Faulty Facial Recognition Technology Led to Man's False Arrest. Then He Was Sexually Assaulted in Jail: Suit

Mar. 15, 2025

Photo:Smith Collection/Gado/Getty

Facade of Sunglass Hut store in San Ramon, California, September 5, 2019

Smith Collection/Gado/Getty

According to his complaint, Sunglass Hut’s parent company EssilorLuxottica worked with Macy’s to positively identify him as one of the robbers using facial recognition software, theHouston Chroniclereported.

A Sunglass Hut employee also picked him out of a photo lineup, though Murphy Jr.’s attorneys, Rusty Hardin & Associates, claimed that the employee met with a loss prevention team beforehand, possibly tainting the investigation.

“I almost thought it was a joke,” Murphy Jr. told the Guardian of his arrest.

Murphy Jr. told The Guardian that he did not report what happened due to the fear of being retaliated against. “That was kind of terrifying,” he told the outlet. “Your anxiety is up so high, you’re still shaking the entire time. And I just got up on my bunk and just faced the wall and was just praying that something would come through and get me out of that tank.”

Rusty Hardin & Associates did not immediately respond to PEOPLE’s request for comment.

Murphy Jr.’s attorney at the firm, Daniel Dutko, said in a statement to CBS News: “Mr. Murphy’s story is troubling for every citizen in this country. Any person could be improperly charged with a crime based on error-prone facial recognition software just as he was.”

His attorneys claimed that error-prone facial recognition software and low-quality cameras contributed to the mistake, along with other factors during the robbery’s investigation, according to theHouston Chronicle.

Want to keep up with the latest crime coverage? Sign up forPEOPLE’sfree True Crime newsletterfor breaking crime news, ongoing trial coverage and details of intriguing unsolved cases.

He is seeking $10 million for alleged negligence, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment and gross negligence, the outlets report

Macy’s said in a statement to PEOPLE that it could not comment on “pending litigation” while EssilorLuxottica did not immediately respond to PEOPLE’s request for comment.

source: people.com