Cops r ussys for hidin flocksafety nother tech n DAfor not beincharged widstalkin @moreperfectunion
The short version: A creator alleges police concealed Flock Safety ALPR use and that prosecutors declined to treat it as stalking, reigniting questions about accountability and consent.
Our Take
Creator AC Sincere Villanueva (posting with a nod to More Perfect Union) raises a pointed allegation: that local police withheld details about their use of Flock Safety camera networks, and that a district attorney's office wouldn't pursue stalking-related charges tied to that surveillance. We can't verify the specifics of this particular case, but the underlying tension is real and recurring — when departments treat ALPR logs as both evidence and secret, the public loses the ability to judge whether the system is being used lawfully, or abused by someone with access to it.
This is the pattern DeFlock keeps flagging: these cameras capture everyone's movements, the data trail is powerful enough to map out a person's entire life, and yet oversight is often an afterthought. If a badge or a login gives someone the ability to track an ex, a rival, or a stranger with minimal auditing, 'accidental' becomes awfully convenient language for departments that don't want to explain themselves. Transparency failures aren't just paperwork problems — they're the mechanism that lets misuse go unprosecuted.
Whatever the full story turns out to be here, it's a reminder to check what's watching your own neighborhood. Look up nearby devices on our camera map, and if you want to push back on secretive deployments or demand real audit trails, our take-action page has concrete steps for doing that.
This is DeFlock The USA’s original commentary. The video above is the work of AC sincere Villanueva, published on YouTube — full credit to the creator.