404 Media Asks Residents to Seek Axon Police Camera Search and Sharing Logs

404 Media is widening its investigation into police use of Axon license-plate-reader cameras, asking residents to seek public records that could reveal how officers search the systems and which agencies receive the data. The outlet says it has already obtained activity reports from six police agencies across the United States.

The request arrives as some cities and police departments replace Flock automatic license-plate-reader cameras with comparable Axon systems, according to 404 Media. The publication links part of that shift to scrutiny of police searches in Flock’s network, including searches connected to Immigration and Customs Enforcement and an abortion-related investigation.

That makes the question larger than which camera sits on a pole. The records 404 Media is seeking are designed to show when an officer searched Axon’s automatic license-plate-reader system, the officer’s name and badge number, the plate searched, and the stated reason for the search. They can create an audit trail, but a stated reason is not itself an independent finding that a search was justified.

Four reports turn a camera system into a paper trail

404 Media’s proposed request covers records from January 1, 2025 through the date an agency processes it. It asks for four report types, shifting the inquiry from individual searches to the relationships and alert settings around a department’s camera system.

• Internal ALPR Activity records searches, exports, and record access by an agency’s own users.
• Network ALPR Activity covers use of shared data by partner agencies.
• ALPR Data Sharing records agencies invited to receive data or removed from access.
• ALPR Hotlist Management Audit details changes to alerts an agency may receive.

This distinction matters because an agency’s own search history and another agency’s use of its data answer different questions. The first can show local operator activity; the second can show how access works once a department has opened a sharing relationship.

Axon describes sharing as permissioned, not automatic

Axon’s July release notes describe cross-agency sharing as a deliberate workflow: one agency invites a specific partner, and the recipient must accept before sharing begins. Axon also says the data owner can revoke a sharing relationship and review a full audit trail from both the donor and recipient sides.

Those product controls do not mean the public automatically sees the resulting trail. They explain why 404 Media’s request seeks both network-use and data-sharing reports: together, they may show which access relationships were created or ended and how partners used shared data.

One city’s disclosure offers a limited precedent

There is evidence that such material can be public. Healdsburg, California, says its online ALPR documents were current as of September 9 and lists an Axon ALPR audit alongside a combined Flock and Axon vendor-history report. That is a useful example of disclosure, not evidence that records are equally accessible in every jurisdiction.

The six agencies whose reports 404 Media has obtained are Benton County Sheriff’s Office in Washington, Falmouth Police Department in Maine, Johns Creek Police Department in Georgia, Ocean Shores Police Department in Washington, Pleasanton Police Department in Texas, and Red Wing Police Department in Minnesota. Its resident-led request effort is now a test of whether comparable logs emerge elsewhere—and whether they make police search and sharing practices easier for the public to inspect.