A Real Misuse Case With Direct Implications for Indiana

Reporting from The Wichita Eagle, KAKE, KWCH, and WKRC shows that former Sedgwick, Kansas Police Chief Lee Nygaard misused Flock Safety license plate readers to track his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend. Nygaard used the system 164 times on her vehicle and 64 times on the boyfriend’s tag, for a total of 228 searches over four months. He also used his police vehicle to follow them outside city limits. Nygaard later admitted that jealousy was involved.

He resigned in October 2023 during a misconduct investigation. His police certification was revoked. He did not face criminal charges. This incident is now one of the few publicly documented cases of ALPR misuse in the United States.

What the Kansas Investigation Found

According to the Kansas Commission on Peace Officers’ Standards and Training:

  • Nygaard repeatedly searched Flock ALPR data for personal reasons,
  • He listed false justifications such as missing child, drug investigation, and suspicious activity,
  • He followed his ex-girlfriend and her boyfriend in a police vehicle,
  • He confronted her at least once and told her to return to town,
  • He admitted that jealousy motivated his behavior.

This misuse was discovered only because he was already under investigation for unrelated misconduct.

A Pattern of ALPR Abuse in Sedgwick County

This was the second reported ALPR misuse case in Sedgwick County:

  • In 2022, a Kechi police lieutenant used Wichita’s Flock cameras to stalk his estranged wife. He was sentenced to probation.

Kansas agencies have acknowledged that ALPR searches are not individually reviewed. Wichita police said they do not and cannot investigate every search because the volume is too high.

This creates an environment where improper searches can go undetected unless flagged by a larger misconduct inquiry.

Why This Matters for Indiana

Indiana has more than 1,300 known ALPR cameras, many supplied by Flock Safety. Despite rapid expansion, Indiana has no statewide ALPR law. Local police departments set their own rules, creating wide differences in retention, access, and oversight.

Without statewide standards, an Indiana officer could:

  • Run ALPR searches without a legitimate purpose,
  • Use location data to monitor someone over time,
  • Provide false or misleading search justifications,
  • Access data from shared regional or national networks,
  • Avoid detection unless an unrelated internal investigation occurred.

What the Kansas Case Shows

The Sedgwick case provides a clear example of how ALPR systems can be misused even when agencies trust their officers and maintain internal policies. Kansas officials said they relied heavily on the chief’s integrity. That trust was misplaced.

ALPR systems collect sensitive location data that reveal daily routines, relationships, visits, and associations. When access controls are weak, this information can be turned into a personal tracking tool.

What Indiana Should Consider

Indiana could prevent similar incidents by adopting statewide ALPR standards that require:

  • Strict retention limits,
  • Transparent access logs,
  • Mandatory audits,
  • Clear penalties for misuse,
  • Public reporting on ALPR activity,
  • Limits on data sharing with outside agencies.

These protections safeguard both the public and law enforcement by providing consistent statewide rules.

The Takeaway for Hoosiers

Misuse does not require sophisticated hacking or insider conspiracy. It only requires one officer with unrestricted access and no statewide oversight. Indiana’s current lack of regulation leaves residents exposed to the same risks demonstrated in Sedgwick.

How You Can Help

  • Sign the petition for statewide ALPR standards: eyesoffindiana.org/petition
  • Share this article to raise awareness,
  • Contact lawmakers to support retention limits, audit requirements, and transparency rules.

Indiana can use ALPR technology responsibly, but it needs clear statewide protections to prevent misuse.