Take garden shears to a surveillance camera and you might expect a misdemeanor. What Evan Meyer allegedly didn’t expect was three felony charges — for destroying a piece of plastic that was never actually watching anyone. The camera was a replica, fabricated on a personal 3D printer by an Oviedo officer at home. The mayor of Oviedo found out about the whole operation roughly when you did. That’s not a reassuring detail for anyone who cares about how police use covert tactics in their city.
The Sting
Multiple real Flock Safety cameras were targeted before police quietly set a trap — with no documented authorization chain.
Between July 23 and August 3, 2026, multiple real Flock Safety cameras — automated license-plate readers — were stolen or vandalized along the Lockwood Boulevard corridor, according to 404 Media. Police responded by setting a trap.
Here’s what reportedly happened:
- An officer fabricated decoy cameras on a personally owned 3D printer at home, designed to resemble real Flock units without collecting any data
- The decoy was donated to the department — no purchase order, apparently
- Police monitored the fake camera until Meyer allegedly cut it down with pruning shears and smashed it
- Meyer was charged with three felonies: attempted grand theft, criminal mischief causing over $1,000 in damage, and damaging computer equipment property
- Police say Meyer believed it was a real camera — that belief is what supports the felony-level valuations
The Transparency Problem
The authorization gap matters: Oviedo’s mayor learned about the covert operation after the arrest, and the department claims no planning records exist.
Mayor Megan Sladek told WESH she was “speechless” when she learned about the operation. Sladek said she didn’t know who paid for the decoy or how it was authorized, per WFTV. The Oviedo Police Department, meanwhile, claims there are no meeting minutes, emails, or text messages about the decoy’s creation prior to the arrest. It also refused to release planning records, citing an active investigation. The department did not respond to requests for further comment by publication time.
The accountability gap here is hard to ignore. A police department ran a covert sting using undocumented, homemade surveillance equipment — in a city already publicly debating whether to renew its Flock contract over privacy concerns. The question isn’t just whether the tactic worked. It’s whether anyone formally approved it, and whether that answer should concern you regardless of how you feel about surveillance cameras.
Meyer’s case remains active. The Flock contract is still under review. Whoever authorized a secret bait-camera operation with zero paper trail hasn’t stepped forward to explain themselves.
