Update, September 2, 2026: Additional analysis of the records found that some Flock searches with a blank Case # field contained what appear to be case numbers in the separate Reason field. The original analysis correctly found that 1,781 of 5,719 records, or 31.1%, had a blank Case # field. That figure should not be interpreted to mean that all 1,781 records lacked case information elsewhere in the audit data. Niles Connect is conducting a further analysis of those records and will report the findings separately.
An analysis of 5,719 Niles Police Department Flock audit records
found that 1,781 records, or 31.1%, had no case number entered in the
system’s Case # field.
The records reviewed cover June 1, 2025 through February 6, 2026,
a period of just over eight months.
During that period, the Niles Flock audit records show:
- 5,719 total Flock audit records
- 3,938 with a case number
- 1,781 without a case number
The records also show that 43 Niles officers or users had at least
one audit record where no case number was entered.
That finding is especially relevant now because Flock Safety has announced changes
to its system that will require law-enforcement users to enter a
case number or case code when conducting searches.
The Highest-Volume Niles Flock User
The highest-volume user identified in the records was
Officer Andrew Mendez.
During the audit period, Mendez had:
- 701 total Flock audit records
- 495 with a case number
- 206 without a case number
That means 29.4% of Mendez’s recorded Flock activity had no case
number entered in the Case # field.
Mendez was publicly sworn in as a Niles police officer during the
October 22, 2019 Village Board meeting.
Police Officers Andrew Mendez and Stephanie Hofer were sworn in during that
evening’s Village Board meeting.
Mendez Wasn’t the Only Officer
While Mendez was the highest-volume Flock user in the records
reviewed, he did not have the highest number of audit records without a case number.
That distinction belongs to Kevin Regal.
Regal had 369 total Flock audit records, with
207 containing no case number, representing
56.1% of his recorded activity.
| Officer/User | Total Flock Uses | Without Case # | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Andrew Mendez | 701 | 206 | 29.4% |
| Anthony Kudra | 479 | 48 | 10.0% |
| John Norwood | 403 | 162 | 40.2% |
| Kevin Regal | 369 | 207 | 56.1% |
| Robert Vehlow | 317 | 108 | 34.1% |
| Jessica Zia | 282 | 0 | 0.0% |
| Jesse Bloomberg | 258 | 55 | 21.3% |
| Andre Caro | 252 | 92 | 36.5% |
| Joshua Guerrero | 244 | 112 | 45.9% |
| Christopher Koch | 188 | 62 | 33.0% |
These figures demonstrate that missing case numbers were not isolated to one
officer or a handful of records.
Why Does a Missing Case Number Matter?
A blank case-number field does not automatically mean that a Flock search
was improper, unauthorized or illegal.
There could be legitimate law-enforcement purposes for individual searches,
and related incident or investigative information could be documented elsewhere.
But the absence of a case number raises an important accountability question.
A case number creates a direct link between use of a surveillance database and
the police investigation that justified it.
If a search is questioned later, a case number provides supervisors and auditors
with a starting point for determining the investigative purpose and reviewing
the underlying police records.
In 1,781 Niles Flock audit records reviewed, that link was absent from
the Case # field.
How did Niles Police supervisors verify and audit Flock activity when no
case number was entered into the system?
Flock Is Now Changing the System
This issue has become even more relevant following changes announced by Flock
Safety in August 2026.
After months of investigative reporting and public scrutiny surrounding
law-enforcement use of its nationwide license plate reader network, Flock
announced several new safeguards.
InvestigateTV reports that Flock will require law-enforcement users to provide
a case number or case code when conducting searches.
Emergency searches may still be permitted without the normal identifier, but
those exceptions are expected to be flagged for administrative review.
Flock is also making its Audit Assistance system mandatory
for law-enforcement customers. The system is intended to identify potentially
suspicious activity and provide additional administrative oversight.
Read the InvestigateTV report on Flock’s announced changes
Flock is now implementing a safeguard requiring identifying information
that was absent from 1,781 of the Niles audit records reviewed.
What the Records Do and Don’t Establish
The audit does not prove that Niles officers conducted 1,781 improper
searches.
What the records establish is more precise:
Between June 1, 2025 and February 6, 2026, 1,781 of 5,719 Niles Flock audit
records, or 31.1%, contained no case number in Flock’s Case # field.
The next question is what internal safeguards Niles used when that field was blank.
- Were supervisors routinely reviewing the Flock audit logs?
- Were searches without case numbers reconciled against incident reports or other police records?
- Could administrators identify the underlying law-enforcement purpose for each record?
- Did Niles require officers to enter a case number when one existed?
- Were searches without case numbers specifically flagged for supervisory review?
The Question for Niles Going Forward
Flock’s newly announced case-number requirement creates another question for
Niles officials:
Will the new Flock safeguards materially change how Niles officers use the system?
If requiring a case number or case code is important enough for Flock to build
directly into its platform, the public has a legitimate interest in understanding
why nearly one-third of the Niles activity reviewed did not contain that information.
By the Numbers
Audit period: June 1, 2025 through February 6, 2026
Niles Flock audit records reviewed: 5,719
With case number: 3,938
Without case number: 1,781
Percentage without case number: 31.1%
Users with at least one blank Case # entry: 43
Highest-volume user: Andrew Mendez, 701 records
Mendez records without case number: 206
Largest number without case number: Kevin Regal, 207
These numbers do not establish misconduct, but they do raise legitimate questions
about documentation, supervisory review, and accountability surrounding
Niles Police Department’s use of the Flock surveillance system.