Wrongly Arrested Peppermill Casino Guest Seeks Names of 168 Others Flagged by Facial Recognition
A Nevada man who was wrongly arrested after being misidentified by facial recognition technology at Reno’s Peppermill Casino Resort is seeking the identities of 168 other people who were allegedly flagged by the system.
Jason Killinger has asked a federal judge to order the City of Reno to produce unredacted arrest reports and declarations of probable cause involving individuals identified by Peppermill’s facial recognition software.
The request forms part of Killinger’s lawsuit against Reno and police officer Richard Jager over his September 2023 arrest.
Nightmare Ordeal
Truck driver Killinger was flagged as a “100% match” to an individual named Michael Ellis who had been banned from the venue months earlier for sleeping on the premises.
Despite Killinger’s insistence that he had been misidentified, Jager refused to believe he was who he claimed to be and accused him of using fraudulent identification when he produced a valid Nevada Real ID, Peppermill player’s card, and debit card in his name.
Jager chose to trust in the powers of facial recognition software over material facts, such as that Killinger is four inches taller than his doppelganger and has blue eyes rather than hazel.
Killinger was jailed for nearly nine hours and spent more than three hours in handcuffs, which left him with bruising and shoulder pain, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit alleges that even after a fingerprint check at the Washoe County jail confirmed Killinger’s true identity, Jager filed a police report claiming Killinger had presented conflicting identification to Peppermill security.
After settling out of court with Peppermill, Killinger sued Jager and later added the City of Reno, alleging the city failed to properly train officers on facial recognition and continued pursuing criminal allegations against him even after his true identity had been confirmed.
Searching for a Pattern
In April, Killinger’s lawyers requested arrest records involving the 168 people cited or transported to the Reno Police Department following facial recognition identifications at Peppermill.
Reno provided more than 1,000 pages of records but removed names and personal identifying information from the documents.
Killinger’s lawyers argue the city had no right to make those redactions without first seeking a protective order from the court.
Defendants redacted the arrestees’ identities from responsive documents without ever seeking a protective order,” Killinger’s motion states, arguing that the identities are needed because the individuals could be witnesses to an alleged pattern of arrests based on facial recognition technology.
The plaintiff argues that the 168 individuals are “percipient witnesses” whose experiences could help establish whether Reno had a wider practice involving facial recognition-based arrests.
Their identities are also relevant, his lawyers argue, because Killinger is seeking injunctive relief and has indicated he may pursue class-action claims.
Reno Pushes Back
In a response filed August 14, Deputy City Attorney Alice Herbolsheimer said the city had already compromised by producing the reports despite disputing their relevance.
She said Peppermill had provided only arrest dates, times, and initials for the individuals, while refusing to provide names because of privacy concerns.
Meanwhile, only 16 of the 168 arrests occurred before Killinger’s incident, meaning later claims could not establish that Reno had notice of a facial recognition problem at the time of his arrest, according to Herbolsheimer.
The judge has yet to rule on Killinger’s request.
