{"id":150366,"date":"2025-08-16T11:29:23","date_gmt":"2025-08-16T11:29:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/150366\/"},"modified":"2025-08-16T11:29:23","modified_gmt":"2025-08-16T11:29:23","slug":"chicago-settles-shotspotter-lawsuit-considers-bringing-gunshot-detection-system-back","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/150366\/","title":{"rendered":"Chicago settles ShotSpotter lawsuit, considers bringing gunshot-detection system back"},"content":{"rendered":"

The city of Chicago settled a lawsuit Friday that claimed police used the ShotSpotter gunshot-detection system as a pretext for unlawful stops \u2014 even as Mayor Brandon Johnson\u2019s administration considers bringing the technology back.<\/p>\n

The city settled the case for $90,000, according to city Law Department spokesperson Kristen Cabanban. However, a lawyer for the plaintiffs said a concession from the city was equally important as the monetary compensation..<\/p>\n

\u201cWe were able to get the city to agree that a ShotSpotter alert does not give police justification to stop or pat down someone who happens to be near the location of the alert,\u201d said Daniel Massoglia, director of the civil rights clinic at First Defense Legal Aid. <\/p>\n

\u201cI think that will be huge for many, many Chicago residents because what we saw when ShotSpotter was in operation, we saw repeatedly police stops that violated the Fourth Amendment.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\"Capt.<\/p>\n

Capt. Steven Sesso operates the Shotspotter system at the Harrison district on the West Side in 2017.<\/p>\n

Frank Main\/Sun-Times file<\/p>\n

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in July 2022, was brought by Daniel Ortiz and Derick Scruggs and named five Chicago police officers, along with the city.<\/p>\n

Ortiz was outside a Schorsch Village laundromat when he was handcuffed, frisked and ultimately arrested on drug charges after two police officers responded to a ShotSpotter alert. <\/p>\n

The officers, Harsimran Powar and Michael Matias, searched Ortiz\u2019s car and found marijuana and a bottle of prescription drugs before taking him into custody and impounding his car. The charges against Ortiz, then 36, were dropped the next day, according to the lawsuit.<\/p>\n

Scruggs was working as a security guard at an AutoZone in Englewood when he was arrested by officers responding to a ShotSpotter alert, according to the lawsuit. <\/p>\n

After questioning and searching Scruggs, Officers Fidel Legorreta and Theodore Andrews Jr. let him go, the suit states. However, they returned the next day and arrested Scruggs for a violation related to his security guard paperwork. <\/p>\n

Those charges were dropped two months later. But by that time, Scruggs had lost his job and was unable to work as a security guard because of the arrest, according to the suit.<\/p>\n

ShotSpotter has been controversial for years, with some alleging the technology is faulty<\/a> and unfairly targets minority neighborhoods.<\/p>\n

A 2021 report by the city\u2019s inspector general\u2019s office was critical of the technology<\/a>, finding that \u201cCPD responses to ShotSpotter alerts can seldom be shown to lead to investigatory stops which might have investigative value and rarely produce evidence of a gun-related crime.\u201d<\/p>\n

Johnson campaigned on getting rid of ShotSpotter and has referred to the technology as \u201ca walkie-talkie on a pole\u201d<\/a> and a waste of taxpayer money. He made good on his campaign promise when he let the ShotSpotter contract lapse<\/a> in September 2024, but his administration has since opened up bidding<\/a> on a new contract for gunshot-detection technology. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\"Chicago<\/p>\n

Chicago police Supt. Larry Snelling and Mayor Brandon Johnson in 2023. Johnson campaigned on getting rid of ShotSpotter and has referred to the technology as \u201ca walkie-talkie on a pole\u201d<\/a> and a waste of taxpayer money. <\/p>\n

Pat Nabong\/Sun-Times file<\/p>\n

Eight firms, including ShotSpotter\u2019s parent company, SoundThinking, have submitted bids<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In an earnings call this week, SoundThinking officials reported recent losses but said they were pursuing \u201cpotential new contracts, including a significant opportunity in Chicago.\u201d <\/p>\n

\u201cWhile no formal decision has been made, we are entering the next phase with growing confidence and a strong belief that our technology is unmatched and aligned with the city of Chicago stated needs,\u201d SoundThinking CEO Ralph Clark told investors, referring to the ongoing procurement process.<\/p>\n

ShotSpotter and its parent company weren\u2019t named in the lawsuit, but Massoglia said his firm will consider bringing a suit again if the city activates another gunshot-detection system.<\/p>\n

\u201cI can say that our lawsuit focused on a challenge to the way the city of Chicago used ShotSpotter,\u201d Massoglia said. \u201cThe way it was deployed in a racially disparate way. The settlement doesn\u2019t prevent us from bringing another lawsuit challenging Chicago police surveillance. We\u2019ll be watching closely.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The city of Chicago settled a lawsuit Friday that claimed police used the ShotSpotter gunshot-detection system as a…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":150367,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5124],"tags":[960,5386,1818],"class_list":{"0":"post-150366","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-chicago","8":"tag-chicago","9":"tag-il","10":"tag-illinois"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115038215481066855","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/150366","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=150366"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/150366\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/150367"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=150366"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=150366"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=150366"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}