From now on, whenever a computer crime is suspected I'll make sure to forward your name as a lead on the off-chance that you had anything to do with the crime.
Policing should start from available evidence leading to suspects, not start from suspects to turn to see which match the evidence.
How exactly do you believe investigations work? You don't think that rounding up the usual suspects and asking questions is a legitimate investigative tool? There isn't always a direct link from the available evidence to a person. Should they just give up and close the case?
Let me put it another way; someone is stealing packages from your doorstep. You happen to be the neighbor of a person you know has been arrested for burglary. That fact doesn't even enter your thought process?
Past behavior is a good indicator of future behavior and the real world isn't CSI. Detectives need to follow any leads they can get their hands on.
Policing start from any leads available, not evidences. Evidences are used in a court of law.
It does provide leads to police officers, which is a great tool. Many criminals are recidivists and are already existing in the database.
Many police officers know their 'clientele' very well by face and name, so they can run checks on the computer anytime they want as long as it is justified. I don't see anything in using a automated way of doing it by picture.