The Hall County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO) has completed its audit of use of the Flock camera system by its employees and Sheriff Gerald Couch has issued his first comments on those findings which resulted in the firings of several deputies.
Couch also revealed some of the safeguards his office has put into place in hopes of preventing abuse of the system in the future.
Here’s the text of his full statement:
“Over several weeks, law enforcement across the country has dealt with public fallout over misuse of
the Flock Safety system. The Hall County Sheriff’s Office has had to address negligent use of Flock in
our own agency. We have not hidden from it and have taken appropriate action in each of the seven
cases uncovered in a widespread audit of our Flock system. Three employees were fired and four
resigned while under investigation for accessing Flock data for non-law enforcement reasons.
As a profession, law enforcement failed, and as a company, Flock failed from the beginning. If your
company name has the word safety in it, your products should include safeguards. From the outset,
Flock did not provide audit tools for agencies and only recently introduced them. Too many officers
across the country and here at home used the time without oversight to misuse the system.
Additionally, our agency and the company should have been proactive in educating the community
on the benefits and limits of the system. While I’m critical of Flock’s previous lack of safeguards, I
have witnessed the benefits of its use in investigations. Our investigators have solved cases because
of our access to the system. One recent instance helped lead them to a murder suspect who
ultimately was arrested hundreds of miles away. That success can be attributed to solid police work
and the professional use of a good tool.
I believe we cannot not discount the positive outcomes Flock can help deliver; however, we must
put our own guardrails in place to ensure we’re using it correctly.
So, here is what we have done in Hall County to correct the issues:
- We completed our own review on September 4, 2026, based on the audit provided to us by
Flock Safety. The irregularities were reported directly to us so we could further analyze the data. Our Internal Affairs (IA) Unit reviewed 758 Flock searches. IA flagged 85 as anomalous or
suspicious in nature. - We made sure there was immediate accountability for violators. Those who violated policy
were terminated or resigned while under investigation. - While the sheriff’s office terminated employees or accepted their resignations for policy
violations, we made criminal referral on all seven cases to the Georgia Bureau of Investigation or
to the Hall County Solicitor for review and possible charges. - All violations will be referred to the Georgia Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST)
Council for professional and certification review. Pending review, it is possible the former
employees may lose their officer certifications. - We have established an updated policy and restrictions. Every vehicle search must now be tied
to a specific criminal case and offense type before it can be submitted. In addition, restricted access
on the number of users in the agency has gone from 124 to only 24. Those 24 users must undergo
specialized training. - We have implemented system-wide safeguards. Flock will now require the labeling of every
search with a criminal case number and will implement an automatic review for abnormal search
activities. Data retention has been shortened from 30 days to seven (7) days, unless the data is
specifically needed as evidence in an investigation. - We have increased our transparency. Our Transparency Portal is open to the public on our
website daily. We use Flock to capture objective evidence without compromising individual privacy
and only conduct searches to solve crimes after they have occurred.
When used correctly, lawfully and honestly, Flock is an investigative tool, not an invasion of privacy.
Should there be policies outlining its proper use with accountability and consequences for
violations? Absolutely.
I want to be very clear that misuse of a tool and legitimate use of a tool are two very different
conversations. The system alone does not solve cases. It doesn’t give us probable cause, warrants
when required, evidence, interviews or good old-fashioned police work. Quite simply, it is another
lead. Sometimes that lead takes us from “we have no idea where they went” to locating a suspect, or
more importantly, finding a missing person we desperately need to locate.
The answer to potential misuse isn’t always eliminating the tool. Sometimes it’s making sure the
people entrusted with it are using it correctly and holding them accountable when they don’t.