An Amarillo, Texas, man says a local police officer used automated license-plate reader cameras to track his vehicle at least 78 times over several months, a discovery he says was so unsettling that he changed where his children sleep in his home. The man obtained the tracking logs through a records request and shared them publicly this week, reigniting a national debate over police access to license-plate camera networks.
What the Records Show
According to the man, the lookups were tied to his personal vehicle and were logged by cameras made by Flock Safety, a company whose automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) are now used by thousands of police departments across the United States. The cameras photograph every passing vehicle, record the plate number, time, and location, and store the data in a searchable database that officers can query.
The man says he was not the subject of any criminal investigation and was never told why an officer repeatedly searched for his plate. He said he only learned of the pattern after filing an open-records request, which returned a log showing dozens of separate searches spread across weeks and months.
“I had to change where my kids sleep,” the man said, describing the fear he felt after realizing an officer appeared to know his daily movements, including trips near his home.
Amarillo Police Response
The Amarillo Police Department has not publicly detailed the reason for the repeated searches. Departments that use Flock cameras typically require officers to log a reason for each query, such as an active investigation, but audits in other cities have found that officers sometimes search plates for personal reasons unrelated to any case, including checking on ex-partners, family members, or people they have a personal dispute with.
Flock Safety has said its systems are meant to be used only for legitimate law enforcement purposes and that misuse should be caught through internal audits by individual police agencies. The company does not control how officers use the search reason field, leaving oversight largely up to local departments.
A Pattern Seen in Other Cities
The Amarillo case follows a string of similar reports elsewhere. Journalists and civil liberties groups have documented instances where officers ran plate searches without a clear investigative purpose, and some cities have pulled back on camera contracts after public backlash. NarwhalTV previously reported on a California city that found Flock cameras reinstalled after officials had voted to cancel the program, illustrating how difficult it can be for local governments to fully remove the technology once it is deployed.
Privacy advocates argue that the sheer volume of data collected by ALPR networks — often searchable across state lines through shared databases — makes it easy for a single officer to track someone’s daily routine, home address, workplace, and social contacts without a warrant.
Why 78 Searches Raises Concern
Legal experts say that while a handful of plate lookups tied to a specific investigation would raise little alarm, dozens of repeated searches on the same private citizen, absent any documented case, suggests the system was used to monitor someone’s personal movements rather than to solve or prevent a crime.
- Automated plate readers can capture a vehicle’s location every time it passes a camera, building a detailed movement history over time.
- Search logs are supposed to include a reason, but enforcement of that requirement varies widely between departments.
- Data from local Flock networks can sometimes be shared with or accessed by other agencies through regional or national sharing agreements.
Broader Surveillance Concerns
The Amarillo case adds to a growing list of stories this year highlighting how surveillance tools originally marketed for public safety are raising new privacy questions. Similar debates have emerged around other technologies, including concerns that Meta’s smart glasses could enable covert recording, and legislative pushes such as Australia’s proposed law letting users opt out of algorithmic tracking.
What Happens Next
The man says he plans to file a formal complaint with the Amarillo Police Department and is considering legal options. He has not identified the officer publicly, saying he wants an internal investigation to run its course first.
Civil liberties organizations, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have long called for stricter audit requirements and public transparency reports for ALPR systems, arguing that without independent oversight, misuse can go undetected for years. Amarillo city officials have not said whether they will review the department’s Flock camera usage policies in response to the incident.
For now, the man says the experience has changed how his family lives day to day, a personal toll he says should prompt broader questions about who watches the watchers when it comes to police surveillance technology.
