Class-action Lawsuit filed by Michael Williams, Danny Ortiz, Lucy Parsons Labs against the City of Chicago over its continuing use of ShotSpotter is available here.

Data regarding the discriminatory deployment of ShotSpotter and the high rate of unfounded ShotSpotter deployments is detailed in an Amicus Brief filed on behalf of Lucy Parsons Labs. Brighton Park Neighborhood Council, and Organized Communities Against Deportation, in State v. Michael Wiliiams in May 2021.

Arguments for why ShotSpotter alerts should never be used to establish reasonable suspicion or probable cause to detain people under the Fourth Amendment, including information about the lack of any proper testing of ShotSpotter, are detailed in an Amicus Brief filed on behalf of the MacArthur Justice Center and Innocence Project in Commonwealth v. Ford in the Massachusetts Appeals Court in September 2021.

The Chicago Office of Inspector General published an in-depth investigation in August 2021 examining ShotSpotter’s utility as a law enforcement tool in the City of Chicago.

The South Side Weekly published a deeply-reported article in 2017 by Michael Wasney that included a careful analysis of ShotSpotter data from Chicago.

Forbes published a study in 2016 by Matt Drange examining data about ShotSpotter-initiated police deployments in seven cities.

A small number of academic studies have been done of ShotSpotter and related acoustic gunshot detection systems. Among the most recent are by Doucette et al. (2021), Mares & Blackburn (2020) and Ratcliffe et al. (2018), both published in the Journal of Experimental Criminology.