An officer shared Flock tracking information with his cousin, who faced domestic violence allegations. The woman’s complaint led investigators to discover the officer’s unauthorized database access. He was fired, but the chief says a gap in state law complicated prosecution. License plate cameras give police a powerful way to find vehicles. Unfortunately, the person using that power can have an agenda of their own. San Jose police say an officer used the department’s Flock database to track a woman who had accused his cousin of domestic violence, then shared information with that cousin. He lost his badge, but the consequences stopped short of criminal charges. Chief Paul Joseph disclosed the case on September 11, telling The Mercury News that the officer was fired in April after a roughly yearlong investigation. He had served with the department for about two years. Joseph declined to identify him, citing personnel protections and the absence of prosecution. There’s also no word on whether the individual ultimately lost their Peace Officer Certification. So it’s plausible they could be back on another squad in California already. Read: Flock Cameras Are Under Fire, But The Private Networks You Can’t See May Be Worse The investigation began in February 2025 after the woman told police that the man she accused of abuse had indicated he knew where she was. Knowing his cousin was an officer, she reported her suspicions. Investigators checked the Flock records and found the unauthorized access. According to Joseph, the officer used his personal phone to retrieve vehicle information and passed it to his cousin. The access still left an audit trail, which helped investigators establish what happened. “What we have here is a betrayal of the public’s trust. Plain and simple,” Joseph said. Importantly, Flock Safety has changed its audit log to make it far harder for the public to track down cases of misuse and abuse just like this one. Neither man was criminally charged in connection with the incidents. Joseph attributed the officer’s lack of charges partly to a gap in California law. Specifically, restrictions criminalizing improper access to certain confidential criminal databases don’t currently extend to ALPR data in the same way, he said, asking lawmakers to expressly criminalize unauthorized access and disclosure. There’s an uncomfortable detail here that deserves attention. The searches left a record, but the investigation began because the woman recognized something was wrong and spoke up. Catching misuse afterward matters. For the person whose whereabouts have already been shared with an alleged abuser, though, that protection arrives awfully late.
+3 others
