MEDIA ARTICLE: Police Accused of Misusing Flock Cameras Across 12 States (Newsweek, 7-31-26)

News Article

Police Accused of Misusing Flock Cameras Across 12 States

Published Jul 30, 2026 at 10:09 AM EDT

updated Jul 31, 2026 at 04:45 AM EDT

 

By Alice Gibbs

Senior Reporter

Police officers in at least 12 states have faced allegations of misusing Flock Safety license plate reader systems, according to a Newsweek review of recent criminal cases, internal investigations and disciplinary actions.

The cases span Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin, and include allegations that officers improperly accessed license plate data for personal purposes, including tracking romantic partners, relatives or acquaintances.

Flock Safety's automated license plate reader network continues to expand across the United States. The technology is used by thousands of law enforcement agencies to identify stolen vehicles, locate missing persons and generate investigative leads.

The allegations come amid a broader national debate over Flock Safety's rapidly expanding network of license plate reader cameras. The technology has faced growing scrutiny from lawmakers, civil liberties groups and local governments, with some communities moving to reject or remove Flock systems and several Republican lawmakers calling for tighter restrictions on their use.

Garrett Langley, Flock Safety's founder and CEO, said the recent cases were concerning but argued they also demonstrate that oversight systems are working.

"It's a disappointing story when I see it, but I also go, look, this is working," Langley said in a statement sent to Newsweek. "This is showing that if you use a tool like Flock or other tools, you should be held accountable, regardless of whether you have a badge or you don't."

Georgia Has Become a Major Flashpoint

Several of the most prominent recent cases have emerged from Georgia, where audits and internal reviews have led to a series of arrests and firings involving officers accused of improperly accessing license plate reader databases.

Authorities have announced cases involving agencies in Albany, Cherokee County, DeKalb County, Greene County and Fayetteville.

DeKalb County authorities recently announced the arrest of former Sgt. Kabiru Salawu following an investigation into alleged unauthorized use of the agency's Flock system. "The public expects and deserves integrity from every member of this agency," Sheriff Melody Maddox said after the arrest of Salawu. "The misuse of law enforcement technology or confidential information for any unauthorized purpose is a serious breach of the public's trust and will not be tolerated."

Cases Continue to Surface in Other States

Recent allegations have also emerged elsewhere in the country.

In North Carolina, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Officer Seth Elliott was arrested after investigators alleged he conducted an unauthorized license plate query using the Flock system and the state's CJLEADS database.

CMPD Chief Estella Patterson said misuse of law enforcement technology represented "a betrayal of the public's trust and a violation of everything this profession stands for." She added that anyone found to have violated that trust would be held accountable.

Court documents filed this week outline additional allegations, stating that Elliott looked up an undercover officer’s license plate information in both Flock and CJLEADS and passed it to the subject of a drug investigation in Watauga County.

According to an affidavit, an alleged dealer had grown suspicious of a buyer and asked Elliott to run the plate; investigators say Elliott did so, learned the buyer was an undercover officer, and then relayed that information back to the dealer. CMPD confirmed Elliott is now on unpaid administrative leave.

In Alabama, separate investigations in Moody and Springville resulted in one officer being terminated and another resigning after audits found alleged violations involving license plate reader systems. Officials in both departments said the matters were referred to the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency.

Springville Police Chief Jason Mize told Newsweek that the officer in his department had used the system "for personal use on a family member" and that the family member was notified. He added that members of the department have been reminded of best practice use of Flock systems and added: "Flock cameras are a very good, useful tool for us in crime fighting. I hate to see that something like this has happened."

Other recent cases have involved a former Orange City officer in Florida accused of using the system to monitor a romantic interest, as well as a former Costa Mesa police officer, Robert Jay Josett, in California who pleaded guilty after prosecutors alleged he used Flock technology and other law enforcement databases to track a woman with whom he had a relationship.

Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer said the case demonstrated the risks posed when officials misuse sensitive databases. "No one should have to live in fear of being tracked through law enforcement databases by someone with a badge and a gun because they decided to call off a romantic relationship," Spitzer said following Josett's guilty plea.

In Kansas, former Kechi Police Lt. Victor Heiar was convicted after authorities said he used Flock technology to track his estranged wife. Current Police Chief Braden Moore, who was not with the department at the time, told Newsweek: "The system should have never been used in that capacity." Moore added that while the agency no longer has access to Flock systems, "Flock is an amazing tool for law enforcement to catch and track the criminal element, but I also believe that there is great responsibility for agencies that use the system."

Backlash And Risk Warnings

Civil liberties advocates argue that the recent cases raise broader concerns about access to vehicle-tracking databases, while lawmakers in several states have pushed for stricter oversight of automated license plate reader systems and the data they collect.

Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky recently introduced legislation that would deny certain federal funding to law enforcement agencies that use Flock Safety license plate readers, arguing that mass collection of vehicle location data raises significant privacy concerns. At the state level, several Republican lawmakers have also proposed legislation aimed at limiting data retention, restricting sharing agreements or increasing transparency around license plate reader use.

Michael Soyfer, an attorney with the Institute for Justice, said the growing number of cases suggests the problem extends far beyond a handful of rogue officers. He told Newsweek that recent scandals are "clearly part of a broader pattern and probably just the tip of the iceberg," pointing to years of limited oversight over license plate reader databases. According to Soyfer, many departments only began uncovering misuse after introducing audits of officer searches, leading to a surge in identified cases. "Given that officers typically only enter vague reasons for their searches, like 'investigation' or 'criminal justice,' there is almost certainly much more abuse that never gets caught," he said.

"Letting the police police themselves doesn't work," Soyfer said, arguing that stronger legal protections are needed.

Chad Marlow, senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, previously told Mother Jones that location-tracking systems can expose highly sensitive information about people's lives. "The tracking of an individual vehicle, as it moves throughout an area, can reveal very deeply personal and private information, not only about the vehicle but the person operating it. That is Flock at its most dangerous," Marlow said.

Langley said the company created its Audit Assistance Tool after hearing calls for greater accountability. "We heard from customers, loud and clear. We heard from communities, loud and clear. Flock should do more. There should be more responsibility, more accountability built in," he said.

Newsweek has contacted key agencies named in this article for comment.

Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Tobias Meyjes and Emma Lee-Sang

Update 07/30/26, 10:20 a.m. ET: This story was updated with comment from Flock and additional police forces.

 https://www.newsweek.com/flock-camera-police-arrests-12263782

READ FULL ARTICLE →

MEDIA ARTICLE: A 72-year-old criticizes Florida’s wildlife agency. They searched his personal data 34 times (Tampa Bay Times, 7-31-26)

Jim Watt, a 72-year-old retired turtle farmer, estimates he has been to more than 30 wildlife commission meetings over the years. The agency he criticizes over their handling of aquatic herbicide spraying has pulled his personal information more than 30 times. [ Courtesy of Jim Watt ]

 

1. News
2. Environment

A 72-year-old criticizes Florida’s wildlife agency. They searched his personal data 34 times

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission said sweeping record searches of outspoken environmental activists were “conducted for public safety purposes.”

By

• Max ChesnesTimes staff
  Published 5 hours ago

Like he had a dozen times before, Jim Watt stood behind the lectern and addressed Florida’s wildlife commission.

“Good day, commissioners,” he began.

“As you know, my name is Jim Watt, and this is my 13th time in front of you, pleading with you to stop killing our wildlife and destroying their habitats with dangerous pesticides,” Watt told the governor-appointed board.

The concerns raised by the retired turtle farmer during his 3-minute speech were the same as always: The state is spraying too many harmful chemicals into waterways in the name of curbing invasive plants.

“In spite of all my pleading over the years, nothing changes,” Watt told the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission at its Oct. 5, 2023 meeting in Jensen Beach.

What Watt didn’t know at the time was, just 14 days earlier, an agency staffer had pulled his personal records from a state database used by police when investigating suspects.

The reason given for the search? “Criminal investigation.”

It wasn’t the first time the wildlife agency accessed Watt’s personal data: Staff had pulled his vehicle information three months earlier.

It wouldn’t be the last time, either. Since that October 2023 commission meeting, records show, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has pulled Watt’s data 30 more times.

Jim Watt will be the first to tell you he's passionate about Florida's wildlife. But the 72-year-old retired turtle farmer says he has never made threats against the Florida wildlife comission. [ Courtesy of Jim Watt ]

The 72-year old isn’t alone.

He is one of more than 20 people, mostly environmental activists and the agency’s loudest critics, whose information has been pulled from the Driver and Vehicle Information Database in recent years under the label of a criminal investigation.

That’s according to public records gathered by a coalition of affected activists and shared with the Tampa Bay Times, which has independently verified Watt’s records with the Florida Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles. The Miami Herald and Orlando Sentinel first reported the searches July 18.

Law enforcement uses the database to retrieve driver information, but the system also includes signatures, social security numbers and medical data. The information is sensitive, so public access is regulated by the federal Driver Privacy Protection Act.

Watt isn’t under criminal investigation, Shannon Knowles, a spokesperson for the wildlife agency, confirmed to the Times. Neither are other activists who had their information accessed, she has told other media outlets. The Times has submitted records requests to determine whether past investigations occurred but has yet to receive a response.

Watt spends his retirement poring over state records about chemical spraying. He then brings his findings into the public square. It’s basically his full-time job: “I’m tenacious — and I know it," he said in an interview.

“I am a real thorn in their ass, sure. But I have never, ever threatened anybody.”

The searches have raised questions about free speech, a potential abuse of law enforcement tools and where the line exists between investigating credible threats and surveilling outspoken environmental critics.

State staffers appear to have pulled Watt’s data more than any other environmental activist in the records: 34 times between June 2023 and February 2025. That’s according to a running tally from the group of activists who were searched, with inquiries into other critics including Chuck O’Neal, a founder of Speak Up Wekiva, and Ryan Worthington, host of the The Florida Excursionist conservation podcast.

The records detail a sustained pattern of inquiries into Watt. In February 2024, for example, a wildlife staff crime analyst sought information about his vehicles. A year later, a separate staffer sought his addresses. One day, in January 2025, staff accessed 16 records.

The records show who searched Watt’s records, when and why, with a field for the agency to track the purpose of every inquiry. All of the searches list “criminal investigation” as a reason.

In a statement, the agency defended its use of the state database to pull information on outspoken activists, saying the inquiries were “conducted for public safety purposes” for recurring commission meetings.

“Assessing credible threats to the people who attend our meetings and work in our facilities is a legitimate and lawful function of law enforcement, and we take every threat seriously,” the agency said in a statement separate from Knowles’ comments to the Times.

A sign paid for by Bear Warriors United is displayed on a digital billboard near the site of a Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission meeting in Ocala last year. [ DOUGLAS R. CLIFFORD | Times ]

While Watt is a regular attendee of commission meetings, others who had their records pulled are not.

Wildlife staff accessed Brent Fannin’s records seven times via the database, he said. The documentary filmmaker, whose 2024 film scrutinized the agency’s handling of gopher tortoise permits for developers, said he’s never been to a commission meeting.

“I think it’s clear that the unchecked power that (the agency) has is being abused by the powerful people that run it,” Fannin said.

Months after he helped write a legislative proposal that would have reformed who can be appointed to the wildlife board, Fannin said he got an anonymous email that he was under criminal investigation. That led him down a path to confirming that he, along with more than 20 others so far, had their records accessed.

“What is supposed to be a conservation organization is being weaponized to surveil any opponents of development interests,” Fannin said.

In response to media reports and heightened public scrutiny, the wildlife agency last week released a redacted document with a sampling of 17 threats made against it on social media. The Times has requested a copy of the document with the names visible but has not yet received one.

The agency has justified its data searches in statements to reporters by saying its employees have been doxed and that a wildlife commissioner’s business was “targeted” via a protest and negative reviews.

The wildlife agency has faced intense public scrutiny over spraying aquatic herbicides in the past. In July 2023, it stopped publicly posting its schedule of where and when Florida’s waterways would be sprayed.

Officials made the decision over “ongoing threats and harassment” to staff and herbicide contractors, Knowles said.

Roger Young, executive director of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, left, Rodney Barreto, chairperson of the agency, and George Warthen, the agency’s chief conservation officer, attend a public meeting of the commission last year at the College of Central Florida in Ocala, where commissioners presented and discussed proposed rules to reinstate a limited-entry black bear hunt—the first since 2015. [ DOUGLAS R. CLIFFORD | Times ]

One of the example comments the agency provided to the Times is about using the chemicals in Florida waters: “If you hang the people spraying, they will stop,” the person wrote. It’s not clear who made the comment, or on what platform.

Watt said he didn’t write any of the threats the agency provided and has “never remotely threatened anybody.”

“I can’t control what people say on Facebook,” he said. “I’m very outspoken, but I don’t want to hurt anybody.”

The Times ran a criminal background check on Watt and found a misdemeanor vagrancy arrest from 1971, when he was 17 in Key West. He had a misdemeanor arrest for hitchhiking four days later.

“I didn’t have a vehicle or gas to put in it. I had hair down to my butt. I did it all for the adventure,” Watt said.

When asked whether the agency believed Watt was responsible for the threat — or if the agency could provide examples of violent threats he made that would prompt a criminal investigation — Knowles said: “Ongoing threats and harassment are not specific to one individual.”

At least one Democratic lawmaker has pushed for an investigation.

In a letter to agency head Col. Roger Young on Wednesday, Sen. Carlos Guillermo Smith, D-Orlando, asked the commission to clarify its use of the database. Calling it “baseless surveillance of environmental activists,” Smith said he filed a complaint with the Office of Inspector General.

Activists who have had their information accessed are also planning to sue.

Katrina Shadix, executive director of the nonprofit Bear Warriors United, had her personal information accessed at least 17 times in the driver database, according to the group’s analysis. Shadix said they hope to file a suit against the agency within a week.

“If they’re threatened by bear-loving tree huggers, they need to get out of their line of work and go somewhere they feel safer,” Shadix said. “We love trees and animals.”

The Tampa Bay Times launched the Environment Hub in 2025 to focus on some of Florida‘s most urgent and enduring challenges. You can contribute through our journalism fund by clicking here.

• 

  Max Chesnes is the Tampa Bay Times' environment and climate reporter, covering public lands, water quality, wildlife and everything in between. Reach him at mchesnes@tampabay.com or follow him on Instagram @MaxChesnes.

• https://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/2026/07/31/fwc-secretly-searching-peoples-records/?utm_source=NewsAlerts&utm_medium=Sailthru&utm_campaign=073126_NewsAlerts_fwc

READ FULL ARTICLE →

MEDIA ARTICLE: Flock AI License Plate Readers: Police Misuse Cases Emerge in June 2026 (UTICA Phoenix, 6-25-26)

Flock AI License Plate Readers: Police Misuse Cases Emerge in June 2026

ByDavid Laguerre

June 25, 2026

Multiple U.S. police officers have been arrested for using Flock AI license plate reader systems to stalk romantic partners, with investigators identifying at least 18 confirmed cases nationwide. A June 2026 report from Tom’s Hardware brought renewed attention to this pattern, which sits alongside separate revelations about unauthorized data sharing, public data leaks, and AI misreads that have put Flock Safety under intense scrutiny this year.

What Is Flock Safety and Why Are These Misuse Cases Alarming?

Flock Safety is an Atlanta-based company that sells automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras to police departments, homeowners associations, and municipalities across the country. The cameras capture plate numbers, vehicle descriptions, and location data, feeding that information into a searchable database that law enforcement can query in real time.

The system is now one of the most widely deployed surveillance tools in American policing. That scale is exactly what makes the pattern of misuse documented in the Flock AI License Plate Readers: Police Misuse Cases Emerge in June 2026 coverage so concerning.

Why it matters: When officers can query a system that tracks where any vehicle has been, that power can easily be turned against private citizens, including ex-partners, neighbors, or anyone an officer wants to monitor without a warrant.

How Are Officers Misusing Flock to Stalk Romantic Partners?

The core abuse is straightforward and deeply troubling. Officers log into the Flock system using their legitimate department credentials, then run searches on vehicles belonging to people they have personal relationships with, often ex-partners or people they are in conflict with outside of work.

According to a 2026 report from Tom’s Hardware, investigators have confirmed at least 18 such cases across multiple U.S. jurisdictions [7]. Officers in these cases were arrested, fired, or placed under investigation after audits revealed searches that had no legitimate law enforcement purpose.

The pattern looks like this:

• Officer runs repeated queries on a specific plate number
• Searches occur outside normal duty hours or without an associated case number
• The plate belongs to a person the officer knows personally
• No criminal investigation justifies the search

This is not a one-state problem. Cases have surfaced in departments of varying sizes, from large urban forces to smaller suburban agencies [8][9][10].

“The same database designed to catch car thieves can become a real-time tracking tool for an abusive officer. That’s not a hypothetical. It’s already happened at least 18 times that we know of.” — synthesized from reporting at Tom’s Hardware [7] and Verity News [8]

What Did San Francisco’s Audit Reveal About Unauthorized Searches?

San Francisco Police Chief Derrick Lew disclosed on June 1, 2026, that an internal audit found 299 improper searches of the city’s Flock ALPR data. These searches were conducted on behalf of federal and out-of-state law enforcement agencies over approximately one year [1].

SFPD characterized the 299 queries as roughly 0.005% of all Flock inquiries during the period. But the department also acknowledged this is likely a “statewide issue” affecting other California agencies using Flock, not just San Francisco [1].

What this means in plain terms:

• Local departments may be running searches for federal agencies, including immigration enforcement, without formal authorization
• The data is more portable and shareable than most residents realize
• Local elected officials and oversight bodies may not know this sharing is happening

This disclosure is expected to accelerate scrutiny of how Flock data flows beyond local control, particularly to federal entities whose enforcement priorities may not align with community values [1][3].

How Did 600,000 Unauthorized Searches Happen in Mountain View?

A separate incident in Mountain View, California, revealed that more than 250 external organizations had conducted roughly 600,000 searches using that city’s Flock data, all without local officials’ consent [6].

When city leaders discovered the scope of the unauthorized access, they deactivated 30 Flock cameras in February 2026 [6]. That’s a significant step, and it signals that at least some local governments are willing to pull the plug when they find out what’s actually happening with their data.

The Mountain View case also illustrates a structural problem: Flock’s network architecture may allow data from one city’s cameras to be queried by agencies far outside that city’s jurisdiction, without any notification to local officials.

Did Flock’s System Actually Leak Data Into Public Search Results?

Yes. Privacy advocates in Northern Colorado discovered that police license plate searches generated by Flock were appearing in public search engine results [6]. The exposed data included full plate numbers, case IDs, vehicle descriptions, and the stated reasons for investigation, including notations like “GTA” (grand theft auto).

 Flock acknowledged that around 70 URLs from 2024 to 2025 had been indexed by search engines before the company moved to remove them [6].

What was exposed:

Data Type	Risk Level
Full license plate numbers	High
Case IDs and investigation reasons	High
Vehicle descriptions and colors	Medium
Location and timestamp data	High

A public audit-log project called “Have Been F?” has documented 184,195,968 Flock searches covering 4,437,098 license plates [6]. That number alone illustrates the scale of what’s at stake if security or access controls fail.

Are Flock Cameras Also Making Mistakes That Harm Innocent People?

Separate from the misuse and data-sharing problems, Flock cameras have been documented misreading license plates, leading to innocent drivers being stopped by police [4][5]

When a camera misreads a plate and flags it as stolen or wanted, officers may conduct a traffic stop on a completely innocent driver. These stops can be frightening, especially for Black and Brown drivers who already face disproportionate police contact.

Business Insider and a Morristown, Tennessee, news outlet both reported on this pattern in early 2026 [4][5]. The AI is not infallible, and the consequences of its errors fall on ordinary people.

What Is the Broader Privacy and Civil Liberties Concern?

The cases documented under the Flock AI License Plate Readers: Police Misuse Cases Emerge in June 2026 umbrella are not isolated glitches. They reflect a systemic gap between how surveillance technology is sold to the public and how it actually operates.

Communities are told these cameras catch criminals. What they’re often not told:

• The data may be shared with federal immigration agencies [3]
• Outside organizations can potentially access local data without consent [6]
• Individual officers can query the system for personal reasons with limited oversight [7][8]
• The AI can misidentify plates and trigger stops of innocent people [4][5]

Several municipalities have already canceled or paused their Flock contracts, citing immigration surveillance concerns and data privacy risks [3].

Conclusion: What Can You Do About This Right Now?

The pattern documented in the Flock AI License Plate Readers: Police Misuse Cases Emerge in June 2026 coverage is a community accountability issue, not just a tech story. Here in upstate New York and across the Mohawk Valley region, many local governments are evaluating or already using ALPR technology. Residents have a right to know what’s happening with that data.

Actionable steps for concerned citizens:

1. Ask your local government directly. File a public records request asking whether your city, town, or county uses Flock Safety cameras and who has access to the data.
2. Attend a city council or county legislature meeting. Put surveillance oversight on the agenda. Demand written data-use policies before any new contracts are signed.
3. Contact your state representative. New York State has active conversations about surveillance oversight legislation. Your voice matters in that debate.
4. Support local journalism. Stories like this surface because reporters dig. Subscribe to and share outlets doing this work.
5. Talk to your neighbors. Community awareness is the first line of defense against unchecked surveillance expansion.

Police reform and criminal justice reform depend on communities staying informed and engaged. The technology moves fast. Oversight has to keep up.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Flock Safety?
Flock Safety is a company that makes automated license plate reader cameras used by police departments and municipalities across the United States to track vehicles and assist in investigations.

How many officers have been caught misusing Flock to stalk people?
Investigators have confirmed at least 18 cases in the U.S. where officers were arrested, fired, or investigated for using Flock ALPR systems to stalk romantic partners [7].

What did San Francisco’s audit find?
San Francisco’s internal audit found 299 improper Flock searches conducted on behalf of federal and out-of-state agencies over roughly one year, which SFPD described as likely a statewide issue [1].

Can Flock data be accessed by agencies outside my city?
Yes. The Mountain View, California, case showed that more than 250 external organizations ran roughly 600,000 searches on that city’s Flock data without local officials’ knowledge or consent [6].

Did Flock actually leak data to the public internet?
Yes. Flock acknowledged that around 70 URLs containing sensitive search data were indexed by public search engines before the company worked to remove them [6].

Do Flock cameras make mistakes?
Yes. Documented cases show Flock cameras misreading license plates, which can lead to innocent drivers being stopped by police [4][5].

Have any cities canceled their Flock contracts?
Yes. Several municipalities have canceled or paused Flock contracts, primarily citing concerns about immigration surveillance and data privacy [3].

Is this a problem specific to one state?
No. Misuse cases have been documented across multiple U.S. jurisdictions, and the San Francisco audit suggests the data-sharing problem may be widespread across California and potentially other states [1][7].

What should I do if I think I was wrongly stopped because of a Flock misread?
Document the stop, request the officer’s name and badge number, and consult with a civil liberties attorney or your local ACLU chapter about your options.

Who oversees how Flock data is used?
Oversight varies by jurisdiction. Many departments lack formal written policies governing Flock data use, access logs, or sharing with outside agencies, which is a core part of the problem.

References

[1] Sfpd Flock License Plate Reader Data Searches 22310416 – https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/sfpd-flock-license-plate-reader-data-searches-22310416.php

[2] Ai Flock Cops Abuse Stalking Alpr – https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2026/6/10/800053236/tech/ai-flock-cops-abuse-stalking-alpr/

[3] Flock Contracts Canceled Immigration Survillance Concerns – https://www.npr.org/2026/02/17/nx-s1-5612825/flock-contracts-canceled-immigration-survillance-concerns

[4] Flock Safetys Ai Cameras Misread Plates Innocent People Pay – https://nationaltoday.com/us/tn/morristown/news/2026/03/09/flock-safetys-ai-cameras-misread-plates-innocent-people-pay/

[5] Flock Safety Alpr Cameras Misreads 2026 3 – https://www.businessinsider.com/flock-safety-alpr-cameras-misreads-2026-3

[6] 4705284467411 Police License Plate Searches Leak Into Public Search Results Through Flock Safety Urls – https://www.newsbreak.com/gadget-review-324582152/4705284467411-police-license-plate-searches-leak-into-public-search-results-through-flock-safety-urls

[7] Several Police Officers Arrested For Using Controversial Flock Ai License Plate Reader System To Stalk Romantic Partners Says Report Investigators Have Unearthed At Least 18 Such Cases In The Us Over Recent Years – https://www.tomshardware.com/software/security-software/several-police-officers-arrested-for-using-controversial-flock-ai-license-plate-reader-system-to-stalk-romantic-partners-says-report-investigators-have-unearthed-at-least-18-such-cases-in-the-us-over-recent-years

[8] Cops Busted Using License Plate Readers To Stalk Exes – https://www.verity.news/story/2026/cops-busted-using-license-plate-readers-to-stalk-exes

[9] Police Officers Arrested For Stalking Ex Partners With Flock Ai License Plate Reader Systems 27309 – https://theoutpost.ai/news-story/police-officers-arrested-for-stalking-ex-partners-with-flock-ai-license-plate-reader-systems-27309/

[10] Us Police Flock Ai Stalking Cases – https://pccentral.net/us-police-flock-ai-stalking-cases/

READ FULL ARTICLE →