Prior to the installation of CCTV surveillance in the city, municipal authorities and the private security agency in charge of the development of the surveillance system concluded that the main cause of violence in Huixquilucan was related to two factors: the actions of groups coming into the city from other areas and these groups recruiting local residents to commit crimes that often involved violence. This analysis caused the authorities to view CCTV surveillance in the city as a form of "border protection," whereby the entrance and exit of outsiders into various areas could be observed and assessed. The system was considered a tool for monitoring who entered and left the areas under surveillance, registering this information in a database that could be reviewed in investigating crimes in areas under surveillance. This means that the location of cameras, their ongoing operation, and the way the data are used is under the control of those who manage the surveillance system. Their judgments, priorities, self-interest, and biases determine how the system functions and who is targeted for intervention. This raises the issue of accountability and the right of citizens to control personal information that is collected by business and government agencies who manage the surveillance system. This article provides a case study in which a murder was committed in an area under CCTV surveillance in Huixquilucan, but was not observed by the cameras because officials involved in the murder were able to control the positioning of the camera at the time the murder was committed. 2 notes, 30 references