The short version
- Tyler Murkerson alleges that Coweta County deputies conducted warrantless searches of his vehicle using Flock’s system without valid investigative justifications.
- The lawsuit highlights systemic vulnerabilities in the software, which previously allowed officers to enter arbitrary text rather than specific case numbers to execute searches.
- Flock has announced plans to require verifiable case codes for all searches by year-end, while the sheriff’s office conducts an internal audit following staff resignations.
A Georgia resident has filed a federal lawsuit accusing local law enforcement and a major surveillance technology provider of engaging in retaliatory monitoring. Tyler Murkerson, a small-business owner, claims that deputies from the Coweta County Sheriff’s Office used automated license plate reader data to track his vehicle movements over several months. The alleged surveillance occurred while Murkerson was pursuing a separate legal action against the department for excessive force, raising questions about whether the technology was weaponized to intimidate a critic of police conduct.
The conflict traces back to February 2023, when Murkerson was arrested by sheriff’s deputies on charges related to an alleged seatbelt violation. Those criminal charges were eventually dropped. In September 2024, Murkerson filed a civil suit alleging excessive force during the arrest. That case has since been settled, but Murkerson contends that during the pendency of his lawsuit, deputies repeatedly queried his license plate information through Flock’s platform. He further alleges that officers physically followed or monitored him as he traveled to and from his residence.
Central to the complaint is the manner in which deputies accessed the surveillance data. Murkerson’s attorneys argue that the searches were conducted without probable cause and unrelated to any active investigation. The lawsuit details that when deputies searched for Murkerson’s vehicle, they entered vague or nonsensical rationales into the system’s free-text fields. Specifically, the complaint notes that the justifications recorded were simply “info” and “37,” neither of which corresponded to a documented case, incident, or call for service.
This practice exploits a known design flaw in Flock’s software architecture. For years, the platform allowed law enforcement agencies to execute searches by entering any text into a free-form field, rather than requiring specific, verifiable case numbers. Legal experts and privacy advocates have long criticized this feature, noting that it enables officers to conduct surveillance without creating an auditable trail of legitimate investigative intent. The complaint cites examples from other departments where officers entered terms like “investigation” or even “hehehe” to bypass accountability measures.
Attorneys for Murkerson emphasize that the core issue is not merely the collection of license plate images, but the lack of procedural safeguards against abuse. Chris Hall, one of Murkerson’s lawyers, stated that the ability for police to conduct Fourth Amendment-implicated searches without controls is deeply troubling. The lawsuit asserts that these actions violated both Georgia state law and constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure, characterizing the monitoring as illegal surveillance rather than legitimate law enforcement activity.
The timing of the allegations coincides with broader scrutiny of Flock’s business practices. In August 2026, the company announced it would update its software to require case codes for all law enforcement searches by the end of the year. This change is intended to mitigate abuses by ensuring that every query is tied to a specific, verifiable investigation. The Coweta County Sheriff’s Office also initiated an internal audit of the system in August, a process that reportedly led to the resignation of three employees before its completion.
Privacy advocates view this case as symptomatic of a larger cultural problem within policing organizations that utilize surveillance technology. Brian Hofer, chair of Secure Justice, noted that while he is unaware of similar lawsuits, the incident underscores the gap between official policy and actual practice. He suggested that guardrails often fail when organizational culture prioritizes unchecked access over accountability, comparing the situation to broader institutional disregard for legal constraints.
Flock has firmly rejected the allegations, maintaining that its technology plays a vital role in helping law enforcement solve crimes and locate missing persons. A spokesperson stated that the company stands by the integrity of its platform and intends to vigorously defend its position in court. The Coweta County Sheriff’s Office did not immediately respond to requests for comment regarding the specific claims made in the complaint.
This lawsuit arrives as hundreds of law enforcement agencies have dropped Flock services, driven by public backlash over concerns about overbroad surveillance. The case may serve as a test of whether software providers can be held liable for how their tools are used by government actors. If successful, it could establish new precedents for accountability in the use of automated license plate readers and similar tracking technologies.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the outcome will likely influence how other jurisdictions manage access to surveillance data. The requirement for verifiable case codes represents a significant shift in industry standards, but critics argue that technical fixes alone may not prevent misuse if underlying policing cultures remain unchanged. Murkerson’s case highlights the ongoing tension between public safety objectives and individual privacy rights in an era of increasingly sophisticated digital monitoring.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- Ars Technica↗Georgia man sues Flock, sheriff's office over alleged ALPR-fueled retaliation
