c/Independent_Media · by Wren@lemmy.today · 1d

Man Charged With 3 Felonies For Breaking 3D-Printed ‘Decoy’ Flock Camera

https://www.404media.co/man-charged-with-3-felonies-for-breaking-3d-printed-decoy-flock-camera/

A police department in Florida used “decoy” Flock cameras that an officer 3D-printed at home to “bait” would-be vandals. Police officers monitored the fake cameras for days, then charged a man with three felonies after he cut down and destroyed one of the plastic devices. The police department in question refuses to release any information about how the decoy operation was devised or carried out and claims there is zero paper trail whatsoever about the operation.

59 points · 10 comments · view on lemmy.world

10 Comments

rumschlumpel@feddit.org · 33 pts · 23h (1 reply)

claims there is zero paper trail whatsoever about the operation.

Absurd that this is supposed to be a defense for what they're doing ...

Wren@lemmy.today · 14 pts · 23h

There's a bunch of funny bullshit going on in this operation. The man could be charged with destroying a public art piece, I doubt they could nail him with the full cost of an actual flock camera like they want to. But here's the real reason the police aren't giving up the paper trail:

"My 2 cents: there are 2 completely separate issues in play here, and they're tangled up in an unfortunate way. ISSUE 1: VANDALISM IS WRONG. I don't care if it's a Flock camera, a piece of art, or graffiti in a public space, it's not right. The police caught a person who engaged in destroying public property, and that's what we hired them to do. They did their job,” she wrote. “ISSUE 2: on Monday, just days before this incident, a majority of COUNCIL AGREED TO CONSIDER ENDING FLOCK. There is a timeline of events related to installing decoy cameras, and somewhere in that timeline, City Council instructed staff to prepare a resolution to end the use of Flock in Oviedo. While it is irrelevant to the issue of vandalism, when the fake cameras were fabricated and installed relative to a very public discussion about their potential discontinuation is something I would like to know.”

DarkCloud@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 22h (1 reply)

Massive amount of work protecting a horrible corporation that they wouldn't do for you or someone you loved!

They don't do this when someone's house is attacked. They don't put this effort into protecting vulnerable people. They only gove VIP service to wealthy people and their companies.

piccolo@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 21h

If they put this much effort into investigations... they wouldnt need flock cameras to begin with. Strange that.

TheJesusaurus@piefed.ca · 12 pts · 23h (1 reply)

I guess good lucky proving shit all in court? Goddamn pigs

thesohoriots@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 21h

“They broke my legos!”

20cello@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 22h

Acab

Hansae@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 7h

No no im pretty sure this particular individual was at the pub with me when this apparantly happened, cant have been him!

resipsaloquitur@lemmy.cafe · 1 pts · 2h (1 reply)

What’s the charge?

Wren@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 2h

It's in the article.