TALLADEGA, Ala. — A Talladega County man is being held on $200,000 bond after authorities accused him of repeatedly shooting and damaging county-owned Flock Safety cameras, an arrest that comes as automated license plate readers face increased scrutiny in Alabama and nationwide.
Six criminal complaints filed in Talladega County District Court accuse Colton Lynn Dorough, 36, of damaging Flock camera systems owned by the Talladega County Commission. The complaints list 10 counts: six counts of first-degree criminal mischief and four counts of damage to utility or cable property.
Four of the complaints allege Dorough used a gun to damage the cameras. Two others accuse him of damaging Flock systems without specifying how. Each complaint alleges more than $2,500 in damage, according to court records reported by ABC 33/40.
Dorough was arrested July 29 and remained in the Talladega County Jail as of this week. The accusations are allegations, and Dorough is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
The reports do not identify a motive, and the criminal complaints do not link the alleged shootings to political or privacy objections to the cameras. But the case has arrived during a widening public debate over Flock Safety and other automated license plate reader systems, which log vehicle plates, locations, dates and times as vehicles pass camera sites.
Flock’s cameras are used by law enforcement agencies, governments, private businesses and neighborhood associations. The company says its systems help agencies find stolen vehicles, locate missing people and develop leads in violent-crime investigations. It says access is controlled by local agencies, searches are recorded and each agency decides whether to share its data with other agencies.
Civil liberties advocates, however, argue that the systems can facilitate broad, warrantless location surveillance of people who are not suspected of crimes. The American Civil Liberties Union says automatic license plate reader systems can reveal sensitive details about a person’s movements, including visits to doctors, houses of worship, political meetings and protests.
The technology has faced recent controversy close to Birmingham. In July, the Moody Police Department terminated an officer after an internal investigation found a violation of the department’s license plate reader policy. A Springville officer resigned after an audit found searches involving a family member. Both matters were referred to the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency for review.
Birmingham police told ABC 33/40 that the department audits officer searches every 30 days and requires searches to include an offense type, such as a missing person, robbery, stolen vehicle, homicide investigation or shots fired. The department said it uses the system to identify vehicles connected to crimes and to locate stolen vehicles and missing people.
Alabama already has statewide administrative rules governing law enforcement use of license plate recognition data. The rules limit collection, use and sharing to criminal justice or public-safety purposes; require access and sharing logs; require agencies to adopt and publicize written policies; and allow retention of data for up to five years, with longer retention permitted in active investigations or pending cases.
The rules also require the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division to audit capturing agencies at least once every three years. Misuse is to be investigated in the same manner as alleged misuse of other ALEA information systems.
Nationally, the backlash has prompted some cities and counties to cancel or reconsider Flock contracts, often over concerns about data sharing, immigration enforcement, retention practices and insufficient public oversight. Government Technology reported that 82 Flock contracts in 28 states were terminated between August 2021 and May 2026, while Flock has maintained that it does not provide Immigration and Customs Enforcement direct access to its camera-generated data.
The Talladega County case underscores a central distinction in that debate: concerns about surveillance policy and government accountability do not excuse alleged destruction of public property. The charges against Dorough will be decided in court, while Alabama communities continue to confront a separate question about how much vehicle surveillance they will permit — and under what safeguards.