'Facial Recognition' - Not Recognised by the Police Service?

'Change, increasing demands, financial constraints, - the service has heard it all before, and it will continue to do so, but just how effectively does it seek out and embrace technology to help it absorb and counter the demands placed upon it' asks Nigel Clarke, who until April 2005 was a Superintendent with Northamptonshire Police when he retired after 32 years service and is now actively involved with work linked to police reform.

The Police Service is not at the forefront of organisations when it comes to a corporate engagement with technology and science, however when it does the results can be quite remarkable, raising the effectiveness and the ability of the service to new levels. The most notable example in recent years being perhaps the developments in DNA which have provided an incredibly effective means of investigation. We should not forget however the range of technological advances in current use, ranging from the PNC, to Automatic Fingerprint Recognition, Airwave Communications and ANPR.
The latter being a prime example of a technology that is only now constrained by the resources that can be assigned to it, and having phenomenal potential as a means of investigation and detection.

Of similar potential is 'Facial Recognition'. As with any 'new' technology it has to develop and in its early days suffered from exaggerated claims as to its capability, but there are now facial recognition products 'which do what it says on the tin'. It can be seen working in the commercial world where it is used widely and effectively as a security measure, to prevent fraud, and save thousands of pounds against a minimal outlay. To be fair some forces are using the technology, with excellent results and investigation time saved. Others however have taken it but not as a strategic force initiative, with the result that as soon as its 'champion' moves on the system is relegated to a corner of an office and forgotten. Its service wide strategic benefits need to be recognised and progressed.

Why are forces, the service and indeed other government agencies not taking the concept of facial recognition forward? - 'It can't pick a face out of a crowd', 'it cannot spot people walking down the street on CCTV'. Maybe not, although with modern cameras correctly sited even some of this is now possible. It is also seen by some as another biometric gimmick. It is biometric technology but unlike Iris recognition and Vein recognition, ear or elbow prints the police service has an extensive data base of photographs (to which it adds daily), which can be readily adapted for use with the technology. It is accepted that there are some quality issues but these should be addressed with the introduction of common standards. The data base of photographs held by the police service, unlike fingerprints and DNA, is not routinely and automatically searched in the course of investigations, in many cases not even locally let alone nationally. That is not only grossly ineffective it is a total waste of an available resource, and the development of the national facial image data base will be almost pointless if it does not interface with facial recognition technology.

It is also now a proven technology, albeit at present limited in some applications, however as with any technology constant development will take it further. It is being used commercially to provide security in buildings, prevent fraud, combating retail crime, and producing huge savings in the process. As an investment to save it has further potential, with estimates of around £25k to install a system handling a data base of 100,000 photographs (a small force) to around £65k for a data base of half a million for a larger force it is hardly significant expenditure. Yet the benefits are significant for the efficiency of investigation, productivity and associated efficiency savings.

At a time when fraud, immigration, crime investigation/detection, and security are all significant issues for the Police Service and other government agencies it seems somewhat incongruous that a technological solution which has so much to offer is not being recognised and utilised to its fullest extent.

As with Fingerprints/AFR, DNA and ANPR there can be no doubt that one day it will become a key tool in the investigative tool kit. But can the service afford to wait until someone has the bright idea or it falls from the latest governmental thinking, whilst the commercial sector continues to reap the benefits of security, fraud prevention, efficiencies and substantial savings set against relatively little outlay

Nigel Clarke was a Superintendent with Northamptonshire Police until April 2005 when he retired after 32 years service. Prior to retirement he was the Staff Officer to the President of ACPO and also served with HMIC. He now provides consultancy as a Police Advisor and is actively involved with work linked to police reform.