The original note (Series A) talks about retention, ~~not collection~~.
>... directing concerned personnel to retain information gleaned from social media that “may disappear before, during, or after a crime.” The memo advises that retaining this information enables investigators to obtain a warrant for a social media account more easily.
> The I-Series includes two documents relating to Field Interview
> (FI) cards. LAPD officers fill out FI cards to document people they
> have stopped or questioned; these cards can be completed on anyone
> an officer comes into contact with. The first document is a July
> 2020 memo from the Chief of Police, Michel Moore, to all LAPD
> personnel. In the memo, Chief Moore urges officers to diligently
> record all information in the FI cards, which would be subject to
> review by Department supervisors “for completeness and validity.”
> As noted above, former Police Chief Charlie Beck had sent officers
> a memo in May 2015 telling them to collect social media and email
> account information in FI cards. The second document is a copy of
> the FI card form, which shows that LAPD is gathering subjects’ date
> of birth and social security number, with a disclaimer stating that
> subjects are obligated to provide their social security numbers
> upon an officer’s request. The FI cards also have a field to collect
> social media and email account information. The Brennan Center
> surveyed other cities’ policies regarding FI cards and found no
> other police department that collects social media and email account
> information, though details are sparse.
It's weird that the actual index card[1] seems to contradict that paragraph. There aren't separate fields for social media info and email addresses. They're just both listed as examples of what to put in the "Additional Info" field.
TBH I think the Guardian article is a bit alarmist. Basically they're combining the implications of a pair of memos:
1. A memo from 2015 basically saying "We're updating the description of the additional info field to suggest that you collect someone's email address or social media names"
2. A memo from a different chief 5 years later, basically saying "please don't get lazy and put incomplete or inaccurate info down when you fill out these forms". My perception of the July 2020 memo is that the Chief encouraging cops to CYA when talking to witness about what happened at last summer's protests. Anyone who has worked in a documentation-heavy bureaucracy has probably seen similar memos.
Sure, it's technically true that the second memo is encouraging LAPD to be more thorough when filling out the forms. But it's not like there's an expectation for everything on the card to be filled out (for example, if you're just walking down the street they're not going to arrest you because they're afraid to leave the "booking number" field blank[2]).
FWIW I've had multiple interactions with LAPD and they've never asked for my social media, email, gang affiliation, booking number, or anything on this form other than "Name".
[2]: However LAPD did get caught fabricating gang affiliations that didn't exist, which IMO is a much more outcry-worthy problem than a cop trying to see if you posted evidence of lawbreaking on your public Instagram
The original note (Series A) talks about retention, ~~not collection~~.
>... directing concerned personnel to retain information gleaned from social media that “may disappear before, during, or after a crime.” The memo advises that retaining this information enables investigators to obtain a warrant for a social media account more easily.