't sort out the corrupting influences and toss them, you are going to be, despite best intentions, corrupt as well,. Just a matter of time.

[steviebuk]

Re: Face recognition is nowhere near accurate enough

Because they can't be bothered to investigate so just let AI do it.

https://www.casino.org/news/video-peppermill-casino-facial-recognition-wrongful-arrest-bodycam-footage-released/

And the grandmother who ended up inside for 6 months due to AI

https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-grandmother-jail-mistake

[RegGuy1]

But if they have done nothing wrong why should they fear 24x7 Police surveillance?

/s

TFTFY

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

I posted in .co.uk, that should have been sufficient

[EricM]

> "Courageous colleagues across London do not deserve to be treated with this level of suspicion by their Big Brother Bosses," said Matt Cane

And citizens not investigated for any crime do not deserve to be treated with this level of suspicion by their Big Brother Governments, one might add.

[Claude Yeller]

MPS officers are citizens too

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

When citizens have privacy, LEO's have that too.

If we call for protecting the privacy of "ordinary citizens", we should also call to protect the privacy of MPS officers. In the end, we will all be treated to the same standard.

[MiguelC]

Re: MPS officers are citizens too

Orwell would have nightmares if he ever dreamt that every citizen would voluntarily walk around with their own telescreens.... 1984 is becoming nothing compared to reality

[Havin_it]

Re: MPS officers are citizens too

I mean, 1984 was over 4 decades ago now. It's closer in time to when the book was written than it is to the present.

By most assessments Orwell under-shot by at least a decade (at least inasmuch as where his predictions met Western societies), so I'd like to think he'd have been a bit relieved about that. I'm not much of a scholar and it's a while since I read the book, so I can't tell you what he thought about the further future.

Anyway if you think he's got it bad, what must Arthur C Clarke have gone through before he even snuffed it?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: MPS officers are citizens too

Rubbish. MPS officers should be held to a higher standard. Tighter restrictions. Their behaviour should be beyond reproach, their honesty unquestionable.

This is the group that wants hugely invasive monitoring of everyone to make their jobs easier, with the logic that if we've done nothing wrong we have nothing to fear.

They're the ones who signed up for a profession in a law enforcement organisation, to have their personal misconduct reflect badly on the whole service and to receive some training as to what that could be and how to avoid it. They should be at no risk of doing anything wrong so should have nothing to fear.

Same with the politicians and members of any other authority.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: MPS officers are citizens too

Fully agree they SHOULD be held to higher standards.

Sadly it does not work like that.

I do not live in London area, however I suspect similar applies - 2 of my women friends were police officers (one still is)

Although decades apart, both described a very misogynist & racist culture and plenty of turning a blind eye to colleague misdeeds - a whistle-blowers life would be made a total hell, the one who still works as a cop said only reason they put up with it is the good pay & pension, especially with no degree required (this is a relatively poor, predominately working class area, well paid jobs are uncommon - my IT job is remote, I would face a very long commute for a decent IT job that required in person attendance)*

AC obvs

* Family commitments mean that she does not want to leave the area.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: MPS officers are citizens too

2 of my women friends were police officers (one still is)

Does it means that one is no more your friend, one is no more a police officer, or one is no more a woman?

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: MPS officers are citizens too

Did you notice that the mass surveillance of citizen has now be put into the hands of the private sector?

in the good old USA, the police doesn't need to spend money on hardware to know everything you are doing, they just buy the information from the local data aggregator...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: MPS officers are citizens too

Of course. How else are we going to usher in this new papers please, social Credit score society. That we are being told will solve all crime, and heal the planet! All these benefits and more can be yours if you have no privacy and obey the narrative.

[MachDiamond]

Re: MPS officers are citizens too

"they just buy the information from the local data aggregator..."

Perhaps that's the reason there isn't a big push to put some constraints on the big data companies.

[jake]

One wonders what the ...

... Stasi would have done to get their hands on technology like this.

And to think that they only missed it by a couple decades.

Ah, well. I'm sure Five Eyes nations and their hangers-on will have fun making up for lost time ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: One wonders what the ...

As with the space program, the USA did recruit past Stasi members to work on mass surveillance tools...

[Anonymous Coward]

Coming to a workplace (very) near you soon.

I’m somewhat conflicted on this one.

If data collection and analysis on this scale can be used on the cops themselves, then employers will undoubtedly do the same in due course. Those data would then be available to the police, and other agencies who can request it.

Feels like the slope is a slippery one here, and any schadenfreude may be back to bite us in the backside.

[IGotOut]

Re: Coming to a workplace (very) near you soon.

Employers have been spying on their employees for a long time.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Coming to a workplace (very) near you soon.

> Feels like the slope is a slippery one here

Exactly. It's a textbook case of "first they came for the cops…"

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Coming to a workplace (very) near you soon.

First they came for the Communists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Communist

Then they came for the Socialists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a trade unionist

Then they came for the Grannies and Former Clergy

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a member of Palestine Action

Then they came for the Jews

And I did not speak out

Because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me

And there was no one left

To speak out for me

[Winkypop]

Seems a bit servere

1984 and all that.

[Moldskred]

Re: Seems a bit servere

"I never expected the boot to stamp on _my_face -- forever" sobs man wearing boots.

[JimmyPage]

Seems they can dish it out

But not take it.

Not quite sure how that is supposed to increase my respect ?

[Dan 55]

£489,999

What an odd amount for the contract. I wonder how that came about?

London's mayor Sadiq Khan was not consulted on the Palantir contract, which fell below the £500,000 threshold requiring mayoral scrutiny, according to the BBC. A spokesperson said Khan nonetheless has concerns about "using public money to support firms who act contrary to London's values."

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Re: £489,999

Very cheap, though not a bargain (£1/£60mil) as the Covid contract.

I smell something fishy

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: £489,999

At the same time there is a clamour for them to be slung out of the NHS, the Met are signing up….

[Strahd Ivarius]

Re: £489,999

It is like in France, where the government says that they need to go to a sovereign cloud and Linux, when the Ministry for Education signs a multi-year contract with Microsoft...

[Moldskred]

To quote an old guy in a top-hat:

"I have always thought that all men should be free; but if any should be slaves, it should be first those who desire it for themselves, and secondly, those who desire it for others. When I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally."

[M.V. Lipvig]

Re: To quote an old guy in a top-hat:

Same here, and that includes people complaining about paying more due to tariffs on nations that commit forced labor against school children. That's right China, looking at you!

[heyrick]

do not deserve to be treated with this level of suspicion

If anything, the Met has demonstrated, repeatedly, that a much greater degree of suspicion is completely justifiable.

[heyrick]

Re: do not deserve to be treated with this level of suspicion

After all, if one has nothing to hide....

...right?

[Aladdin Sane]

Re: do not deserve to be treated with this level of suspicion

Have we sent their writing to Cardinal Richelieu?

[TimMaher]

Re: “Cardinal Richelieu “

And don’t forget… nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: do not deserve to be treated with this level of suspicion

That's unfair, there are 1000s of officers in the Met. By shear chance, one or two of them must be innocent

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: do not deserve to be treated with this level of suspicion

If they are innocent, they will be charged for dereliction of duty!

[VoiceOfTruth]

The hypocrisy

>> This presumption of wrongdoing and attack on officer's personal lives is unacceptable.

The police presume everyone is guilty. The number of false arrests by the Met is startling. It reached such a level that the concept of 'de-arresting' had to be invented. That papered over the cracks. Instead, the Met should have been disbanded for wilful wrongdoing. Start again from scratch as the whole body of it is diseased.

Arrest and release? Bullshit.

[Red Or Zed]

Re: The hypocrisy

All police have an unshakable belief that everyone they are interacting with (by chasing, talking to, looking at or being on the same planet as) is a criminal. Their job is to deal with criminals, ergo if they are dealing with someone, that person is a criminal.

You may be a victim or bystander or going about your business, but if a police is interacting with you, it's because in their mind, you're a vile criminal. Either now, or in the past, or in the future.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The hypocrisy

"Innocent or guilty is just a matter of timing" was a line from the Stallone Judge Dredd movie. By a psycho wielding powers reserved for police.

If your views tie up with comically-insane movie villains, you should probably re-evaluate them!

[jake]

Re: The hypocrisy

"If your views tie up with lines from TV or movies, you should probably re-evaluate them!"

FTFY

[MutantAlgorithm]

Re: The hypocrisy

Obligatory Sir Pterry quote “Everyone was guilty of something. Vimes knew that. Every copper knew it. That was how you maintained your authority—everyone, talking to a copper, was secretly afraid you could see their guilty secret written on their forehead. You couldn’t, of course. But neither were you supposed to drag someone off the street and smash their fingers with a hammer until they told you what it was.”

[elsergiovolador]

Re: The hypocrisy

> The police presume everyone is guilty.

Except politicians and big corporations' top brass.

[Uncle Slacky]

Re: The hypocrisy

Or each other.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The hypocrisy

>> The police presume everyone is guilty.

> Except politicians and big corporations' top brass.

Oh they assume they're guilty too, but are well aware they're in the position to provide a "drink" or two.

[Claude Yeller]

Re: False arrests

"The number of false arrests by the Met is startling."

That's behavior on the job. No one is complaining about them being followed and observed during their jobs. The complaints are about surveillance in their private life.

Met officers have the same rights as other citizens.

And what is this thing about Freemasonry?

[Killfalcon]

Re: False arrests

Freemasonry is an odd side thing. Broad anti-corruption measure hitting against an honestly-held belief.

Basically there's a recent law-thing about Police officers not being _secretly_ members of social societies, and Freemasons are quite a big one on secret membership.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: False arrests

Freemasonry is a threat to Reform?

[Red Or Zed]

How are the Met managing to make me think well of Palantir? We live in a topsy-turvy world.

[elsergiovolador]

Polite

If only Police were doing their jobs...

It's kind of ironic.

Palantir has no business to operate in the UK and yet here we are.

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder how much of this useful information, aka potential leverage, finds its way back to Palantir.

[Anonymous Coward]

All of it, as per the standard contract.

[b1k3rdude]

"Courageous colleagues across London do not deserve to be treated with this level of suspicion by their Big Brother Bosses," said Matt Cane, the federation's general secretary, in a statement."

So the police dont like being spied on, but are fucking happy to do it to the general public... What a complete and utter self serving hypocritical and patronizing cnut of a statement, Oi Matt, how about you fuck off and do one mate.

[Anonymous Coward]

You’ll be getting arrested for threatening behaviour for that, and then de-arrested for overreach as being offensive is allowed in the UK.

Even being grossly offensive is fine, as long as you don’t cross any protected characteristic thresholds.

For the avoidance of doubt, being a ‘fucking slag copper’ is not a protected characteristic, and evidence who of the public was offended by that is required.

[Anonymous Coward]

May I point out that "the police" is not one homogenous blob.

What the force does as policy is decided by a relatively small number of people high up in the organisation. I strongly suspect that they somehow manage to exempt themselves from a lot of this.

The people lower down the tree who have to actually enact the policies may well have a different view. I certainly have "a view" on some of the policies my employer has. But unless one is prepared to walk away and find another job, or refuse to perform tasks as directed until you are sacked and forced to find another job, then you have to enact the policies even if you hate them.

Few have the luxury of being able to walk away from a reasonably well paid and secure job, with a good pension ... Personally, there are aspects of my job that I "very much dislike", but also the pay is reasonable and the pension good, and much of the job is OK - it would need a lot more dislikable aspects before I'd be prepared to sacrifice my ability to put food on the table by quitting.

[An_Old_Dog]

On the Job?

... flagging staff who rarely attend work and yet have declared a second job."

Don't they have any way other than officer-GPS-logging to figure out if they're not on the job when they should be?

And if they're not on the job when they should be, why are they being paid?

"TK-421, why aren't you at your post?"

[StewartWhite]

Re: On the Job?

"... flagging staff who rarely attend work and yet have declared a second job."

Like MPs you mean?

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Laptop (Faraday cage) bag

Put it into the bag once shift is finished.

icon: For added protection, line the helmet/cap with tin foil

[MachDiamond]

Re: Laptop (Faraday cage) bag

"Put it into the bag once shift is finished."

And then store it in a locker at the station. When off-duty, be off-duty. Leave data/bt/wi-fi off on the personal phone when not in use. If required to have an issued phone to carry when off, turn off connectivity and see about forwarding calls so it can live in a locker at work (not in a Faraday bag).

[M.V. Lipvig]

Question for the Brits

And this is because I don't know what the deal is.

Why is it a problem for the cops to be Freemasons?

[42656e4d203239]

Re: Question for the Brits

>>Why is it a problem for the cops to be Freemasons?

It isn't. What is a problem is for a cop, of any rank, to be a Freemason and not tell the appropriate people.

Trouble is there was quite a long period of time (like forever-ish) when there were some weird outcomes in Courts which, upon investigation, were related to the membership of that grand fraternal society. There were also instances where people were accused of serious crimes and the charges mysteriously went away, only for it later to be found that somone in the decision making chain had been on the square and level, as it were, and kyboshed to process; I seem to recall that those cases contributed to the argument for the establishment of the Crown Prosecution Service.

Now any of the allegations I have just made are from, now quite old, memory of newspaper reports when I was a young thing - there have been many beers and doors walked through since then, so I may be mis-remembering, and i do not intend to libel any of the organisations involved (which, to be fair, have never condoned, in public, such behaviour by their members).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Question for the Brits

Indeed, everything you are retelling is part of the lies about Freemasons propagated by the far right since the XIXth century.

Not that some didn't do such feats, but it is far less common than rich people doing the same, without being Freemasons themselves, just people of the good part of the English society.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Question for the Brits

"It isn't. What is a problem is for a cop, of any rank, to be a Freemason and not tell the appropriate people."

As much as I love the UK, I'm glad I don't live there. I don't see why I would have to list organizations I associate with outside of work. If they aren't highly controversial or banned, it shouldn't make a difference. By controversial, I mean something such as the KKK or NAMBLA, not the Freemasons or Boy Scouts.

The next step will be listing all of one's acquaintances with whom one interacts with more than once each year. Not "friends", just people that one might talk with or exchange an email.

[jake]

Re: Question for the Brits

One wonders why the freemasons are required to out themselves, but members of the RAOB are not.

What about the Catholics? The Scouts?

_{Personally, I'd never join one of these organizations in the first place ... unless it was a drinking society with a historical problem, of course.}

[WSWS]

Re: Question for the Brits

I don't think it's a problem for them to be one. It's a problem for them to fail to declare it as a potential conflict of interest.

[M.V. Lipvig]

Re: Question for the Brits

OK, makes sense. Thanks everyone.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Question for the Brits

Because judges, and lawyers, and magistrates, and mayors, and city/county/district/parish councillors, and many other influential people besides are also masons, and there are a great many blind eyes that can be turned. Is all.

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh???

> Additionally, 12 officers face gross misconduct proceedings for failing to declare Freemasonry membership

Wasn't the UK once a free country?

[JohnMurray]

Re: Huh???

Yeah, like membership of a secret society raised no red flags ever

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Huh???

This is not a secret society...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Huh???

> membership of a secret society

I would suggest that you inform yourself before opening your mouth and removing all doubt.

[42656e4d203239]

Re: Huh???

>>Wasn't the UK once a free country?

It still is.

Anyone can be a member of the Freemasons (obviously subject to whatever selection process goes on in that organisation) however if you are a cop (or employee of the police service) of any sort you must, as part of your Ts&Cs of employment, declare such membership.

Hence dealt with under gross misconduct for not declaring membership of the Freemasons, not gross misconduct for being a member of the Freemasons.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Huh???

> if you are a cop (or employee of the police service) of any sort you must, as part of your Ts&Cs of employment, declare such membership.

In civilised countries there is such a thing as freedom of association.

Freemasonry makes for a very handy bellwether. When a government starts viewing it with suspicion, you know that totalitarianism is never far away.

PS. À ceux et celles qui ont rendu hommage au Père-Lachaise vendredi : vivre libre ou mourir est plus d'actualité que jamais.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Huh???

> It still is.

Those who oppose genocide beg to disagree.

[Tubz]

Funny how Starmer's Gestapo demand 24/7 monitoring of the public, but when it's them, scream privacy invasion, hypocrites. "If nothing to hide, nothing to fear", isn't that their normal response, or are the coppers as corrupt and doing unlawful activities as the public suspect ?

[Killfalcon]

It's a police union, it's their nature.

[JohnMurray]

But --

It's OK to check every citizen in their journey across the UK...and to use video to literally check every citizen, and ANPR to follow every vehicle.

I forget, how many years is it since there was a month where no police were locked up for raping someone?

7?

[Anonymous Coward]

A spokesperson said Khan nonetheless has concerns about "using public money to support firms who act contrary to London's values."

Those will be the "values" that allow knife crime, burglary and shoplifting to spiral out of control?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep those values.

[teebie]

I was going to come here to add the traditional "if they have nothing to hide" switcheroo

But that list of corruptions is quite a lot to hide.

[b1k3rdude]

" A spokesperson said Khan nonetheless has concerns about "using public money to support firms who act contrary to London's values." - oh he does now does he? yet has no problems allowing the met us the same money to fck over the lives of Londoners. What a hypocritical khunt. As they say in Landan, "Khan needs to fck off and do one"

[Havin_it]

I believe "do one" is a Scouse formulation, actually.