Michael Morris Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I think I would use the "It wasnt me" plea. I do have a car that looks like that, but it wasnt me! Yes that is MY tag, but it wasnt me! Yes it looks like me, but it wasnt me!! MM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SicShelby Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I think I would use the "It wasnt me" plea. I do have a car that looks like that, but it wasnt me! Yes that is MY tag, but it wasnt me! Yes it looks like me, but it wasnt me!! MM Ha-ha "Yep, that's me but it wasn't me!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 In one aspect, I'd like to know how RADAR cameras get past case law whereas a police officer first has to determine for their self that the vehicle was speeding, and then rely on the RADAR for a reading. Then there's also testimony for audio being the only was to determine a true reading from a false one. Does case law mean nothing nowadays? Second for the OP, it's not like he was caught with tens of thousands of dollars in his refrigerator under criminal circumstances or selling his influence in national security matters. Most photo radars are a civil action rather than a criminal action. That is why there is usually no points on the license. You just have to pay a fine in most areas. I don't know if that is how they get around the previous court precedents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss Doctor Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Most photo radars are a civil action rather than a criminal action. That is why there is usually no points on the license. You just have to pay a fine in most areas. I don't know if that is how they get around the previous court precedents. So are they duping people into thinking they'll face criminal penalties if they ignore the ticket...as in a failure to appear warrant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackVert Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Give me a friggin' break!!! Let's recall all of the Dem Rule #1's ("It's only OK when WE do it!!")......shall we??? Here's yet ANOTHER substance abuse Kennedy getting away scot free due to his last name. At least this time he didn't murder anyone!! http://www.wusa9.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=49033 And, who could forget this "inconvenient truth" about Little Al Gore arrested for speeding and drugs. Can you IMAGINE the field day that corrupt, liberal big media would have if it was...say.....I don't know......THE BUSH TWINS!!!! Thankfully the corrupt media also obeys dem rule #1, so it was censored. I mean corrupt media DOES protect its own!! http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20044628,00.html etc., etc. etc..... Dude, you gotta just let go of some of this hatred... You do bring up some valid points from time to time, and yes- politicians are frustrating (both dem and repub alike), but you're gonna die an early death from all the anguish and frustration... I mean, what does your blood pressure skyrocket to, when you see a picture of Pelosi or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one_quik_pony Posted May 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 So are they duping people into thinking they'll face criminal penalties if they ignore the ticket...as in a failure to appear warrant? Absolutely, in BIG RED LETTERS...too bad it's a lie. They will not issue a warrant, unless you have a collection of tickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stump_breaker Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 So are they duping people into thinking they'll face criminal penalties if they ignore the ticket...as in a failure to appear warrant? We actually had a meeting in the Lions Club where the Chief of Police was the guest speaker. Since we were getting red light camera's installed in the city at that time, there was quite an uproar towards him. He said the red light cameras are operated by a private company hired by the city and the majority of the money goes to the State with the city getting about 20-25% and the camera company works for five years before turning a profit. He also said if a citizen does not pay the ticket it is not a traffic violation and only gets put on your credit. That statement shocked everyone in the room! Even though the Chief of Police (Todd Miller, Terrell, TX) was a member of the Lions Club, there was not a lot of love in the room for him that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
svttim Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 LOL, Big Brother is watching! I have no problem with the red light cameras, too many people think thier time is more important than the lives of others. But LE is getting lazy and intrusive. Put more cops on the street. That kind of speed at that time in the morning, no danger to others, still against the law though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SicShelby Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 They toyed with putting red light cameras here in Columbus. They did, after the fact that it was decided that the revenue from the cameras couldn't be used to maintain them, lol. SO, the company that made the cameras are getting the short end of the stick, ha-ha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 So are they duping people into thinking they'll face criminal penalties if they ignore the ticket...as in a failure to appear warrant? Doc, what they do is send you the notice to pay. If you do not pay the fine is usually doubled and there are court costs added to the original fine. Then you cannot renew your license until you pay a huge fine. Even if out of state as most states have reciprocal agreements where you cannot renew your driver's license in your home state if you owe an out of state fine. Either way they have you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted May 9, 2009 Report Share Posted May 9, 2009 So are they duping people into thinking they'll face criminal penalties if they ignore the ticket...as in a failure to appear warrant? I was in AZ recently and a woman told me her husband had rec'd a radar speed ticket. He decided to fight the ticket. First he ignored the notice sent by mail. She stated they must ensure you are served so if you do not respond they send a bailiff or process server to your house. She stated they have to serve you within 120 days or it goes away. However, they charge you for every time the process server spends looking for you which could be thousands of dollars. Don't know if this is fact but it is what she stated. Radar speed cameras in AZ are used to produce revenue. There may be a ballot initiaitve to prevent their use in 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersnake94 Posted May 10, 2009 Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 Nice car, dumb decision for that night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one_quik_pony Posted May 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2009 Doc, what they do is send you the notice to pay. If you do not pay the fine is usually doubled and there are court costs added to the original fine. Then you cannot renew your license until you pay a huge fine. Even if out of state as most states have reciprocal agreements where you cannot renew your driver's license in your home state if you owe an out of state fine. Either way they have you. http://www.photoradarlaw.com/service.htm http://kaylerlaw.com/ Susan Kayler, an attorney who SPECIFICALLY targets the unconstitutionality of photo radar, tells it differently. The only validity to your statement is that you receive a notice, and not a ticket. Red-light cameras and speed cameras are under two different jurisdictions. A red-light camera provides an actual "ticket" and will be held against you at renewal, as well as actually serving a warrant. Speed (revenue) cameras provide you with a notice that you were speeding, signed by a computer, and mailed electronically. There is no receipt of delivery. It cannot be held against you at renewal time. Once you acquire several of them, a handwritten notice to appear will be served to you and you will have to appear in court. You should read her book, "Smile for the Camera", as it explains the various civil rights that are being violated by our speed cameras...and we know how concerned you are about civil rights! The only way we can protect them is to correctly know them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss Doctor Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 http://www.photoradarlaw.com/service.htm http://kaylerlaw.com/ Susan Kayler, an attorney who SPECIFICALLY targets the unconstitutionality of photo radar, tells it differently. The only validity to your statement is that you receive a notice, and not a ticket. Red-light cameras and speed cameras are under two different jurisdictions. A red-light camera provides an actual "ticket" and will be held against you at renewal, as well as actually serving a warrant. Speed (revenue) cameras provide you with a notice that you were speeding, signed by a computer, and mailed electronically. There is no receipt of delivery. It cannot be held against you at renewal time. Once you acquire several of them, a handwritten notice to appear will be served to you and you will have to appear in court. You should read her book, "Smile for the Camera", as it explains the various civil rights that are being violated by our speed cameras...and we know how concerned you are about civil rights! The only way we can protect them is to correctly know them. Dude, I don't think that he's for them. I asked him about legal points, and he's just responding with what someone told him. He's not presenting as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I am very much against radar cameras and red light cameras. I think it is too Orwellian. And yes I do not claim to be an expert on this issue but only related what a person from AZ told me. When a person writes a book it is often a review of the laws in many if not all 50 states. Hence it deals in generalities. I wish I could say the photo radar is unconstitutional but I do not know if that is accurate. I do know that citizens do have the right to confront their accuser and that is difficult with a camera and a computer. One thing we can all agree on is that the cameras, while masquerading as safety tools, are primarily intended for generating revenue. Pony, just curious, do you have any experience with these in the East valley of Phoenix? Do you know anyone that has first hand info on the issue and repurcussions if you do not pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 http://www.city-data.com/forum/phoenix-area/285885-help-need-info-re-fighting-photo.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one_quik_pony Posted May 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I am very much against radar cameras and red light cameras. I think it is too Orwellian. And yes I do not claim to be an expert on this issue but only related what a person from AZ told me. When a person writes a book it is often a review of the laws in many if not all 50 states. Hence it deals in generalities. I wish I could say the photo radar is unconstitutional but I do not know if that is accurate. I do know that citizens do have the right to confront their accuser and that is difficult with a camera and a computer. One thing we can all agree on is that the cameras, while masquerading as safety tools, are primarily intended for generating revenue. Pony, just curious, do you have any experience with these in the East valley of Phoenix? Do you know anyone that has first hand info on the issue and repurcussions if you do not pay? Apparently someone misunderstood my point. Nowhere did I mention you were pro-camera, nor did I intend for it to come across that way. Cameras are bad, mmmmmmmkay! I listened to Susan Kayler on KTAR a few Sundays ago. She has devoted part of her profession to helping citizens defend themselves against the personal intrusion of photo radar. She was very informative on the issues, and provided some good legal information. In order to defend our rights, we need this information. I also know what a stickler you are about civil rights, or what little we have left after the last administration. That's good. Photo radar is bad! Just a quick poll, a few of us engineers are working on a product to protect you against photo radar...how many would be interested? What would you be willing to pay for it? Is the cost of one photo radar ticket a fair price to ask? I'm rooted in north Phoenix, but occasionally make it to Mesa, primarily to fly out of Williams Gateway. I don't see many photo "cash machines" on the 60 or 202, so you must be talking about the surface street cameras, or the "red light" cameras. Those are evil, avoid them at all costs. Even anti-photo radar activists won't touch those. Better just pay them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DubbsFaris Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 Well, I have a couple thoughts on this: 1. Whats the fuss with his political affiliations? You gonna tell me politicians dont speed, or have affairs with hookers, or kill their interns, or pick up homosexual partners in airports?...I could go on forever here... 2. Cut the guy some slack...who here hasn't driven that fast in their cars on a public street? Other than my father in his, and a couple of your garage queens out there...not many... I know many here who have seen 140+ and a few 160+ ...you know who you bunny lovers are! 3. If the guy should have been faulted for something it would be driving too slow! Yup, I said it..if he had just gone faster, he would have beat the shutter on that stupid camera... 4. Whats with the legal questions? Our local DA has authorized mandatory blood samples drawn from any DUI suspect on site by officers, not even the hospital...talk about illegal? But here is the trick, they drop charges on anyone that can afford to challenge it in a high court...since local courts are political and no judge will go against the DA for questions of policy...out of sheer job security. So they just screw the little guy who cant fight it...but it remains effective...so is it right? no. is it effective? yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportscars Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I think the bigger issue for me is that they ARRESTED him after the fact. Whats that? If the cop pulls him over thats one thing, but to arrest someone hours or days later with a picture that may or may not be him?!? What if it was his brother driving? What is the statute of limitations on speeding? Officer, "Mr. Driver , I have a picture of you (I think) speeding from 1986. You'll have to come with me." The story also stated that they let you get away with speeding 10mph over (camera activates on 76mph). You either broke the law or you didnt. Can you imagine what would happen if the police let you go because you stole something that was less than $5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 Apparently someone misunderstood my point. Nowhere did I mention you were pro-camera, nor did I intend for it to come across that way. Cameras are bad, mmmmmmmkay! I listened to Susan Kayler on KTAR a few Sundays ago. She has devoted part of her profession to helping citizens defend themselves against the personal intrusion of photo radar. She was very informative on the issues, and provided some good legal information. In order to defend our rights, we need this information. I also know what a stickler you are about civil rights, or what little we have left after the last administration. That's good. Photo radar is bad! Just a quick poll, a few of us engineers are working on a product to protect you against photo radar...how many would be interested? What would you be willing to pay for it? Is the cost of one photo radar ticket a fair price to ask? I'm rooted in north Phoenix, but occasionally make it to Mesa, primarily to fly out of Williams Gateway. I don't see many photo "cash machines" on the 60 or 202, so you must be talking about the surface street cameras, or the "red light" cameras. Those are evil, avoid them at all costs. Even anti-photo radar activists won't touch those. Better just pay them. I am interested. There is definitely photo radar in both fixed and mobile locatons on the 60. There are signs warning drivers. It is quite elaborate with cameras and flash on both sides of the roadway covering all 4-6 lanes. Be careful. Tell us more about your concept. How about just paying someone to spray paint the camera lenses on a regular basis.!!!!! Also, be very careful of photo radar on Ellsworth on the East side of Williams Gateway Airport. It is a 45 MPH zone. The road is 2 lanes each with a divider. It is perfectly flat and straight and should be 55-60 mph. But they keep it at 45 to generate revenue (IMO). I have also seen photo radar on Sossoman near the airport. I will admit I am not against the red light cameras as much as the speed cameras. I was told the current fine for radar camera is 181.00. But I am sure it is more if the speed is extreme. I cannot believe they came and locked the guy up for his speeding rather than just citing him. We talk about jail over crowding and that is a facet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one_quik_pony Posted May 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 I am interested. There is definitely photo radar in both fixed and mobile locatons on the 60. There are signs warning drivers. It is quite elaborate with cameras and flash on both sides of the roadway covering all 4-6 lanes. Be careful. Tell us more about your concept. How about just paying someone to spray paint the camera lenses on a regular basis.!!!!! Also, be very careful of photo radar on Ellsworth on the East side of Williams Gateway Airport. It is a 45 MPH zone. The road is 2 lanes each with a divider. It is perfectly flat and straight and should be 55-60 mph. But they keep it at 45 to generate revenue (IMO). I have also seen photo radar on Sossoman near the airport. I will admit I am not against the red light cameras as much as the speed cameras. I was told the current fine for radar camera is 181.00. But I am sure it is more if the speed is extreme. I cannot believe they came and locked the guy up for his speeding rather than just citing him. We talk about jail over crowding and that is a facet. They came and got him because 40mph over the speed limit is criminal speeding, and requires jail time. The current "tax" for speeding on our freeways is $181 plus court costs. I'm used to seeing the signs and the cameras on I17, I10 near the airport, and 101 through the north valley, where they are positioned every two miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted May 12, 2009 Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 Tell us about the concept you are working on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one_quik_pony Posted May 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 12, 2009 Tell us about the concept you are working on. Hehe still working on the patent...Ill keep you informed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastfords Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 By law, all photo radar sites have warning signs clearly posted before you come to them. On the freeways there are signs at 1/2 mile and again at 300 feet. What scares me is when people tell me "Oh, I never pay any attention to the warning signs". Anyone who lives in the Phoenix area would have to be a hermit to not know about the cameras on the freeways given all the media hype that has surrounded them. On a daily basis I see people tooling down the road concentrating on everything exept driving. This ranges from reading a book or newspaper to applying makeup to text messaging. I belive this is just another logical step in the unwillingness of people to take responsibility for their own actions. If you are a local resident and familiar with the area and are not bright enough to avoid getting a ticket on the freeway then I guess you can call it a wake up call. Again in my opinion, I would rather get a ticket to make me realize I am not paying enough attention to the road than be involved in a horrific crash like the ones shown every day on the news. As for the redlight cameras, don't even try to tell me they are unnecessary. That is another "me me me" discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted May 13, 2009 Report Share Posted May 13, 2009 Again, I don't like living in an Orwellian society but dislike the red light camera less than the speed camera. However, I have heard of one issue and that is that people hit the brakes when they realize they are in the photo enforcement zone causing chain reaction crashes. And the speed cameras only serve to slow people down in that zone then they speed up again. As you know Phoenix traffic is crazy. I don't know how their speed cameras are adjusted but radar can obviously pick a person up well beyone 300 yards and probably even beyone that 1/2 mile. But there remains the constitutional issue of being able to challenge your accuser in a court of law and that is being bypassed. And I don't like the Orwellian concept of Big Brother looking over our shoulder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportscars Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Ticket dismissed! http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2801.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffIsHereToo Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 Ticket dismissed! http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2801.asp Yeah, the judge HATES these cameras and has been dismissing them. But what's messed up is the way the ticket and arrest was done. I think we can all agree that was a little heavy handed and sure looked politically motivated. I'm sure he was doing 108 in a 55, I think a lot of us have, BUT judgement and treatment should be fair and equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gth0007 Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 A friend sent me this... http://www.kpho.com/news/19389185/detail.html# In a statement, Mecum said, "I have no particular memory of the facts nor have I had an opportunity to review any of the evidence in this particular matter. As a consequence, I have entered no plea in this matter. I expect to and look forward to having an opportunity to see all the information DPS has collected and I will evaluate that information prior to entering any pleas in this matter. I have every expectation that this matter will in no way compromise or affect my ability to do my job as executive director of the Arizona Republican Party." Dumbass! I don't blame the guy for wanting to wait to make his plea. That's his right and just because the police say he was speeding doesn't mean much in a free country. As a former police officer I can tell you that SOME police officers and police departments have agendas beyond their authority. Case in point, I was driving through Greenville, Mississippi at 8:30 AM and was stopped for "weaving". The officer was then joined by other members of the "I.C.E." (Illegal Contraband Enforcement). The officer stated he needed to have a look in my car. He then proceeded to search my luggage and everything else with no explanation as to what he was looking for. When nothing of interest was found I was "allowed" to go without a ticket, nothing, just a 45 minute delay in my trip. Coming back through Greenville a week later the same officers had three other cars pulled over, two of which were being "searched". The one common denominator was that all of us, had OUT-OF-STATE license plates. A complaint letter was sent to the Police Chief, who, of course did not reply. So my point is that just because someone is accused by police, doesn't mean their guilty of anything, NOT until the case is proven by reviewing/analyzing the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss Doctor Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 I don't blame the guy for wanting to wait to make his plea. That's his right and just because the police say he was speeding doesn't mean much in a free country. As a former police officer I can tell you that SOME police officers and police departments have agendas beyond their authority. Case in point, I was driving through Greenville, Mississippi at 8:30 AM and was stopped for "weaving". The officer was then joined by other members of the "I.C.E." (Illegal Contraband Enforcement). The officer stated he needed to have a look in my car. He then proceeded to search my luggage and everything else with no explanation as to what he was looking for. When nothing of interest was found I was "allowed" to go without a ticket, nothing, just a 45 minute delay in my trip. Coming back through Greenville a week later the same officers had three other cars pulled over, two of which were being "searched". The one common denominator was that all of us, had OUT-OF-STATE license plates. A complaint letter was sent to the Police Chief, who, of course did not reply. So my point is that just because someone is accused by police, doesn't mean their guilty of anything, NOT until the case is proven by reviewing/analyzing the evidence. As a former police officer, why did you give them permission to search? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGT/SC#0471 Posted June 26, 2009 Report Share Posted June 26, 2009 As a former police officer, why did you give them permission to search? +1000. You can only be searched when you give consent, although my experiences with the south would suggest otherwise and ICE is a national police force? What? Sounds orwellian to me. The immigration enforcement part of ICE (immigration and customs enforcement) is bs, I could do a better job with a pickup and a Home Depot. Its just the national police force. These cameras are BS, I have a new hobby if I am making a left turn in a red light intersection I stop if there is a city bus behind me, they are always in a hurry and then the bus gets to smile for the camera haha pisses off the city I am sure. Paintball guns anyone? F these cameras everywhere. They go off for making a left turn and waiting for traffic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.