Ars Technica Article - Red Light Camera Ticket

[Skid]

A law professor goes up against the man when he gets a red light camera ticket and wasn't driving the car at the time.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/...of-the-century/

Some highlights:
The City Attorney could not answer his basic question of whether this was a civil case or a criminal case.
Quote:
I asked her whether this was a criminal action or a civil action. She replied, “It’s hard to explain it in those terms.” I asked whether she intended to proceed under criminal procedural rules or in civil procedure. We would proceed under the “rules of criminal procedure,” she answered because this is a criminal case. I asked when I could expect to be charged, indicted, or have a probable cause determination. She replied that none of those events would occur because this is “a civil action.” So I could expect to be served with a complaint? No, no. As she had already explained, we would proceed under the criminal rules.

The cop who signed the affidavit admitted to perjuring himself on the stand for not having enough information for probable cause.
Quote:
- He was not present at the time of the alleged violation.
- He has no photographic evidence of the driver.
- There were no witnesses.
- He does not know where Adam MacLeod was at the time of the alleged violation.

 

[maverickfhs]

Very interesting read. Sometimes being knowledgeable and persistent, pays off!

Thanks OP for sharing.

 

[itguy08]

99% of traffic enforcement is about revenue generation over safety. Red light cameras are the most onerous of them.

 

[umungus1122]

"Failed to return my bond." Thievery hiding behind the law. Convicting individuals with no evidence they were operating a vehicle. A disgrace to America and liberty itself and progress toward an almighty Big Brother.

 

[fdcg27]

These tickets are civil claims and not citations and can therefore be ignored.
The claimant would be the vendor running the camera system, since the municipality involved merely gets a portion of the take as given by the camera operator.
The company owning the cameras is not about to assert a civil claim against anyone who ignores their fake citations since to do so might bring the whole cash cow program into question and there are plenty of suckers who'll pay.
I got one probably about ten years back and trashed it.
The vendor sent a couple more and I trashed those as well.
Guess what happened?

 

[Shannow]

Yes, it's about revenue, not safety...although I'd LOVE a red-light camera at the local highway traffic lights...you get gree, and can hear the semis changing down a few gears to thunder through the red.

Oz has made this type of case difficult...the registered owner is liable for the infringment, penalty, and points loss off their licence unless they finger the person that was driving the vehicle. A NSW judge used this to advantage, identifying an overseas friend as the culprit (she was also dead at the time), and got away with heaps because of his position.

They used to take "full frontals" so that the drive could be identified clearly, but too many important people got caught in marital indescretions, so it doesn't identify the occupants...then made it a strict liability offence.

 

[KD0AXS]

They put up red light cameras here in Minneapolis about 10 years ago. A ruling by the MN Supreme Court forced the city to take down the cameras and refund all tickets that had been issued with them.

 

[Sayjac]

Knowledge is power. But it seems "The Man" is still going to try and extract his pound of flesh with the ripoff "doubled appeal bond".

Good for the prof for fighting it.

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
These tickets are civil claims and not citations and can therefore be ignored.
The claimant would be the vendor running the camera system, since the municipality involved merely gets a portion of the take as given by the camera operator.
The company owning the cameras is not about to assert a civil claim against anyone who ignores their fake citations since to do so might bring the whole cash cow program into question and there are plenty of suckers who'll pay.
I got one probably about ten years back and trashed it.
The vendor sent a couple more and I trashed those as well.
Guess what happened?
Here ignoring the ticket gets your license and registration suspended until you pay the fine and the extra costs for being late.

 

[Lyman]

Red light cameras were banned around here.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The solution to revenue cameras was, is, and remains a good high-velocity target rifle, and a batch of steel-cored match-grade ammo for said rifle. Maybe try for a thousand-yard patch.

 

[SeaJay]

My take is a bit different. I think the red light cameras are being repealed by the politicians because their voters are angry that they could not run red lights without worry of attracting a ticket for the violation.

 

[LoneRanger]

In my state, all traffic infractions are similar to a civil process on account of the fact that the Burden of Proof is not "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" as in criminal cases, but rather "A Preponderance of the Evidence" i.e the Magistrate need only be 51% convinced (so to speak) that the Defendant committed the Infraction in order for a judgement against the Defendant to be entered. There are some traffic violations that at Misdemeanors however, and the Burden on those is Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
99% of traffic enforcement is about revenue generation over safety. Red light cameras are the most onerous of them.


Exactly!