Posted on 9/5/2001, 9:47:34 AM by MeekOneGOP
RED LIGHT CAMERA TICKETS DISMISSED
(09-04-2001) - A judge Tuesday dismissed 250 tickets issued through San Diego's red light camera program, ruling that a private contractor's involvement in the system made evidence inadmissable [sic] at trial.
Superior Court Judge Ronald Styn ruled that the city's decision to contract with Lockheed Martin to run the program, combined with a contingency fee, made evidence gathered from the red light cameras "unreliable" and "untrustworthy."
Styn, in upholding his Aug. 15 tentative decision, ruled that the city failed to operate the red light system as outlined by the Legislature.
He also said the agreement for Lockheed Martin to get $70 for each $271 ticket paid made evidence obtained from the system inadmissable [sic] in court.
City officials will decide soon whether to appeal Styn's ruling, Deputy City Attorney Steven Hansen said.
Attorneys in the case said the judge's ruling affects only the 250 red light citations that were consolidated for trial.
A class action lawsuit filed Thursday by four groups of plaintiffs alleges Lockheed Martin was illegally allowed to run the red light program, and that the private company had an illegal financial incentive by taking the $70 for each ticket paid.
All 19 red light cameras in the city of San Diego have been turned off pending completion of an inspection of the entire system.
A hearing is scheduled Oct. 4 on a defense motion to disqualify the San Diego City Attorney's Office from prosecuting any pending or future red light cases.
What do you think of red-light cameras to enforce traffic laws? <-----Weigh in with your opinion here!
Should be banned 35.19% (38)
Just a revenue generator for police 25.93% (28)
Disturbing invasion of privacy 18.52% (20)
Good concept, but ripe for abuse 9.26% (10)
I have the feeling I'm being watched right this second! 7.41% (8)
Excellent tool, should be more of them 2.78% (3)
Not sure 0.93% (1)
I'm indifferent to them 0.00% (0)
Other 0.00% (0)
--------------------
TOTAL VOTES: 108
LOL Good for you! He got hot as heck, huh? I bet he got over it though? :-)
It's World Net Daily and they won't spam you.
They require e-mail to vote for good reason. A few months ago, they were inundated with homosexuals multiple voting on a poll. When I saw the results of the poll and weighed in the content/issue of the poll, I knew the results had been skewed by these weirdos leaping into the poll. Shortly after that, they required e-mail login to prevent multiple voting.
I understand your concern, but don't be alarmed or fear for "spamming." Thanks for letting me know. ;-)
Perhaps, but explain then why Scottsdale is currently using them?
I have a similar beef. IMHO, for many years now, law enforcement agencies see themselves as revenue-generators. Its echoed in the speeches of other elected officials as well. How many times have you heard this: "Our city/county has lost $X over the past three years due to unpaid traffic tickets." They actually see "fines" as revenue due them, and if you dont pay, then you have stolen from them and they have lost revenue. It sickens me.
REO: (Revenue Enhancement Officer)
Oh please. As if "freeping a poll" is not common practice around here.
Whether it's wierdo homo's or libertarian freepers, internet polls are always skewed. Hell, all polls are skewed.
Well, they have to, don't they? Fines have to be accounted for as "assets due." If they don't materialize, then they have to account for them as a loss. Maybe if they had a loooockbooooxxxx..... Bwahhaaaa!
Don't wonder, FOIL their records. (Freedom of information lawsuit)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.