ShotSpotter is a technology service that uses hidden microphones to detect potential guns and alert law enforcement agencies in real time. Complaint filed on Monday According to a copy obtained by the Daily Beast, it is suing Voice over a series of articles casting doubt on service practices and effectiveness. The lawsuit was filed in Delaware Superior Court.
Ralph Clark, CEO of ShotSpotter, told the Daily Beast in a brief interview: What, business damage and damage to our reputation. ” “It has also damaged our company’s enterprise value, causing our stock price to fall.”
Voice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Over the years, Voice’s tech news and research vertical motherboard has written at least six articles about the surveillance service. A similar report alleges that some cities are installing shotspot audio sensors. Almost exc exclusively in non-white neighborhoods. And creating false shooting warnings that led to the deployment of armed police in such areas. (In his lawsuit, the spot shooter claimed that the voice was “carelessly ignored or deliberately concealed” such as the supervisory company has a black CEO and “oversight of the board in which Including the president of the largest civil rights organization in the United States, the lives of black gun victims, and [has] Black people were acquitted of crimes they did not commit.
But Monday’s case is largely focused. A motherboard article. It suggests that, at the behest of police departments, ShotSpotter has in many cases altered the data in ways that “appear to be in the grip of evidence.” [law enforcement’s] The story of events. ”
Voice’s articles rely heavily on publicly available court documents and the testimony of experts and public defenders who have raised issues with the reliability of shotspotter technology. But the audio surveillance company claimed that Voice misrepresented the citations, and failed to highlight examples where the company’s technology was successfully used in both prosecution and defense. (Motherboard. involved in Statistics provided in at least one company story about ShotSpotter.)
The lawsuit alleges that Voice’s defamatory implications for Shotspotter were incorrect. “Shotspotter does not shoot or alter evidence. No court has ever concluded otherwise, nor have shotspot experts ever testified otherwise.”
Even before Motherboard articles, Shots Potter’s technology has been a magnet for controversy and criticism. As a publication. pointed outMany cities, including Charlotte, North Carolina, San Antonio, Texas Troy, New York and others, have not renewed their contracts with ShotSpotter.
Shot Spotter is represented by Claire Lock, a law firm that has become notorious in media circles for its aggressive advocacy in defamation cases against media companies.
As the Daily Best. Reported in 2018., The firm successfully “neutered” a The Washington Post. Story about 60 minutes Executive producer Jeff Fager, who hired a law firm to investigate an alleged mismanagement. The firm also represented the former. Today Show host Matt Lauer and New York Times Reporter Glenn Thursh, who was previously accused of sexual misconduct in reporting to major news outlets.