Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2018
Publication Title
Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law
Abstract
As with most new things, the big data revolution in criminal justice has historic antecedents—indeed, a 1965 Presidential Commission called for some of the same data analysis that police departments and courts are today developing and implementing. But there is no doubt we are on the precipice of a criminal justice data revolution, and it is a good time to take stock and to begin developing guidelines so that, as much as possible, criminal justice systems might reap the benefits and avoid the pitfalls of this newly data-centric world. In that spirit, I propose ten high-level rules to guide criminal justice big data implementations. Rule One: Bring Technology to the Problem Rule Two: Bring Only Credible Technology to the Problem Rule Three: The Decider Should Be Human Rule Four: The Code and Decision Algorithm Should Be Accessible (Though Not Necessarily Public) But the Decision Algorithm Need Not Be Explainable Rule Five: Any Technology Implementation Should Balance Costs and Benefits Rule Six: Any Proposal for Privacy-Based Restriction on Government Technology Should Consider Non-Government Use Rule Seven: Privacy Protections Should Not Be Limited to Acquisition Restraints—They Should Consider Robust Use Restrictions Rule Eight: Any Claim to First Amendment Rights in Consumer Data, Algorithms, or Algorithmic Results Should Be Opposed Rule Nine: Any Significant Technology Implementation Should Proceed Only With Public Notice and Comment Rule Ten: Most Decisions Should Be Made by the States
Volume
15
First Page
527
Recommended Citation
Stephen E. Henderson, A Few Criminal Justice Big Data Rules, 15 Ohio St. J. Crim. L. 527 (2018).