Flock says its cameras worked fine. A Colorado woman disagrees

A Denver woman is suing Flock Safety and two municipalities after police wrongly accused her of stealing a $25 package based on license plate camera data. Chrisanna Elser, a certified financial planner who lives in south Denver’s Fort Logan neighborhood, said the accusation jeopardized her employment and left her unnerved by how much information police could access.

“It’s very nerve-wracking to know that they’re really indoctrinated into the technology for just a town of 900 people,” Elser said.

On Sept. 27, 2025, Columbine Valley police Sgt. Jamie Milliman arrived at Elser’s home and accused her of stealing a package from a doorstep in Bow Mar. Flock cameras had captured her green Rivian traveling on the street where the theft occurred, but video from the home did not show the thief getting into Elser’s vehicle.

Flock Safety says its technology was not the problem.

“Flock is an investigative tool used alongside other evidence to help law enforcement solve crimes,” said Paris Lewbel, Flock’s public relations manager. “As noted in the complaint, the Flock system accurately identified the location of Ms. Elser’s vehicle, while law enforcement retained responsibility for interpreting and weighing that information as part of the broader investigation.”

That distinction is now at the center of Elser’s lawsuit: whether a surveillance system can function accurately and still contribute to a wrongful accusation when police treat location data as stronger evidence than it is.

“We have cameras throughout the town. You can’t take a breath of fresh air without us knowing,” Milliman said in Ring doorbell footage of the encounter.

He wouldn’t show Elser the video of her supposedly stealing the package, saying she could see it in court. Elser offered to show Milliman video from her truck showing that she drove to her tailor a quarter mile from the scene, but he refused to see it.

“If you’re going to deny it, I’m not going to extend you any courtesy,” Milliman said in the video as Elser looked at her husband in disbelief.

Elser later provided police with video from her Rivian and location data from her phone showing she was at a tailor when the package was stolen. The summons was voided Oct. 15, 2025. Nevertheless, Elser’s federal lawsuit names Flock Safety, Columbine Valley, Bow Mar, Milliman and Police Chief Bret Cottrell, alleging they used surveillance technology without adequate safeguards or oversight.

“She has never committed a crime in her life and has never even been accused of committing a crime,” said Andrew McNulty, who is representing Elser in this case. 

According to McNulty, the footage of Elser’s Rivian is the only evidence connecting her to the area. Video from the doorstep where the package was stolen does not show the thief getting into a vehicle.

“To be candid, that woman was like 20 years younger than my client and didn’t look like her at all other than having blonde hair,” McNulty said.

McNulty said the case shows how location data generated through automated license plate readers can take on more significance than it deserves once it enters a police investigation.

“Because of AI, those cameras can be used to create a detailed mosaic of where everyone goes at any given time,” he said.

Flock rejects the suggestion that its cameras determine guilt or identify suspects on their own. The company says its system provides investigative leads and that law enforcement is responsible for deciding how those leads fit with other evidence.

McNulty agreed that police bear responsibility for how the data is used but said Flock should also have stronger safeguards in place to prevent misuse.

“If you give a bazooka to a toddler, you don’t just get mad at the toddler … You get mad at the person who gave the bazooka to the toddler,” he said. “And that’s what Flock is doing here.”

McNulty said the level of tracking is unprecedented, and Flock is not providing enough training to police officers.

“We’re hopeful that we can not only get some compensation for Chrisanna but also send a message that this is unacceptable and prevent this from happening to anyone else,” McNulty said. “I think I read a news story a day nowadays of these Flock cameras being used in ways that are just absolutely horrifying.”

He pointed to other reported cases involving officers accused of using license plate-reader databases for personal purposes. Elser’s lawsuit also raises questions about Milliman’s own disciplinary history.

The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office fired Milliman in 2013 after finding that he failed to take reports as required by policy, failed to read Miranda rights to a juvenile before questioning and failed to complete required paperwork.

Cottrell, the police chief who is also named in the lawsuit, has issued Milliman a letter of reprimand for rude behavior, a dismissive attitude and an unwillingness to de-escalate during the encounter with Elser. The reprimand also directed Milliman to complete additional training in community relations, de-escalation and interview techniques.

Cottrell did not respond to Bucket List Community News’ request for comment.

The dispute comes as Flock’s footprint continues to grow. The company now operates roughly 120,000 cameras across 49 states. Flock says its technology helped law enforcement locate approximately 10,000 missing people in 2025, a figure based on the company’s own customer survey and statistical estimates.

The cameras can provide law enforcement with data points about where a vehicle was seen, but they do not independently establish whether the driver committed a crime. That is the distinction McNulty says matters most in Elser’s case.

“The government’s not going to step in,” he said. “So we have to step in as private citizens and bring these lawsuits.”