These FALSE arrests and stops starting to make sense. Flock is feeding the police ALERTS 🚨 based off of altered, degraded, low-resolution copies of license plate data ALERTS . If POLICE want a more high-resolution original file with the metadata, the police department is forced to go back to Flock and request the "premium" file from Flock's corporate vault. Flock is deliberately degrading evidence to artificially manufacture a dependence and they’ve altered their TERMS & CONDITIONS 4X MID CONTRACT Why would a company do this? Because If the police only get degraded copies, the police investigation relies on Flock to "enhance" or provide the real data. But more importantly, if the police department cancels the contract (like Evanston or LAPD), the police lose access to their own "owned" data because Flock controls the method and medium of access. But Flock retains a perpetual license to use the high-resolution data. Say a CITY wants to LEAVE and CANCEL FLOCK contract the police lose access to the high-resolution originals. If THEY have OPEN cases they all die because the degraded copies they have on file are legally useless in court. This guarantees Flock's contracts are practically unbreakable.🚨⚠️ They are holding the original evidence hostage to ensure police departments can never truly leave their platform. 🚨🚨 If the police use a degraded Flock image in court, the defense will destroy it because it lacks authentication (no metadata). This guarantees that cases will be thrown out or wrongful convictions will occur because the original high-quality data is withheld by Flock as leverage. One example ⚠️ LAPD's audit found that 161 plate matches were confirmed by officers, but the vehicles were not stolen. That means the "hot lists" feeding the alerts are inaccurate. Why is this allowed to persist? Flock's new T&C expands protections against liability for willful misconduct or gross negligence ⚠️. Flock knows the alerts are false. They know cops are stopping people based on bad data. But they shifted the liability to the taxpayers (the city) and locked the city into mandatory arbitration in Georgia so the citizens can't sue Flock effectively. —— Another case is where Evanston, Illinois, voted to cancel their Flock contract and deactivate their 19 cameras in August 2025. They issued an official termination notice. During the termination period, the cameras disappeared from the poles. But then, Flock physically reinstalled the cameras back on Evanston streets without municipal authorization🚨👀 Evanston issued a cease-and-desist order on September 18. Flock claimed the reinstalled cameras were "inactive," but they left them up for months, only removing them when a news organization started asking questions. Why would a company reinstall dead cameras on public poles after being fired? Look at the new February 2026 contract terms. Flock wrote in a "perpetual" right for themselves to keep using customer data to "support and improve its services" even after a town terminates its relationship with Flock. Flock wrote the perpetual license into the contract because they are building a shadow surveillance network using the physical infrastructure of cancelled jurisdictions. A camera that is "inactive" to the local police department is not inactive to Flock's corporate servers🚨👀. The Flock cameras are solar-powered and cellular-enabled. They do not need the local police department's network to operate. They connect directly to Flock's cloud.. When Evanston cancelled their contract, Flock reinstalled the cameras because those cameras were still transmitting raw vehicle data to Flock's nationwide database for their own proprietary use. They bypassed the local city council entirely. Flock is using the physical utility poles of cities that explicitly fired them to illegally harvest location data on American citizens without a government contract or legal authorization aclu.org/news/privacy-techno… @RepThomasMassie