Show Topic: Flock Camera Backlash: Public Safety vs. Privacy

podcast, [music] the one and only law enforcement podcast that's tackling critical policing and social justice issues and provides insights into the daily realities of policing with your host, Chief Virgil Green. Happened before, it's going to happen again unless you demand transparency within [music] surveillance. Growing concern across Georgia tonight about flock cameras. Several law enforcement officials across the state have been [music] charged with misusing the surveillance tech in just the last week. So, is it just a few bad apples or [music] a symptom of a wider problem? And that is where we start tonight on the news at 10. I'm Russ Spencer and I'm Christine Spiro. In the latest instance, a Green County deputies accused of using the flock database for personal business. And he's not alone. Within the last few months, at least 10 other members of law enforcement around the state have been charged with the same. Our side's Rob Durenzo joins us tonight with a closer look at the growing concerns over those Flock cameras. Rob, that's right, guys. Good evening to you both. I spoke with the co-founder of Flock, which is headquartered right here in Atlanta. She thinks these cases are a small price to pay for all the crime that the system solves. But the ACLU of Georgia says this is a wake-up call. Growing public distrust after several officers have been charged across Georgia for using the flock license plate tracking database for personal reasons. It has happened before and it's going to happen again unless you demand transparency within surveillance. In Green County, Deputy Kenisha Goss was fired on Tuesday charged with misusing the flock system. Earlier this week in Albany, five police officers. Last month in Cherokee County, a lieutenant, sergeant, and deputy were all charged with violating their oath. In this case, um, where misuse happened, the technology itself was not creating the misuse. It was it was human beings. Paige Todd, the Atlanta based company's co-founder, says many of the recent arrests have come as a result of departments using their new audit assistance tool, which flags unusual searches. The best way to prevent misuse is now every member of law enforcement out there knows that this audit exists. It uses AI. And that's why information security analyst Peter TR says this is so unnerving for so many because this network of cameras has the ability to track a lot about you which become searchable in a nationwide database. It becomes a privacy and security issue. So your whereabouts, where you shopped, your name, your address. Across the country, there's a growing push back against Flock cameras with dozens of communities ending their contracts with the company over privacy concerns. Jeopardizing your civil rights and civil liberties is never just an unfortunate event. You have constitutional rights, especially your right to privacy. And the question is who polices the police. But Todd believes the good her company has enabled cops to do has outweighed the bad. We I believe solve about a million crimes with our technology. 10,000 missing people have gone home because of it. Um this feels like pretty small in comparison. And guys, meanwhile, there are dozens of videos circulating on social media explaining to people how they can break, disable, or tear down these flock cameras, but it did happen in Barrow County. The sheriff there says it happened to three flock cameras, and he reminded people it is a felony. Live in Midtown, Rob Deenzo, Fox 5 News. Well, it's an issue that's not going away. Rob, thanks very much. I want to welcome everybody to another episode of You and the Law podcast. I'm the host of the show, Chief Virgil Green. And as always, I want to thank you for taking the time to tune in and join us for definitely another informative topic um on you and the Law podcast. And just with that opening of the podcast, um, as we talk about the the Flock camera systems and the benefits and now the concerns that the public has, uh, with some recent incidents that have occurred. Uh, we're going to have a conversation tonight about this technology. Um technology has trans transformed modern policing uh from body cameras to to drones and automatic uh license plate readers. [clears throat] Today officers have more investigative tools than ever before. But with greater technology comes greater responsibility. Uh recent allegations involving officers accused of improperly accessing flock system cameras have sparked concerns across the country. uh is this simply misconduct by a few individuals or does it reveal a larger need to a larger need for stronger oversight and accountability? So tonight we'll separate the technology from the people using it and asking an important question. How do we protect both public safety and the public trust? And as you've seen in that video, uh there's been a lot of uh concerns across the country, especially in Georgia, where officers have been uh arrested and charged with misusing uh this uh technology for their benefits. Uh some have tracked um you know people that they've met, some have tracked um people that they've dated and and some have used the system to uh for other personal uh gains. And so uh throughout this podcast I want you know if you have any questions or any comments definitely put them into the chat and I'm going to put that up on the screen. And so um you know ask your questions in the chat and tell me what what are your concerns if you have any about uh this technology and how this technology that you know of is working in your community. Uh because the technology is here to stay. Uh it has definitely benefit uh a lot of uh agencies and in a lot of communities uh finding loved ones or even finding murder suspects. And so throughout the the next hour, we're going to definitely talk about uh the positive side of this technology and also look at some of the the negative things that have happened uh and ask some questions as to what are some agencies doing to prevent some of these things from happening. And I'll have to say, you know, when I came up with this um topic to talk about, uh the flock camera systems, um I definitely noticed a lot of uh some agencies, especially in Oklahoma, who uh had put out some social media post explaining to their communities how they were using the flock camera systems and the benefits of it and uh some of the concerns that people are just generally having around the use of this technology. So, as tonight as we talk about the flock camera backlash um uh versus uh the public safety and the privacy, um a lot of people are going to say, well, see, we this is something that we said was going to happen when this technology was first introduced. The the technology has been around for a number of years. It has definitely solved a lot of crimes. It has definitely found a lot of people, but now the technology is being used for things that it shouldn't be used for. And the question is going to be um does Flock have some some systems in place that agencies can use uh to do some real time audits to make sure that officers are not utilize or or you using this uh data for their own personal uh benefits. And you know there's going to be a lot of there's definitely a lot of conversations around the country especially from the ACLU and other organizations that are questioning this type of of technology and the privacy which again you you have some people going to say well hey this is another big brother looking over but you know as someone who has been in law enforcement uh as long as I have and I've talked about the positive sides of the flock camera systems. U now it is just coming out that there are some things that officers can do um to uh violate some policies that are in place to prevent these things from happening. And again, one of the questions going to kind of come out, well, who's policing the police? Uh what safeguards are there? You know, are you know, supervisors able to in real time go in and check? Are there uh certain safeguards that are being put in place that that an officer or an investigator has to get some type of supervisor's permission to even log into the system to investigate uh certain crimes. But again, it's definitely uh alarming when you hear that, you know, more than a handful of of officers, especially in the state of Georgia, have been arrested and are now facing charges and they definitely have been terminated from those agencies. But the question is going to come out, okay, well, how did these things happen in the first place? And so that's some of the the questions that we're going to be talking about uh throughout the hour as to how did these things happen and why. But again, the technology is there for the benefit of the agency, for the benefit of the public. Uh but also you do have people who are abusing this technology and the technology is definitely advanced outside of the in the public uh space because you are seeing a lot of uh HOAs, homeowners associations who are now uh purchasing these flock cameras to put into their neighborhoods. And you're also seeing the cameras uh show up in parking lots such as your Home Depot and your Lowe's uh depot uh businesses. And so there again, it's it's it's how these agencies are able to share this information uh when they're looking for certain uh suspects who've been involved in crimes. And so, you know, one of the things again, you know, this is not to uh criticize the the technology that Flock has um has presented to the to law enforcement and to the public, but also a question about when the technology is is being misused or even when the technology is probably used in the right way. But there's been cases where individuals have been accused of committing certain crimes that they have not committed. Um, but there again, it's it's technology. And so there's going to be some some breakdowns in the system as to how did these things really happened. And so I'm going to, you know, show share some videos with the listening audience tonight. But again, I want to remind you that if you have any questions or comments, put them into the chat about how do you feel about this technology and the benefits of it or let me know what you don't think that the benefits are because again there are benefits and there are definitely some concerns that the public have about this technology. And so the the next video that I want to show, it comes out of uh Knoxville, Tennessee, where a uh an elderly man was was located by using the flock cameras. And so this is just an example of how the technology is definitely uh working to benefit law enforcement and to get uh individuals back home safely to their families. is on the alcohol highway [laughter] over on uh UT campus over that way. KPD soon got a hit thanks to Flock cameras, a type of surveillance video that detects license plates, also known as LPR technology. We run the truck through that LPR system. And uh fortunately, we're able to get a quick hit on uh the vehicle. We found him in the area on Neand Drive. Thankful that her husband was found safely and quickly, this wife is thrilled that this kind of technology is being used within the community. And I didn't realize that they had that type of technology. I was just amazed and shocked, you know, how they just maneuver and how they could track him down like that, you know. So, I'll tell anybody that's that is really something. In Knoxville, Erikica Lunsford, WVT News. And Scott Erlin with KPD says this is the second missing person that they've been able to find with these flock cameras. And they've also recovered more than $900,000 worth of stolen property using the LPR technology. Well, in in in that video uh in that news clip, you you definitely see how the LPR cameras were able to to find a missing uh husband uh in a very short period of time. And you know, one of the things that I've said uh when I've talked to [clears throat] community uh members about the technology because they they do have a lot of there is a lot of concern about it. But one of the things that I've talked about is stories just like this here is that when you do have uh an elderly population who are still driving vehicles uh they may be suffering from you know dementia or Alzheimer's uh but they're but they feel that they can still get out and and drive to the store or drive um wherever they need to go. And we've seen cases to where individuals have crossed state lines and went into another state and even multiple states um and have been missing for for days. Um and I have to say, you know, when this technology did not exist, you know, we relied upon the signs that everybody has seen on on the interstates where it says an Amber Alert. um that Amber Alert is is put out uh to let people know, hey, we're looking for this vehicle. But can you imagine, you know, say a decade ago when this technology did not exist. Um and and if it did exist, it was very limited in certain parts of the country and in some communities there were just so much of a public uh concern about it. a lot of police departments did not move forward and their local governments did not approve uh of this purchase. And so, but here's a situation where, you know, a um uh a wife reported a husband missing. Uh his license plate was entered into the system and a flot camera had an alert that was sent to that agency for them to to find uh the vehicle. And oftent times uh every s this is done in real time and and oftent times officers are able to locate those vehicles uh in the same area where where cameras have hit uh made a hit on them. And so uh I want to thank Mr. Hollis for tuning in and joining uh you and the law podcast tonight. Uh but again hopefully you can uh uh add some uh some comments to to the uh to the chat tonight. Uh but uh because again uh these cameras exist uh in a lot of states u pretty much almost every state they exist in in every community and so I know Mr. the holler in Arkansas. So, they may exist in in in the communities that that you live in, but but but again, uh we want to have just a an honest conver an open conversation and dialogue about this technology and why it is so why this technology is so important to have in in our communities. And again, that story right there where a u a wife was able to she reported her husband missing and the law enforcement agencies were able to recover uh find him and and get him home safely. And and so that is just another example of why there's been such a a positive experience with these uh camera systems, but also there's been some negative uh concerns about it. And you know, maybe a lot of people who are listening to the podcast tonight, you're kind of like, okay, well, where are these cameras located at? If you are driving down uh your a major street and you if you look up and you see a just a single black pole with a with with a device on it that looks like it's uh has a solar power and it has a little camera on it. That's most likely an LPR camera. Now, I do know uh especially in the state of Oklahoma, u Oklahoma went to a system to where it can identify uh tags that uh do not have uh insurance. And so, uh the owners of those vehicles will get a a letter in the mail letting them know that there was a hit on their vehicle uh and their vehicle does not have insurance on it. And so again, the technology is being used in in various different ways, but also here's an example of where uh people are are who don't have car insurance or they may have let their car insurance, you know, uh go past due and they don't renew their car insurance. Well, there are these cameras that are set out throughout the uh the Oklahoma uh city area and even in other parts of Oklahoma where individuals are getting notifications that hey, you need to get insurance and if you don't get insurance, you can get insurance from the state. But again, there's a lot of u concerns and and some misinformation about what these cameras do. And and I'll take, you know, just don't take my word for it. Uh type in Google Flock cameras and that information is going to be readily there for you to be able to read what the cameras can be used for and what they're not used for. And I think a lot of people have some concerns that the cameras are being used to uh to track people, you know, images. No, the cameras are not being utilized to as as facial recognition. It it's not the cameras uh as you're driving down the street, the these cameras are taking pictures of every single vehicle. And let's say there's a vehicle that's been uh involved in a homicide in a in a whole another state and this vehicle is a a vehicle that law enforcement is looking for to question the individuals in that vehicle and and you get a hit off of that vehicle. Now they know, hey, there was a uh in and actually I'm going show a news clip where a a murder was committed in another state, but the vehicle was found in another state and law enforcement officers were able to make an arrest on an individual who was uh involved in a in a in a murder uh in another state. And so again, the technology is is definitely there to benefit law enforcement, but as we seen in the first clip, uh the technology is being utilized by officers for all the wrong reasons. Um and it's definitely caused a lot of concerns within in within the public. And so one of the uh and I'm gonna show this video because again uh I think it's it's one of the things I would like to say be before I show this video is that law enforcement agencies definitely need to be transparent with their communities about this technology. uh some agencies probably did not have community meetings to say that we're bringing this technology into our communities. Some smaller communities have definitely had public forums, public discussions about utilizing this technology and they got some input whether it was positive or negative and oftent times it has been more negative and there's been a lot of push back from it and so you you see where these agencies don't move forward with the technology but there may be a a neighboring uh jurisdiction that does have the technology and So again, there are just a lot of questions about it. And so I want to get to one of the comments in the in the chat by Mr. Hollis who puts in the chat that u you know I thought police had to have a reason to flag uh someone's license plate. That type of policing can can very well be used to racially profile a person of color. You know, Mr. Hollis, I'm going to say I think you know one of the things that that that is a concern especially in the black community, but you know the these cameras are not taking pictures of of a person's face. They're just taking a picture of a of a vehicle and a license plate. And so at no time is there an image of a individual person that will let officers know that that car is dri driven by any race of a person. It's just a camera that is uh catching the image of the vehicle as well as the license plate of the vehicle. And for those who uh travel through throughout Oklahoma, uh Kansas, uh who travel a turnpike, uh these cameras are there they're these they have cameras throughout the turnpike that take pictures of your vehicle and take pictures of your tags. And so, but these cameras, those cameras are totally different from the flot cameras, but you do see a lot of states, uh, Texas, um, and, uh, many other states who are putting these cameras out on the interstates because they see that there's a benefit that they may get a get an alert on a vehicle that's traveling down a major interstate. this uh it may be a person who is missing uh from from a halfway across the country but they're in Texas or it may be a person who is uh wanted for questioning of a homicide in another state uh or it may be somebody who is who is involved with with uh some kind of child molestation. And so, but again, the cameras are not being used to identify a person's race. Uh, and I think that's one of the uh misconceptions that the public has about uh these flock cameras is that they can be utilized to racially profile people, and that's just not the case. Um, you know, and people are going to say, well, how do you know they're not being used to racially profile anyone? because again, uh the cameras are taking a picture of the vehicle as it's passing and it's a picture of the of the rear license plate um and uh the making model of the car and so you cannot see inside of the vehicle as to what race that that individual person is. But that is definitely a good question to ask because there is a lot of concerns about uh can these cameras be used for racial profiling. And some people are going to say, well, you know what? If an officer uh utilizes that information, they got your tag number. Uh they got the the making, model of the vehicle. Now they can search and they can tell, you know, what race you are, where you live at. And again, that's some of the concern that that has been raised, especially by some, you know, like the ACLU, the NAACP, and some other organizations because officers are misusing this information. And again, it's it's not the technology that's being misused. It's the people who are tapping into the system who are misusing that technology. Uh, and I have to say, you know, once again, a lot of people are going to go back and say, well, we had these concerns uh many years ago and everybody said no, there were safeguards that were put in place that would prevent these things from happening. Well, if that's the case, uh what oversight do police departments have in place and what policies do they have in place and what auditing system do they have in place to prevent these things from happening? Uh because again, I think that's one of the the the main conversations about what safeguards have been put in place. Uh but you know, some people are going to say, well, now these crimes have been committed. Now these agencies uh have put in place some some safeguards that would prevent that from happening or maybe even Flock has come up with some new technology that the agencies can utilize to uh to have real time audits uh being done on these systems. But clearly there has to be some uh some steps taken to really prevent uh these things from happening from for people to feel like especially the public that their privacy is not being violated by law enforcement. And also the question is going to kind of come up, okay, well if these cameras are on private properties, who have access to the cameras? Do does the private property have access to the cameras? Do law enforcement have access to the cameras? What other people have access to the cameras? Because again, if an HOA says, "Hey, we want to have these cameras put on our properties in our homeowners association, who has access to those cameras? Is it does Flock have access to them? Does somebody with the homeowners association have access to them? or are that information being shared with law enforcement? And so again, I think there has to be a lot of transparency with the public about how this technology is being utilized. You you can always talk about the positive sides of any technology whether it's you know dash cameras or incar cameras or whatever it may be drones there's always a lot of positive to to those technologies but there there's there's this percentage of of negative things happening and people are going to say well let's just say this is only 5% of of of what's happening well that 5% % can be a very large number. Uh it really shouldn't be even 1% but again this technology is being utilized for other purposes than what it should not be utilized for. And so I want to share with you here's this next video that I want to share uh with those who are listening as to how the flock cameras were able to to solve a uh a murder investigation. Governor Basher asked Kuckians to pray for both families. New tonight, Lexington police say flock cameras helped lead police to a wanted murder suspect from Michigan. Heavy on Burell was arrested on Tuesday. Lexington police say they worked with US Marshals to arrest Burell. They say the flocked license plate readers helped find a vehicle connected to Burell here in Lexington. Lexington installed 25 flock cameras back in April across the city. And over the summer, police released an update on how those cameras have been used by investigators. Police say the license plate readers have helped recover 26 stolen vehicles and find two missing people as well as helped out in about a dozen other investigations. Okay. So, just as we seen in that news clip, how the technology was used to locate a person who was wanted uh out of the state of Michigan, out of Michigan who was actually in Kentucky. And so again, if that technology did not exist in that that community or in in Kentucky, um then this person who had committed this crime would probably still be uh wouldn't have been caught. But again, that's just another example of how the technology is benefiting law enforcement and how the technology um is able to find individuals who are who have been involved in some very serious crimes uh across state lines. And so again, I think it's really important to to highlight the the the good of the technology, uh, but also talk about the concerns that the public has about the the the transparency of the technology. And what are agencies doing now to to show to to let the public know, hey, yeah, we have uh done some internal audits. We've been able to see where officers have misused the technology and we've been able to dismiss those officers. They're now facing charges. They've been arrested. But but there again, it kind of goes back to uh the conversation that a lot of people have said before, how did these things happen? Because again with technology, everybody's going to find a way uh to abuse this technology and to use it for their own benefit. And and so uh again, this is it's just a growing concern. But how do we uh make sure that these cameras are are being utilized throughout every parts of the country for the best interest of the public. Now, this next video that I want to show is going to come out of of of Minnesota. Um, it's an area that I'm very familiar with. Um, and when I when I saw this, you know, I was like, okay, these are things that are are raising the concerns of of the public because the situation could have definitely turned uh more serious uh depending upon how the actions of the officers and also the action of the of the driver of the vehicle. And so this situation took place in Plymouth, Minnesota. Uh a sub a sub suburb city that I'm very familiar with. Uh lived in the Plymouth, Minnesota in this this co where um this incident happened. I had uh definitely uh shopped at this store uh quite often. A local automotive journalist says he spent days unknowingly being tracked by police after license plate cameras mistakenly identified the test vehicle he was driving as stolen. Kent's going to break down how all this happened and why this story is sparking a much bigger conversation about surveillance right after returning a package at the Kohl's near his Plymouth home. Hello sir, can you come out to me please? Sure. Joel Federer, is it just you and you and the wife? And his wife, both of us, both of us were suddenly surrounded. I was parked here. There was a car here, so I couldn't just drive away. Even a week and a half later, he still can't believe it. And I legitimately looked at my wife and I was like, I wasn't even speeding. Like, THERE'S NOTHING I DID WRONG. That certainly didn't stop things from getting tense. Are you armed at all? No. No. Okay. Is this your car? Uh, it's complicated. Can I explain it? Joel is director of content and product at the drive.com, meaning the Land Rover he was driving wasn't his, but he was testdriving it for work. I have paperwork cuz I can show you that I drive this for the week. Okay, it's owned by Jaguar Land Rover. If you run the plates, it's owned by Jaguar Land Rover. They own it. Little did he know Plymouth police had already run them. The reason you have four cops here is because your license plate is registered as stolen license plates in our system. Are you serious? 15 years doing this job, I've never had this. This is insane. That's because the plates were flagged by an emerging surveillance network of flock cameras. And not just before this stop hit on our license plate readers the other day, too. So, are you serious? Cameras that read my license plate now twice in the last couple days and it picked up and flagged it for the cops. You guys been searching for this car. Unreal. And it turns out the issue at the heart of the stop really wasn't real. Plymouth police released him after more than an hour, telling us today, quote, "When the license plate was reported as stolen in California, it was improperly entered in the National Crime Information Center database with incomplete numbers. Manufacturer plate for New Jersey has two big numbers, two little numbers, and three big letters." Okay, 3410 DTM was my plate. But what got flagged was 34 DTM. In a statement from Flock, the company wrote, "We take incidents like this seriously and are looking closely at what happened." Flock system is highly accurate and situations like this are rare. That said, an alert should be one part of an investigation, not the whole basis for a stop. I think the issue is is that a human error got amplified because this technology doesn't have enough guardrails in place. The police officers that day told me there were four plates, including mine, in the state of Minnesota, they were hitting on 34 DTM on flock cameras. Four. Range Rover told me there's about 15 Range Rovers in the Eastwine fleet that had some combination of 34XX DTM. They had to freeze the whole fleet until this whole got figured out because other people could get pulled over. Might not ended the same. This is the craziest story. Legitimately, there are so many concerns here. I mean, I'm thankful my kids were in the car. I'm thankful the cops had the patience to listen and they didn't come in hot and angry, guns drawn. I mean, someone could have got shot, right? Again, Joel is relieved that concern didn't become reality. But just a few weeks prior, he did a whole podcast on the drive.com about the many privacy concerns that can arise for car owners when our local governments pay private companies like Flock for cameras that can tap into national databases and track you with AI. A few days later, that concern certainly became real, Jana, as is her his concerns about guard rails. Like all of the stuff about privacy seems to be moving too fast again. Yeah, that's his whole point because he says the database itself was where the error is, but he doesn't understand why the flock cameras didn't catch that little number that would have prevented all of this. Just wild stuff. Doesn't look good for Flock. Thanks so much, Kent. We'll be right back. Oh, okay. Hopefully I've got my mic unmuted. So, probably a lot of what I just said over the last couple of minutes probably was not heard, but let me kind of go back and u uh read a comment that's in the chat. uh from Mr. Hollis who stated that indeed it is a great technology to locate uh people who suffers from mental illness. Uh he also states in the city of Oyola, Arkansas, a ranking uh police officer used uh its investigative computer system to get some kind of embarrassing information on his neighbors and that cop was disciplined but should have been fired. Uh he bas he says that I conducted that search personally myself. So yeah, there are there will be cops who abuse their powers and I think that's one of the main concerns that the public has is about the abuse of these systems and uh and how uh this technology is being uh misused and so u but again there is a lot of positive conversation a positive things that have happened with this technology but again um the technology ology is definitely uh been abused and but and as we talk about this conversation tonight about uh the fly camera backlash and the public concerns about privacy, you know, one of the the the the things that I want to ask the the listening audience, uh you know, why uh what policies would you like to see uh police departments imple implement um that would prevent some of these things from happening. Uh because again, it this kind of goes back to the oversight of this technology and how this technology uh is definitely there to benefit the community, but also how that technology can prevent uh police officers uh you know, somebody who's investigating the crime from using it to uh to check up on somebody. And uh and clearly there have been cases to where that has definitely happened. And so um this next video that I want to uh play to you um this is something a concern that uh local elected officials have addressed. But one of the things that kind of concerned me with this story was was that this officer had been disciplined uh for violating the the very policy that and then he turns around and he does it again. And so again, uh, agencies really need to be very aggressive when it comes to, uh, officers misusing this technology because it's, it goes back to the public trust. The public is going to say, "We don't trust you to police yourselves." Because when these incidents do happen and we find out about it uh, months or years later that, yeah, this officer was caught, but he was disciplined, but he's back on the job. So what would prevent him or her from not doing the same thing again? And so again, I think that is uh a concern that the public has. Some of those flock security cameras across our area are not being used in the way in which they were designed as crime surveillance. Yeah, that is what they're supposed to be used for. Over the past week, we've been reporting on flock cameras being spray painted over and vandalized. Some even have been sold off. Now in Pasadena, a council member tells ABC 13's Briana Willis an officer is accused of misusing the Flock camera system. Briana? Yeah, Erica and Gina. The council member telling me the officer resigned here just last week following an ongoing investigation. He says that investigation reveals the officer used cameras just like this one not far from the police department to stalk a fellow female officer here. Now, according to Pasadena City Council member Emanuel Gueredto, he says the first investigation into the officer misusing the cameras was last year in March. He says that officer was suspended and later reinstated in August 2025. But Geredto says the next investigation, again, also including allegations the officer stalked another female police officer in the department with the flock camera system, started in January. The officer involved has not yet been charged with the crime, but Guerrero says he resigned just last week and says he supports the use of block cameras to deter crime in the city, but not this. There's laws that protect public trust. Um, and the second allegation was uh the stalking and following of a female police officer and the the stalking or following any officer is a felony. So, there's two felonies at once. The misusage of the flock system is a m a misuse of public resources by by this by one law enforcement individual. Yeah. And I did of course reach out to the officer involved, but his attorney says they declined to comment at this time. Have also reached out to the Pasadena Police Department multiple times today. We walked in, we called, we emailed, and have texted, but so far we have not heard back. We're live in Pasadena. I'm Brianna Willis, ABC13 Eyewitness News. And just as we've seen in that news clip, you know, you got an officer who is abusing the system to track one of his own uh fellow colleagues. And so that's real that's a concern is the fact that uh you know, even if it's someone in the general public, it's still a concern. But why would this officer utilize this flock camera system to track a female colleague uh that he may, you know, be involved with? He's just trying to find out, you know, where she's going and where she's at. And I think some people want to uh will ask this question. Okay. Well, does the cameras track a vehicle? Well, the cameras will definitely show uh where a vehicle has been traveling throughout the city and and officers will be able to go back and utilize that information to see uh what side of the city that vehicle was on, what neighborhoods that vehicle uh passed through, and they will be able to, and again, this is supposed to be used for an investigative uh tactic. You know, let's say you're investigating a homicide and here you have a uh investigators are tracking that vehicle. So when they do locate the pe the people who are involved in this uh homicide investigation. Now, these investigators are able to to know how honest and truthful those individuals are, but they can also besides using cell phone tower data, they're able to use these uh flight camera systems to track that vehicle's movement and to say, "Okay, well, you were in the area at the time of this homicide. Maybe you came back uh into that area where this homicide took place at." And so again, it is supposed to be used for investigative purposes, but it is it is not being used uh for that purpose at all. And as we just saw in that video, um and so one of the questions that uh that's put in the chat uh by Mr. Holly says, "I believe there are already policies and state laws to govern misconduct related to misuse of department technology. The question I have is uh why do these cops feel so comfortable misusing the technology? You know, Mr. Hollis, I think one of the things is that, you know, they know that they're probably there's not that much oversight by their uh supervisors and that they could probably go in and and and do some they can uh delete what they were looking for. Again, uh there should be safeguards in place and again there should be alerts anytime a officer or detective or somebody is conducting a uh some type of a search of that of a of a of a license plate that a supervisor or even all the way up to the police chief. There should be some type of notification that Flock um is has in place that these agencies should be able to uh use to say, "Okay, well, uh so and so detective or so and so officer just uh logged into the system and they're tracking a certain vehicle." U and now you can go and say, "Okay, well, is there a a business purpose? Is there an investigative purpose that you're uh using uh to log into the system and and again I I you know this profession is not a micromanaging profession but at the same time you definitely need to put in some some uh some safeguards to prevent the misuse of the technology and again Mr. And I just think that there are some police officers they know uh when these audits are being done. And you know in the video that I showed earlier uh from Georgia, there were supervisors who were arrested. And so again, this is kind this goes back to uh a lot of questions around the the trust uh and when you have high ranking law enforcement officers who are misusing this technology and even all the way up to some police chiefs around the country have been uh arrested and charged with misusing the technology. Uh I have to say that some of those uh uh chiefs have been at at much smaller departments and not larger departments. But again, there has to be some safeguards uh put in place for uh officers not to feel that they uh have just um free uh free reigns to to log into the system and to track a vehicle, especially to track somebody that they are maybe dating or tracking somebody that they may have pulled over and that they have that they're trying to get to So again, uh this is why the public has so much concerns about the use of this technology and why the technology continues to be used. And again, I go back to the the technology has definitely aided law enforcement in solving crimes, finding missing people and and but also now it is coming out that the technology is being misused for all the wrong reasons. And this next video that I'm going to show you is a clear example of of somebody having to prove to law enforcement that that they did not commit a crime and that uh and it was it was really disturbing to see that here is how the cameras are being wrongfully used and how this lady in in uh in Denver was being accused of committing a crime. Hey, developing this morning, a Denver woman says that she was wrongly accused of a crime after police told her they tracked her car using flock cameras. Police went to her door accusing her of stealing a package and served her a court summon. Croissana now saying she was never in the area of the robbery to begin with. Fox 31's Jared Dean joins us live from Coline Valley this morning. Good morning, Jared. Yeah, good morning. Yeah, Christina Eler was at home, heard somebody at her door, went to her door, and found a police officer from the Coline Police Department with a summon telling her you took a package that was valued at $25 in Belmar. We have you on doorbell camera and flock camera taking this and she said she was never in the area and actually proved her innocence with evidence of her own. Now, that evidence included dashboard camera footage of her driving that day in another area at that time and used Google Maps to show a log of her location to prove her innocence to the police officer. Elser says the officer denied reviewing her video, telling her it wasn't worth it and quote, "You have not been honest with me, so I am not going to extend you any courtesy of showing you a video I don't need to." And then after this, Elser got in contact with the chief of police, sent the evidence, and her summons was voided. But she says she didn't need to prove her innocence in the first place. You know, we have cameras in that town, and you can't get a breath of fresh air in or out of that place without us knowing. Correct. They need to be used properly and be used with caution in a conversation versus we're now going to use this to accuse anybody and everybody. Now, we reached out to the Coline Police Department. We did not get a response from them. Now, Alicer says she encourages those in the community and her neighbors to get cameras of their own so they don't have to go through what she went through. Live in Littleton, Jared Dean, Fox 31. Yeah, I mean, we talked about flock cameras yesterday in Aurora. That was your story, Jared. And now you're talking about a town Coline Valley as well. So, a lot of talk about this program. Thanks. You know, once again, here is another example of an agency not being transparent because again, you got a uh an officer standing at uh at this uh person's door accusing him of a crime that they did not commit and pretty much basically told the lady that he really didn't care what she had to say. U and this was all over, as you heard, a $25 uh package that was stolen off of somebody's front porch. Uh, but the officer was was uh pretty uh verbally uh I won't say just overly aggressive, but definitely made the uh the lady feel uncomfortable uh because she was being accused of a crime and that she was being summoned to appear in court over a package of $25. Um and so she had her own uh incar camera. she had uh was able to to prove that that was not her. But again, just another example of why the public uh has so much concerns about police departments utilizing this technology and how this technology is being abused and and and so uh that is just uh you know and again I think you know when people see that see this type of um video footage and and people hear the conversations around the concerns concerns with the flock cameras and the backlash that the public has. And again, it's not so much the the company flock. It is it is the police departments. And I want to make that very clear. This conversation is not negative against the flock itself. It is it is a conversation about how the police departments are abusing this technology that Flock has um put together uh for the benefit of the public and how Flock is is been able to share with different uh communities around the country that by having these cameras there is definitely uh a much more benefit to having the cameras than it is not to have these cameras uh in your community. Uh but this last video that I want to show is uh is comes from um uh LA and here is one of the largest police departments in the country and they're ending their uh their agreement with Flock uh to uh have these cameras placed around uh the city of Los Angeles. Let's get to the breaking news right now. Now, the LAPD is ending its agreement with Flock Safety. Flock operates surveillance cameras throughout Los Angeles. And I News reporter Tim Pullium is live in Echo Park with the breaking details. Tim. Yeah, David. LAPD uses flock cameras around the city. But today, the department announced it is allowing its contract and agreement with the company to expire starting tomorrow. Now, flock cameras are used to take images of vehicles and license plates on the road. LAPD says that it helps them in tracking down suspects involved in a crime. Now, some people in the community like that surveillance. Others say that it violates their privacy. LAPD says that concern is what led to its decision. Well, this contract's not being renewed because of uh serious concerns around civil liberty and civil rights issues. um particularly around privacy and the data that's being collected from these cameras. So the LAPD had to make a difficult decision of uh continuing in this case discontinuing using flock services until we can get those data privacy security and sharing concerns ironed out through a contractual relationship. LAPD's contract with Flock ends tomorrow and their tech department is not sure if the cameras will still be recording. LAPD does LAPD doesn't own the cameras. In many cases, they are owned by organizations and homeowners associations who have allowed police and the city to have access to them. Now, LAPD says it is having ongoing conversations with the company in revising the agreement. They want updated language around privacy and the storing of data to be included in this new agreement. I've reached out to Flock for a comment about this and I am still awaiting a response. Tim Pullium, ABC7 Eyewitness News. Now, and we just uh heard in that news clip here, here is a major city who has some a major city, a police department who has some concerns uh surrounding the uh the techn the technology and how they are uh kind of pulling away from from the uh from the flock camera systems until there are some safeguards is put in place. And I have to say this is um you know not something that a lot of people would expect to see out of a out of a major city uh such as uh LAPD do but again I think with everything that has happened u they want to make sure that there's some safeguard that's put in place either by flock or some safeguard that they're being put in place by by the agency because again um there has to be a lot conversations around the protection of this uh of this data. U flock has stated that this data is is after 30 days nobody has access to the data the data just goes away. Uh but again how many you know let's say your vehicle is traveling uh in uh past a block camera multiple times a day but how long is that data how long is your tag information stored into that database? Uh again let's just say you at day 29 or day 30 you pass right through another camera and now your your your tag is is back in the system. And so again, there's a lot of questions that the public has about the system and how it's being utilized, especially if it is, you know, vehicle tags are being or continue to be um tracked. Uh and again, it's it's not a person that's being tracked. Let's let's be very clear about that. these uh LPR cameras are not tracking a a person, but they're tracking uh the the vehicle and the tag of that vehicle. Uh because again, as as we've talked about uh throughout this podcast, there's definitely a lot of positive things that have happened, but there's also definitely a lot of negative things that have happened with this technology. And I stated at the at the beginning of the of the podcast, I I noticed uh this past week, especially leading up to having this conversation tonight about u the the flock camera system, that I've seen agencies in Oklahoma, I've seen agencies in other other parts of the country who have taken to social media to explain why they are number one, why the cameras exist in the communities and the benefits of those. and they've also addressed some of the concerns that they uh that other people are are talking about with the the misuse of the cameras. But I think one of the main things that really needs to be discussed is the fact that you know when when these cameras are being misused. uh what are agencies immediately doing to address those and and up to terminating and up to making sure that criminal charges are being brought against people who are misusing the technology because and also being very uh uh transparent with the public about it when you do find these things happen. Don't just keep that information internally, but share that with the public so the public knows that you do have safeguards in place because the the last thing we need to see is where the public does not trust uh their local police department. And again, there's a lot of good positive to this technology and hopefully, you know, agencies will put some safeguards in place and they will work with Flock to uh put some things in place internally to where we don't continue to see or hear about the misuse of this technology from around the country. Um, but again, I want to thank everybody for tuning in and for the the comments that were putting into the chat and and as we talked about the flock camera backlash and the public concerns about privacy uh is not going to go away. But again, hopefully uh in the coming weeks and coming months, in the coming year that more uh safeguards will be put in place uh to prevent some of these things from happening. Uh I got one other comment in the chat from Mr. Hollis. Again, technology is very useful in preventing and solving crimes. But to deter this misconduct going forward, there needs to be uh severe penalties for police officers who misuse uh the technology. If conduct is found to be a pattern or uh repetitive, then uh the police officer should be terminated. Uh I'm not excluding uh criminal charges. Again, the public needs to know uh when officers are misusing this technology. And as we've seen u you know that I played at the top of the podcast where uh a handful of officers in the state of Georgia uh have been arrested and are charged and no that are no longer working for those uh departments. uh but they found ways to get around the system and so we need to make sure that there are safeguards that are being put in place to prevent these things from happening and that there's not patterns that are being utilized and I know you know Mr. policy. You asked this question, you know, how why would somebody feel so comfortable with uh with with violating a policy or violating uh this technology? Again, this is these are human beings. They they they make mistakes. Uh we're supposed to be um above making mistakes like this here. But again, this is just one uh piece of technology that that's a tool that's that is definitely uh there to benefit police departments, but now we're seeing that it's being misused to uh track people uh and to violate people's uh privacy. Uh but you know again I want to thank everybody for tuning in to tonight's uh [clears throat] podcast and u you know uh definitely if you miss if you miss any portions of this podcast go to our YouTube channel if you don't subscribe uh subscribe to you and the law podcast on YouTube uh follow us on on Spotify and so many other uh podcast platforms but again I want to thank everybody for tuning in and listening to our conversation. tonight about the uh the flock camera systems and the privacy concerns. Uh and make sure you tune in next Thursday because it is definitely going to be another informative topic right here on You and the Law Podcast. Everybody have a good night and see you next Thursday. That's a wrap on this episode of You and the Law Podcast. We've got more eyeopening conversations and hard-hitting insights coming your way. So, make sure you subscribe on YouTube, follow us on Spotify and Apple Podcast, and stay ready because the next episode might just change the way you see law enforcement forever.