Text settings Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only Learn more Minimize to nav A small-business owner in Georgia has sued Flock and the Coweta County Sheriff’s Office over alleged retaliation using license plate cameras. “[The lawsuit] alleges illegal [license plate tracking] searches over many months without probable cause and unrelated to any specific investigation,” Hall & Lampros, attorneys for plaintiff Tyler Murkerson, wrote in a press release. “The lawsuit alleges that Flock also failed to put safeguards in place to prevent illegal surveillance by officers by accepting free-text-field entries instead of specific case numbers or investigations.” Murkerson’s saga began in February 2023, when he was arrested by sheriff’s deputies over an alleged seatbelt violation; those charges were dropped months later. In September 2024, Murkerson sued the department, accusing them of excessive force. The case was only recently settled. While that lawsuit was pending, Murkerson says his car’s license plate was searched multiple times in the Flock system.
Additionally, he alleges that deputies followed or monitored him as he drove to and from his home. His attorneys claim that, when searching for Murkerson’s vehicle, sheriff’s deputies entered nonsense rationales. This has been a widely reported weakness of the Flock system. “Throughout the relevant period Flock’s platform required only that some text be entered in a free-form field, and it accepted whatever was typed—‘investigation’ and, on twenty separate occasions at one department, ‘hehehe,’” the October 8 complaint states. “The only justifications entered for the searches of Mr. Murkerson’s vehicle were ‘info’ and ‘37.’ Neither corresponds to any investigation, case, incident, or call for service.
A search recorded that way documents no investigation. It documents only that someone typed something. Flock has since conceded, by its own conduct, that its platform should have required a verifiable law enforcement justification before executing a search.” In August 2026, Flock announced it would change its software and require “case codes for all law enforcement searches by the end of the year” as a way to mitigate these abuses. The Coweta County Sheriff’s Office began its own audit of the system that same month, and the complaint notes that “three employees had resigned before the audit was completed.” “What’s really troubling is when that type of surveillance is available, so that the police can do Fourth Amendment-implicated searches without any controls,” Chris Hall, one of Murkerson’s attorneys, told Ars. “For us, it’s not the privacy of taking photographs of your license plate.
This is focused on illegal activity and what we allege is that they did violate Georgia law and violate the Fourth Amendment—because it’s a search and surveillance put on somebody.” Lunchtime Flock has been under increased scrutiny, with hundreds of law enforcement agencies dropping the company recently, largely because of a backlash over overbroad and unwanted surveillance. Brian Hofer, the chair of Secure Justice, a California-based organization that has scrutinized the use of Flock and other surveillance technologies, said he’s unaware of another lawsuit of this type. But, he added, it matters what agencies actually do compared to what they say they do. “Over the years, a number of law enforcement agents have told me that ‘culture eats policy for lunch,’” he emailed Ars. “I think this lawsuit is another example of why guardrails don’t work, analogous to the Trump administration disregarding court orders and the law in general. The remedy is to prohibit use of the technology, at least until the culture of policing changes for the better.” Flock responded to our request for comment with a short statement. “Flock stands by the integrity of its technology and the important role it plays in helping law enforcement solve crimes, find missing people, and keep communities safe,” a spokesperson said. “We disagree with the claims raised in this lawsuit and intend to vigorously defend our position in court.” Coweta County Sheriff’s Office did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment. 13 Comments
Leave a Reply