Jeeper Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 (edited) So I lend my car to a friend of mine and she gets a ticket in it from one of those photo radar vans. The ticket goes to my wife because my friend is female and my wife is on the title of my car. No big deal right, I just send in a color copy of her driver's license and they should dismiss it. Wrong, they set a hearing she has to go to. So I figure I will just call down to the court and try to straighten it out. They said they believe it is her and are bring a tech to prove it. First off, my wife has red/strawberry blonde hair and my friend is a brunette. Second, my friend is 10 years older than my wife. They court person says she has to go to the hearing. This pisses me off so now it is time for me to be the jerky lawyer I have fun being. I am filing my appearance for my wife Monday including an interesting claim for attorney's fees against the state. Statutorily it is a valid claim assuming I can prove bad faith. I know that they just want her to rat out my friend so they can give her the ticket but that is not going to happen. What a waste of tax dollars making people go to court when they know they did not do it. This ought t be a fun hearing. I hate big brother trying to push people around just because they usually can get away with it. I know some of you might think the attorneys fees claim is BS but the State only learns through their wallet. Edited May 17, 2008 by Jeeper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 Give 'em hell Jeeper! Big Brother is getting way too big. Like Mr. Sunshine says, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of those who threaten it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Ho Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 the State only learns through their wallet. It's our wallet and they never learn. Fortunately we were able to get rid of our red light cameras. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 It can only get worse...cameras are everywhere. I hope you whup up on them!! Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyZip Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 Some may not agree with you but I certainly do! I just can't get over the whole photo-ticket thing. Kinda seems chickens&^t. I can understand it at red lights but speeding to me, is different. Good luck, let us know how you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlamoShooter Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 A photo Radar Van ! So the city or the state pays for someone to drive a van to trap drivers speeding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeeper Posted May 17, 2008 Author Share Posted May 17, 2008 A photo Radar Van ! So the city or the state pays for someone to drive a van to trap drivers speeding? they park them on side of the road Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tin Can Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 Jeeper, Would you keep us informed of the outcome. I recieved a notice that I had been caught on camera in Tempe last year. I NEVER HAVE BEEN IN THE CITY OF TEMPE. I realize that this is not a discussion forum, maybe transfer the topic? THX TC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMV Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 As a police officer for a "big" city department, I would just like to say; "GIVE 'EM HELL!" Best of luck, I hope make them look like the fools they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 My company car is in the name of the leasing company so I have often wondered what they would do if they were presented with a photo ticket. I heard on the radio, in Phoenix I think, someone saying to have your car title in your spouses name only for this reason. Let us know how the lawyer fees thing goes. I hope you are asking for something like $ 350 an hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bountyhunter Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 This ought t be a fun hearing. Wow. Your traffic court must bedifferent than ours. Down here, you are heard by a "commissioner of the court" (they don't waste judges on traffic court) who stares out the window while you talk... and when he gets bored enough, he cuts you off and tells you what the fine is.. and you are DONE.I always marvel at people thinking they will get any kind of due process at traffic court.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianH Posted May 17, 2008 Share Posted May 17, 2008 A photo Radar Van ! So the city or the state pays for someone to drive a van to trap drivers speeding? Beaverton Oregon did that starting in 1997....it was a little trailer they parked in a driveway 100 yards from where the speed limit went from 45 to 25. I think I told the story elsewhere.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austinkroe Posted May 18, 2008 Share Posted May 18, 2008 Jeeper, This sounds like tough case that may even call for a second chair. Bill out the hours the right way: twice. In all seriousness, best of luck to you. I never did understand how the photos pass muster with the courts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raz-0 Posted May 18, 2008 Share Posted May 18, 2008 Yeah, and it probably makes you even happier to know that odds are 50% of that revenue gets kicked back to the company that makes the photoradar system. Which isn't even an American company. It's liked being taxed by an australian business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcarter Posted May 18, 2008 Share Posted May 18, 2008 There is a reason for not using this kinda stuff. Those cameras at intersections to find stop light violators and this "Radar" van (which I've never heard of) are not reliable enough to issue citations to people off of. It costs a person way too much in time and GAS to go and defend themselves. This is why you will probably never see them in Cincinnati and thank GOD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scirocco38s Posted May 18, 2008 Share Posted May 18, 2008 There is a reason for not using this kinda stuff. Those cameras at intersections to find stop light violators and this "Radar" van (which I've never heard of) are not reliable enough to issue citations to people off of. It costs a person way too much in time and GAS to go and defend themselves. This is why you will probably never see them in Cincinnati and thank GOD! Dont for a miinute believe that. As more and more city's see them as ways of generating revenue. They are citations without any penalty other than the fine. That is all the city is after anyway. The equipent is the property of a company hired to run it and they get 65% of the take for using their equipment. The citation's often state that it is only a civic fine not a moving violation so people wont contest them. So be careful out there as city managers and the commissioners in the city look for ways to generate more money, you will see them appear. I have seen the cops in my city watch people run the red light at the intersection and not do anything as the flash from the cameras go off, when asked, theyy were told to let it go as the city makes the money off the citation not the state. In North Carolina the county school system in which the citationn is issued gets the revenue off of all traffic citations by state law, so if it doesnt go to court the city gets the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 I am always suprised that I am not reading in the paper about people vandalizing the redlight cameras and radar equipment. In phila they vandalize everything else. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miranda Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 I am always suprised that I am not reading in the paper about people vandalizing the redlight cameras and radar equipment. In phila they vandalize everything else. Ted I wondered too.... I think the answer is that Vandals don't have cars and so don't care either way. it is an interesting question/answer.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 (edited) As a police officer for a "big" city department, I would just like to say; "GIVE 'EM HELL!" Best of luck, I hope make them look like the fools they are. Agree! These stupid "1984" style cameras stand to put many police officers (and lawyers) out of work. Your case might not change the direction in which this society is headed, but for everyone's sake, I hope you make them PAY (and then spread the news far and wide). Edited May 19, 2008 by Carlos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 ! Dont for a miinute believe that. As more and more city's see them as ways of generating revenue. They are citations without any penalty other than the fine. That is all the city is after anyway. The equipent is the property of a company hired to run it and they get 65% of the take for using their equipment. The citation's often state that it is only a civic fine not a moving violation so people wont contest them. So be careful out there as city managers and the commissioners in the city look for ways to generate more money, you will see them appear. I have seen the cops in my city watch people run the red light at the intersection and not do anything as the flash from the cameras go off, when asked, theyy were told to let it go as the city makes the money off the citation not the state. In North Carolina the county school system in which the citationn is issued gets the revenue off of all traffic citations by state law, so if it doesnt go to court the city gets the money. Correct. In D.C. a few years back, the press caught the city admitting to their actual motive: money. Someone filed a FOIA to get an official city memo proposing a contract for more cameras. The memo's only justification for the cameras was the projected revenue generation. Not one word about safety - none. When they were called on it, the city tried to claim "Oh its only about safety. We just forgot to mention that." D.C. IS the city that Mayor Barry built (he is STILL on city counsel btw). And the cameras were installed. The companies pull a trick when they first install cameras: the DOUBLE the length of the yellow light. The effect of doubling the length of the yellow light dramatically cuts down on accidents. Then, the camera company makes this claim: "See? Cameras save lives!" - when in fact, the camera had NOTHING to do with it. Its a money-making scam by governments - nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry cazes Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 You may want to research some of the recent cases against these radar vans here in california. They used them for years. I got caught by one in 2006 and had to go to traffic school to clear the citation and of course payed a $200+ fine Sometime in 2007, the legality was challenged in the courts and the city lost. Local newspapers had a ball over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 This ought t be a fun hearing. Wow. Your traffic court must bedifferent than ours. Down here, you are heard by a "commissioner of the court" (they don't waste judges on traffic court) who stares out the window while you talk... and when he gets bored enough, he cuts you off and tells you what the fine is.. and you are DONE.I always marvel at people thinking they will get any kind of due process at traffic court.... +1 Commissioners Court here is the same way....you do not even have to have a law degree to be the judge in C Court...Learned the hard way...made my pitch...told me the fine, I objected and she asked me if I wanted to go to jail....WTF!!! Big Bro has infiltrated that part of our lives...too bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driver8M3 Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 I am always suprised that I am not reading in the paper about people vandalizing the redlight cameras and radar equipment. In phila they vandalize everything else. Ted i saw something on tv once about similar cameras in england. they were constantly being vandalized. they'd throw a car tire on the camera...then light it on fire! a paintball gun seems like it could be useful... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKSNIPER Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 I wish you luck in fighting the summons. I also am a P.O. from a large department (2000+ sworn) and do not like the idea of these machines. Not so much because they will"Put me out of work". Anyone using a scanner on Friday-Saturday nights would not think for an instant we L.E. types will be put out of work. Family fights, drunks, robberies...... no shortage of L.E. work out there. The tickets should be issued in person. Maybe the person was upset, in a huge hurry to visit a sick relative in the hospital, maybe they just brain-farted and drove through the light. I always try to put myself in the shoes of the motorist and give them a break. Machines don't give breaks. I also fought the Parking Violation Bureau who was saying I needed to pay them lots of money for an illegally parked car I had traded into the Ford dealer a while ago. The new owner never registered it and I was the last registered owner so they tried to get the money out of me. They then tried to claim my current vehicle was parked in NYC at a time when I was working 3-11 tours. Would have been proof of my abilities to bend space and time to prove that one. Fight hard, don't surrender! JK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bountyhunter Posted May 19, 2008 Share Posted May 19, 2008 This ought t be a fun hearing. Wow. Your traffic court must bedifferent than ours. Down here, you are heard by a "commissioner of the court" (they don't waste judges on traffic court) who stares out the window while you talk... and when he gets bored enough, he cuts you off and tells you what the fine is.. and you are DONE.I always marvel at people thinking they will get any kind of due process at traffic court.... +1 Commissioners Court here is the same way....you do not even have to have a law degree to be the judge in C Court...Learned the hard way...made my pitch...told me the fine, I objected and she asked me if I wanted to go to jail....WTF!!! Out here the commissioners are the people who can't get hired at Burger King. Seriously, they are morons. A potted plant in the chair would be a better choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts