Georgia deputies allegedly tracked a man’s every move for six months with flock cameras. Then he discovered it started after he sued them
Some suspicions leave a digital trail
Suing the police shouldn’t mean becoming their next target. But one Georgia man claims that after filing a civil rights lawsuit against sheriff’s deputies, his movements were monitored for months. And he wasn’t even under criminal investigation.
Tyler Murkerson noticed patrol cars near his home, workplace, and daily routes. He suspected deputies were following him, but even his wife thought he was imagining things. Then he discovered records that appeared to support his fears.
According to Atlanta Black Star, deputies allegedly tracked Murkerson’s vehicle using Flock Safety cameras over 197 days. The surveillance overlapped with his lawsuit against the same sheriff’s department. What he uncovered raised troubling questions about police retaliation.
He had a reason to worry
The dispute began in February 2023. Coweta County sheriff’s deputies stopped Murkerson at a Newnan gas station over an alleged seat belt violation.
According to his complaint, deputies threw him onto the pavement and handcuffed him. Body camera footage showed Deputy Radford Brooks pressing his forearm against Murkerson’s neck while Deputy James Teare tased him.
Prosecutors dismissed both charges in June 2023. They included failing to wear a seat belt and obstructing an officer.
In September 2024, Murkerson sued both deputies and Sheriff Leonard Wood, alleging excessive force. He maintained that he hadn’t resisted and argued that Georgia’s seat belt law didn’t apply on private property.
While the lawsuit was pending, Murkerson began noticing sheriff’s vehicles along his commute. Deputies allegedly parked near his driveway and vehicle repair business. Police also stopped him at two roadblocks along his regular routes.
The complaint further alleges that Deputy William Faulkner’s Dodge Hellcat repeatedly appeared near a gas station. Murkerson regularly passed that location.
As his suspicions grew, he eventually ended a six-year business relationship servicing vehicles for a neighboring police department. He feared for his safety.
In August 2026, the sheriff’s office disclosed an internal audit involving Flock Safety access. Three employees resigned before the review concluded. The department also requested an investigation by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.
Reports of police misusing surveillance technology to track people prompted Murkerson to search his vehicle on haveibeenflocked.com, a website containing publicly obtained camera audit logs.
The results were alarming. His lawsuit alleges five searches covering May through November 2025, with 76 cameras recording his vehicle over 197 days.
Two operators were identified as William and Randall Faulkner, while three others remained unidentified. Murkerson also alleges his vehicle was placed on a persistent alert list connected to at least 6,000 Flock networks nationwide.
Standard camera scans have a 30-day retention period. However, the complaint claims his location information was stored longer.
Search operators reportedly entered vague justifications, including “info” and “37,” without identifying any criminal investigation. Murkerson had no outstanding warrants or active criminal cases during that period.
The allegations emerge as Flock cameras face congressional scrutiny over surveillance abuses. Murkerson’s complaint argues that the company’s safeguards allowed searches without legitimate law enforcement purposes.
Flock introduced optional auditing software in April 2026 and made case numbers mandatory in August. However, the complaint questions whether those measures adequately prevent misuse.
Murkerson’s new lawsuit alleges constitutional violations, retaliation, unlawful database access, and negligence. It seeks damages, deletion of improperly obtained records, and class-action status for affected Georgia residents. Eligible plaintiffs also seek $2,500 per alleged federal privacy-law violation.
His attorney said the original lawsuit was confidentially resolved in August 2026. The new case remains pending, and the proposed class hasn’t been certified.
The sheriff’s office declined to address the allegations, citing pending litigation. For Murkerson, months of suspicion led to a troubling discovery. Now, the question is why deputies were allegedly searching his movements at all.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]
Follow The Mary Sue:
