{"id":1299621,"date":"2023-11-20T10:03:29","date_gmt":"2023-11-20T15:03:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.publicsource.org\/?p=1299621"},"modified":"2023-11-20T11:58:10","modified_gmt":"2023-11-20T16:58:10","slug":"shotspotter-pennsylvania-supreme-court-evidence-artificial-intelligence-ai","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.publicsource.org\/shotspotter-pennsylvania-supreme-court-evidence-artificial-intelligence-ai\/","title":{"rendered":"Pa. high court approves use of ShotSpotter report in North Side man\u2019s conviction, airs concerns"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court last week ruled that evidence derived from Pittsburgh\u2019s ShotSpotter gunshot detection system was properly allowed in the prosecution of a now-72-year-old North Side man, but two justices expressed concern about the admissibility of tech-derived reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The six sitting justices ruled unanimously that Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Judge Jill Rangos did not err when she allowed prosecutors to submit, and a City of Pittsburgh police officer testify regarding, a ShotSpotter-generated report in a case against Angelo Weeden. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

He was charged in a 2018 incident involving shots fired at a car in which a former romantic partner and others were riding. Court records indicate two bullet holes in the car door, but no injuries. A jury convicted him of aggravated assault and related charges, and Rangos sentenced him to 10 to 20 years of incarceration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
\n\n\n\t\n\t\t\t\t\t