TheNewspaper

New Mexico Bans Traffic Cameras From State Roads

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-19T00:02-08:00

The cities of Albuquerque, Las Cruces and Santa Fe have sixty days to pull down the red light cameras and speed cameras currently operating on state and federal roads in New Mexico. The New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT) announced yesterday that transportation commission members unanimously decided to outlaw automated ticketing machines on thoroughfares within its jurisdiction.

"There seems to be many competing studies out there that make confusing claims about the efficacy of the devices currently in use," State Transportation Commission Chairman Johnny Cope said in a news release. "While the true safety impact of the use of these cameras is still murky at best, one thing has become clear to the Commission -- more and more New Mexico cities seem to be putting driver-generated revenues ahead of sound traffic management techniques; frankly, that concept really troubles me."

Data from Las Cruces showed that red light cameras failed to produce any significant reduction in accidents nine months into the program (view data). This finding is consistent with a number of controlled studies conducted around the world (view studies). Despite the poor safety results, red light cameras and speed cameras have generated revenue windfall in the cities that use them. Albuquerque's program, for example, has generated tens of millions in profit.

The new directive does not affect automated systems installed on local roads. After deciding to take a cut of the revenue from fines, the state government gave municipal authorities the ability to install cameras. State and federal roads, however, tend to have the greatest traffic volume and revenue potential. NMDOT identified eight specific intersections that would be affected under the new policy.

"Any existing red-light cameras violating this new policy must be removed within sixty days of the implementation of the policy," Transportation Secretary Gary Giron said. "NMDOT will work with each city on this issue; shutting down and ultimately removing the devices in a timely manner." Source

Louisiana Supreme Court: Phone Tips Justify Traffic Stop And Search

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-18T00:04-08:00

Police can pull over and search any motorist in Louisiana based on an anonymous phone call, the state supreme court ruled Tuesday. The case began at 6:30pm on Christmas Day in 2007. A motorist in Bossier Parish called to report a dark colored Ford Ranger pickup truck that "was going all over the road." Benton Police Officer Randall Matlock acted on the call and pulled over Trey Daniel Elliott, then 17, whose vehicle matched the description.

Police had no search or arrest warrant. They had no means of knowing whether the tip received was credible or not. Elliott's lawyers argued that, at the time, Officer Matlock had no independent knowledge that a crime was being committed and no way to know whether the 911 witness was credible. A district court judge agreed and threw out the stop as unlawful based on case law governing anonymous tips provided to the police. The court of appeals concurred. The high court, however, found that there is an exception to the Constitution when the case involves driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI).

"We are aware that a growing number of jurisdictions have concluded that drunken or erratic driving presents such an immediate risk of public safety that it constitutes an exception to the general rule that police may not act on anonymous tips unless they corroborate them in sufficient detail," Justice Greg G. Guidry wrote for the court. "In the present case, the witnesses were clearly citizen informants providing information about a crime as it was happening and not anonymous tipsters.... The dispatcher could reasonably infer from the circumstances that the caller was motivated by the desire to eliminate an immediate risk to public safety and was holding herself accountable for the information she provided by identifying herself, if not by name, then by the cellular phone from which she was calling."

The court ruled that the tip was not anonymous because of caller ID and that the information conveyed on the call provided reasonable suspicion for Elliott to be stopped and searched because it described traffic violations. After the stop took place, the caller arrived on the scene to verify the information. For that reason, the supreme court reversed the lower court's ruling and upheld the evidence obtained as a result of the stop. The court remanded Elliott's underage DUI case back to the district court for further proceedings.

A copy of the case is available in a 25k PDF file at the source link below. Source

Report Warns Of Private Car Repo Dangers

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-17T00:38-08:00

Private companies that repossess automobiles without the involvement of law enforcement are creating potentially deadly situations, a report released Thursday by the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) warned. The Boston, Massachusetts-based non-profit legal advocacy group examined the consequences of turning car seizures over to private firms, particularly during the recent economic downturn.

"In just the past three years, the publicly reported toll from self-help repossessions is shocking," John W. Van Alst and Rick Jurgens wrote in the NCLC report. "Six deaths. Dozens of injuries and arrests. Pistols, rifles, shotguns, knives, fists and automobiles wielded as weapons. And, in at least three cases, repo agents towed away automobiles with children under the age of nine inside."

An estimated 1.9 million repossessions take place each year. In 33 states, no license or background check is required for the companies that repossess cars on behalf of lenders and car dealers. This means convicted felons can, and do, operate repo businesses.

The NCLC report takes issue with the practice of allowing a lender to unilaterally seize a car from its owner for missing a payment without first having a neutral third-party judge or administrative officer verify the claim.

"With the ability to repossess on a whim, dealers and lenders can use repossessions not simply as a means of retaking collateral when a debtor defaults," the report stated. "Lenders can also use the threat of repossession to intimidate consumers. For example, the prospect of having a car seized can be used to keep a consumer from asserting the right to withhold payment for a warranty violation or other breach of contract in the sale of the car or the right to revoke acceptance of a car with substantial defects."

The report cited court documents that showed one major repo company forced its agents to work up to 90 hours a week without overtime pay. "Each of you have the ability to do WHATEVER it takes to pick up more cars," an email sent to employees urged. Those who failed to meet a minimum weekly quota of twenty cars were forced to work longer hours. The pressure to take extreme actions in several cases has resulted in violence both against vehicle owners and the repo men themselves.

NCLC recommended that states adopt laws that require lenders to provide notice and provide car owners with a set period to remedy missed payments. It also recommended that lenders obtain a court order prior to seizing a vehicle. This, the group says, would allow motorists to have the opportunity to have a chance to challenge an improper seizure in a neutral setting. The report also urged that repo companies be licensed to prohibit the hiring of individuals with violent criminal histories.

A copy of the report is available in a 1.4mb PDF file at the source link below. Source

West Virginia To Turn School Buses Into Ticket Machines

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-16T00:46-08:00

Faced with a $120 million budget deficit, West Virginia lawmakers are turning to school buses to bring in desperately needed revenue. The House of Delegates voted 98-0 Saturday to give final approval to House Bill 4223 which allows county school boards to deploy buses to issue $500 automated tickets. The proposal becomes law with the signature of Governor Joe Manchin (D).

"Every county board of education is hereby authorized to mount a camera on any school bus for the purpose of enforcing this section or for any other lawful purpose," House Bill 4223 states.

Private companies have been traveling to school boards around the country offering to install the cameras at no cost. The company would then issue tickets, collect on the fines and deposit a significant cut of the profits into the school board's bank account with no work required on the school's part. The Italian firm Elsag, for example, ran a test of the system in New York state last year. West Virginia's law, however, would require photographing the driver when issuing the citations. For the first ticket, a thirty-day license suspension is mandatory, with a judge having discretion to impose a six-month jail sentence. After a third ticket is mailed, jail time is mandatory. Arizona currently is the only state that jails vehicle owners based solely on the evidence provided by a ticket camera.

Passage of the school bus legislation represents a significant win for photo enforcement lobbyists who snuck the measure through the legislature with very little public scrutiny. Copies of the Senate-amended version of the bill were not made available on the legislature's website.

In 2006, state lawmakers had enacted one of the country's toughest bans on all forms of photo enforcement which was enacted before any vendor had attempted to sell cameras in the state. We asked the six primary sponsors of the photo ticketing ban why they would change their position and vote for the school bus cameras.

"I did support the original legislation in 2006 for two primary reasons," Delegate Bob Beach (D-Monongalia) said in an email. "First, many law enforcement officers opposed the idea fearing job loses. Secondly, many felt technology needed improved to be effective and limit challenges in the court. Today, law enforcement in West Virginia see the technology as a benefit.... I'm pretty confident when I say, that the desired intent of the legislation is not the increased collection of fees, but rather a reduction in lost (children) lives."

State officials insist that the photo enforcement ban is not applicable because "photo monitoring devices" are defined as automated systems. The same officials insist that the school bus drivers would operate the cameras with a button.

"What we, the West Virginia Legislature actually did, was to use school bus cameras as a supportive avenue of evidence of an eyewitness in order to protect school children, not create school bus ticket machines," Delegate Randy Swartzmiller (D-Hancock) said.

A copy of the legislation, as passed by the House and Senate, is available in a 160k PDF file at the source link below. Source

Partnership for Advancing Road Safety Is New Photo Enforcement Industry Front Group

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-15T00:50-08:00

The photo enforcement industry announced on Friday the creation of a new red light camera and speed camera advocacy group. The Partnership for Advancing Road Safety (PARS) describes itself as an organization that seeks to use best practices to reduce the number of accidents and fatalities on American highways. The group's number one priority is countering the growing nationwide backlash against the use of automated ticketing machines that has resulted in multi-million dollar loses for camera vendors.

"While a vocal minority may oppose road safety cameras, our research indicates just the opposite -- 80 percent of the public support intersection safety cameras and 67 percent support speed safety cameras," said PARS Executive Director David Kelly. "Automated road safety cameras share one thing in common with other proven safety countermeasures -- they save lives. And that's the message PARS intends to communicate to everyone we can reach."

Kelly provides a respectable face for the group as the former chief of staff for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and a former senior staffer at Mothers Against Drunk Driving. The group itself, however, is the creation of the public relations firm APCO Worldwide. The website was registered by APCO. The PARS contact on the group's press release, Jeffery A. Smith, listed a "jsmith@advancingroadsafety.com" email address, but the phone number given rings the offices at APCO.

The "founding members" that hired APCO for this public relations project include Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions, UK-based Lasercraft and Redspeed, Germany-based Traffipax and Australia-based Redflex. The overseas companies use front groups to evade laws prohibiting direct foreign influence in the US electoral process. Redflex, for example, specifically cited an "APCO nationwide poll" in a press release issued earlier this month, making no mention of its connection to the firm.

"In a recent nationwide opinion poll, voters showed 80 percent support of the red light cameras as a safety tool," the Redflex news release stated.

Despite the bold claim, neither red light cameras nor speed cameras have ever survived a public vote. In nine out of nine municipal referenda on the issue, automated ticketing lost with as much as 86 percent of the public voting against cameras. Source

France, Poland, South Africa: Speed Cameras Under Attack

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-14T12:22-08:00

Last Monday, vigilantes lightly scorched the housing of a speed camera in Bons-Tassily, France. A tire at the base of the automated ticketing machine on the RN 158 was set on fire, but the device survived the incident according to Ouest France.

A pair of automated speed trap operators in Port Elizabeth, South Africa got a taste of highway robbery on Friday. As the mobile speed camera issued citations on Uitenhage Road, thieves came up from behind the municipal employees and held them at gunpoint. According to the Weekend Post newspaper, the thieves made off with cellphones, wallets, handcuffs and the keys to the speed camera car. One of the city workers was shot in the arm during the incident.

Vigilantes in the districts of Kutno and Leczyca, Poland continue to disable speed cameras by covering the lenses with paint. Local officials complain that the cameras are disabled faster than they can repair them. Most of the automated ticketing machines in the remote locations of the region are not operable for another reason. Because the devices do not have their own dedicated power supplies, police must bring battery packs that last no more than three hours at a time. The city of Lodz, for example, has 59 cameras -- 23 of which run on batteries. Of the 13 cameras in Kutno and Leczyca, only one, in Bedlnie, has a dedicated power supply, Polska Dziennik reported. Source

California: Red Light Camera Refunds Reach $3.1 Million

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-13T11:29-08:00

Red light camera refunds will now reach $3.1 million in the city of South San Francisco, California. City officials decided this week that it had no choice but to refund tickets issued between January 28 and March 10 after being confronted by potential lawsuits over the city's failure to abide by state law.

In January, the city admitted that every photo ticket that American Traffic Solutions (ATS) issued on its behalf between August 2009 and January 28, 2010 was invalid because the city council failed to ratify the contract. The council agreed to refund the tickets, nearly 3000 worth $446 each, and pay for the traffic schools motorists were forced to take. While generous, this move was not enough.

ATS restarted the mailing of camera tickets on January 27, but California law requires a 30-day warning period before tickets may be issued. In the eyes of the law, the program started on the 27th -- without a warning period. The state supreme court upheld a court case that found tickets issued without this warning period were void. The editor of the website Highwayrobbery.net pointed out that the city may have been forced into this untenable legal position by vendor reluctance to hold a warning period without being paid to do so.

"ATS shall provide the customer [South San Francisco] with an optional one-time warning period up to 30 days in length at the outset of the program," the contract between the city and ATS stated.

During the warning period, the vendor is responsible for all of the expenses for creating and mailing warning notices to alleged violators. ATS had already paid for a warning period in 2009, when the program was operating illegally.

City council members may vote next month to drop the red light camera program entirely.

"With 60 day written notice, on the first anniversary of the start date, either party shall have the option to terminate this agreement," the city's photo enforcement contract explains. Source

Florida: Red Light Camera Lobbyist Fails To Register

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-12T00:07-08:00

On Tuesday, Melissa Wandall appeared at the Florida state capitol building to throw her support behind legislation that would legitimize the use of red light cameras in the state. Wandall heads the Stop Red Light Running Coalition of Florida, a group she formed in March 2006 with registered lobbyist Neil Spirtas to advance the cause of automated ticketing before the state legislature. Wandall's crusade may run afoul of state lobbying regulations.

Wandall became involved in the issue after a tragic red light running accident took the life of her husband Mark in 2003. The photo enforcement industry has specifically sought out victims like Wandall through a program known as the "Survivors Advocate Network" which is designed to replace difficult questions about the efficacy of automated enforcement with appeals to emotion. Wandall's pleas before the legislature helped last session to bring an industry-sponsored red light camera bill to the brink of passage. The measure, reintroduced in the current session, cleared several committee hurdles this week.

Wandall's Coalition website lists insurance companies and photo enforcement firms as "supporters" ( view list, 350k PDF). She has also confirmed receiving financial support from Manatee and Sarasota counties -- both of which stand to profit significantly from passage of this legislation. Despite receiving compensation for her lobbying activities, Wandall has not registered with the state as a lobbyist. County governments may not provide such payments to non-registered lobbyists.

"No person shall provide compensation for lobbying to any individual or business entity that is not a lobbying firm," Florida Statutes section 11.045 states. "'Lobbying' means influencing or attempting to influence legislative action or nonaction through oral or written communication or an attempt to obtain the goodwill of a member or employee of the legislature."

The Stop Red Light Running Coalition of Florida appears to match key criteria for a lobbying firm under state law.

"'Lobbying firm' means any business entity, including an individual contract lobbyist, that receives or becomes entitled to receive any compensation for the purpose of lobbying, where any partner, owner, officer, or employee of the business entity is a lobbyist," Florida Statutes section 11.045 states.

Neil Spirtas, vice president of the coalition, is a registered lobbyist. The primary purpose of the coalition is to influence lawmakers through direct testimony before legislative committees.

Lobbying disclosure laws are designed to allow the public to know when business entities deploy their financial resources to effect a change in the law. A total of 1789 individuals have registered to lobby Florida's legislature. Those that fail to file a disclosure report face a fine of up to $5000. Any citizen may file a request to investigate a potential violation. Source

Louisiana Lawmaker Proposes Local Votes For All Traffic Camera Programs

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-11T00:46-08:00

Local governments that use red light cameras and speed cameras would be forced put the future of these efforts to a public vote under a proposal by a team of Louisiana state lawmakers. Led by Representative Jeff Arnold (D-Algiers), a bipartisan team of seven on Monday pre-filed legislation to rein in the use of automated enforcement systems.

Arnold's preference is to ban them outright with House Bill 160, but he prepared an alternative measure designed to be more attractive to his colleagues with close ties to local government. House Bill 159 would require a referendum before any automated ticketing machine could issue fines in a local city or parish.

"You can't argue with giving the people a right to decide," Arnold told TheNewspaper. "I'm not making the decision, the people are. When people are given a choice on this issue -- as happened in Sulphur, Louisiana -- they vote over 80 percent, 'No, we don't want traffic cameras.'"

Arnold explained that this measure would force automated ticketing advocates to live up to their own rhetoric.

"People who support these cameras say that there's strong public support for it," Arnold said. "If you think you're right and people support these, go ahead and put it up for a vote. Let's see what it gets you.... If Lafayette votes 'yes, we like our cameras' then they can keep them, but if Orleans votes 'no,' then they're gone."

Last year, the House by a 56-26 margin voted down an amendment to ban photo ticketing outright. Arnold explained that lawmakers did not like the idea of adding the camera ban to an unrelated piece of legislation during an abbreviated session. This time, the House will have plenty of time to consider free-standing legislation. As one of the most senior members and chairman of the powerful Commerce committee, Arnold expects his proposals will receive a fair hearing in the committee of jurisdiction.

"I've talked to some members on the Transportation committee who voted against this last time who are now looking to vote for the bill," Arnold explained. "They're coming to the understanding that this is really a cash grab as opposed to a safety issue."

Arnold intends to introduce two more versions of his legislation in case the ban and referendum efforts falter. One bill would ban the use of cameras on state-funded highways and roads. Another would require any tickets go before a judicial proceeding before an elected traffic judge, as opposed to an administrative hearing officer who works as an employee of the local jurisdiction.

The Louisiana State Legislature's legislative session begins on March 29. A copy of the pre-filed House Bill 160 is available in a PDF file at the source link below. Source

Texas: Short Yellow Brings $130,500 In Red Light Camera Refunds

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-10T00:08-08:00

League City, Texas has lost $130,500 in red light camera ticket refunds and cancellations after a local motorist discovered the city had been ignoring state law. Byron Schirmbeck drives through the intersection of Interstate 45 and FM 518 every day on the way to work. He noticed the amount of yellow time given to motorists seemed a bit on the short side, so he decided to check. Armed with a stopwatch, Schirmbeck clocked the interval between the green and red lights at just four seconds -- 0.7 seconds shorter than the minimum required under Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) regulations at an intersection with a posted 50 MPH speed limit.

A study by the Texas Transportation Institute found that violations jumped 110 percent when yellow light timing was reduced by one second under the bare minimum amount (view study). Conversely, the addition of one second beyond the bare minimum yielded a 40 percent collision reduction. The doubling of violations, and revenue, is what attracted Australia's Redflex Traffic Systems, which runs the photo enforcement program, to the intersection.

"The camera company installed cameras here like they have done elsewhere where they knew they could take advantage of the poor engineering and short yellow change intervals," Schirmbeck told TheNewspaper. "Instead of fixing the problem and seeing what effect that has they choose to profit from a dangerous situation."

Schirmbeck was impressed by the honest and swift response of Chief Michael Jez to his emailed complaint. Jez immediately called in Redflex and TxDOT to investigate. After TxDOT agreed with Schirmbeck, Jez ordered the refund or cancellation of every ticket issued between October 1 and March 4 while the light should have been yellow -- a total of 1740 tickets worth $130,500. Schirmbeck was less impressed by the lack of oversight that led to the problem in the first place.

"The questions are still there, why was the light so low for so long?" Schirmbeck asked. "League city said the timing was the same as when the cameras went up. Where were the engineering studies that should have identified the problem? With the camera company, the city and TxDOT all looking at the intersection why didn't someone catch it?"

Schirmbeck lives in Baytown where he is leading the charge to get a referendum on the ballot to ban red light cameras. He has also caught Baytown shortening the duration of yellow lights at camera intersections. Unlike League City, however, Baytown's actions have been deliberate.

"[Baytown] claims that since paying a ticket is an admission of guilt they are not legally able to refund tickets," Schirmbeck said. "Clearly League City does not agree with this opinion. Why is it that in just a couple of weeks League city can correct short yellow timing, issue refunds and dismissing other tickets prompted by someone who isn't even a League city resident but Baytown can't do the same?" Source

Virginia State Police Help With Budget Crunch

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-09T00:41-08:00

A federally funded ticketing blitz in the state of Virginia landed a total of 6996 traffic tickets this weekend. The blitz, dubbed "Operation Air, Land and Speed" coincided with frantic efforts by state officials to close a$2.2 billion budget deficit. Supervisors ordered state troopers to saturate Interstates 81 and 95 to issue as many tickets as humanly possible over the space of two days.

"The safety of Virginia's highways begins the minute a vehicle is put in 'drive,'" Virginia State Police Superintendent W. Steven Flaherty said in a statement. "Those split second decisions to choose not to drive drunk, to choose to wear a seat belt and to choose not to speed or drive aggressively really do make a difference in preventing and/or surviving a crash."

Officers had no trouble delivering the requested number of speeding tickets with a total of 3536 ordinary speeding citations written. In addition, another 717 "reckless driving" tickets were filed, although these most often are simple speeding tickets that happen to carry a fine of up to $2500. Driving as little as 10 to 15 MPH over the limit can qualify for this enhanced punishment. On the other end of the scale, some 310 tickets were handed to drivers who either forgot to wear their seatbelts or made a choice not to do so.

Activists with the National Motorists Association pointed out that enforcement efforts may have concentrated on areas where speed limits are expected to rise to 70 MPH following Governor Bob McDonnell's signature on legislation raising the state's maximum speed limit (view law). This would mean a significant number of tickets were issued for conduct that will be perfectly legal in a matter of months. The group also indicated that state police tactics may run afoul of state law.

"All officers making arrests incident to the enforcement of this title shall be paid fixed salaries for their services and shall have no interest in, nor be permitted by law to accept the benefit of, any fine or fee resulting from the arrest or conviction of an offender against any provision of this title," Virginia Code Section 46.2-102 states.

Under the federal grant application process, state officials explained that they would pay officers overtime -- at least one-and-a-half times their normal salary -- to participate. This special reward for ticketing operation participants appears to violate the spirit of state law.

Since 2006, a total of twenty-three ticketing blitzes have taken place, generating 120,977 traffic tickets. Source

Indiana Appeals Court: Concealed Carry Not A License To Be Searched

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-08T12:04-08:00

Police may not search a vehicle merely because its driver has been issued a valid concealed carry permit, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday. A three-judge appellate panel weighed the actions of Indianapolis Police Officer Danny Reynolds who pulled over Melvin Washington for driving with a burned-out headlight on September 17, 2008 at 12:30am.

On that morning, Reynolds first asked Washington whether he had a gun, and Washington said he had one under his seat. Washington also carried a valid concealed carry permit. At this point, Reynolds ordered Washington out of the car and handcuffed him so that he could conduct a search under the seat of Washington's vehicle. Reynolds spotted a small bag of marijuana and issued Washington a court summons and a ticket for the defective headlight. Washington was then released with his handgun placed in the trunk of his vehicle, unloaded.

Washington moved to have the evidence against him suppressed because the warrantless search, he argued, violated the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches. A lower court disagreed, insisting that "officer safety" justified the search. The court of appeals did not buy the safety argument.

"In the present case, prior to the search for the handgun, Officer Reynolds did not express any concerns for officer safety," Judge James S. Kirsch wrote for the majority. "Although Washington admitted that a handgun was present inside of the car, he was at all times totally cooperative with Officer Reynolds The testimony at the suppression hearing indicated that, during the traffic stop, Washington made no furtive movements, answered the officer's questions, and showed no disrespect to the officer. At the time he searched for the handgun, Officer Reynolds had no information that any crime or violation of law had been or was about to be committed, except for the inoperable headlight infraction. Further, at the suppression hearing, Officer Reynolds did not testify that he had any specific concern for officer safety during his traffic stop of Washington."

Because no legitimate safety exception to the Fourth Amendment applied in this case, the court ruled the search was improper. Judge Melissa S. May added in a concurring opinion that the majority's ruling created a subjective element -- cooperation -- that could serve as a loophole allowing searches. To solve this problem, May cited the US Supreme Court case Arizona v. Gant where a warrantless vehicle search was overturned because the suspect had no access to his car (view decision).

"While we are dealing here with a traffic stop, rather than an arrest, the fact remains that Washington, like Gant, was removed from his car and handcuffed," May wrote. "Accordingly, Washington's statement there was a gun under his seat simply could not justify a search of his car based on concern for officer safety."

A copy of the decision is available in a PDF file at the source link below. Source

Spain, UK: Speed Cameras Self-Combust, Are Impersonated

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-07T12:06-08:00

A speed camera van in North Wales caught fire last Monday at around 12:30pm. The van had been parked in Gwynedd to issue tickets on a narrow road in the area. A North Wales Fire Service emergency crew arrived on the scene to extinguish the blaze, leaving the vehicle heavily damaged.

"The firemen were very quick in putting the fire out but there were just a few smiles on their faces afterwards," one witness told the North Wales Daily Post newspaper. "I think quite a few people around here had a bit of a giggle as well."

Investigators told the Daily Post that an electrical fault in the van caused the blaze. Last month, a speed camera van in Tennessee caught fire and burned down a barn under similar circumstances.

In Ferrol, Spain a 24-year-old student mocked the overuse of speed cameras in the city last week by creating a "fixed mobile radar" costume. Standing in the median of the AC-566 he used an attached pocket camera to photograph passing motorists while a group of friends filmed from the other side of the road.

View the speed camera impersonation video on YouTube:

Source

Colorado, Italy: Speed Camera Operators Caught Disregarding Law

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-06T11:44-08:00

The private company that operates speed cameras in Denver, Colorado is ignoring the provisions of state law designed to protect the public. Motorist Bill O'Neil used his cell phone camera to document the lack of warning signs around a photo radar van issuing tickets on First Avenue in January, KMGH-TV reported. City officials entrust Redflex Traffic Systems, an Australian company compensated based on the number of tickets it is able to issue, with the responsibility of placing the signs. A police spokesman told KMGH that signs were out, just on the other side of the road.

Similar tactics are used in the city of Fort Collins, where a speed camera van was hidden behind a bridge abutment on Tuesday. The warning sign was placed on the ground, partially obscured by a planter, the Coloradoan newspaper reported.

In Genoa, Italy a local judge has ruled that average speed cameras are illegal. Justice of the Peace Elena Paolicchi canceled a ticket issued on the A7 between Genoa and Milan after motorists organized by the website strademulte.it challenged the reading of the system known as Tutor. A written ruling has not been issued in the case, but the challenge was filed questioning the system's accuracy and the integrity of the evidence. Red light camera systems known as T-Red caused such a controversy with the shortening of yellow lights and corrupt, backroom deals that Italy's Ministry of Interior last year banned private companies from operating photo enforcement devices. Source

Hawaii Supreme Court Strikes Down Another Speeding Ticket

TheNewspaper Editor — 2010-03-05T00:01-08:00

The Supreme Court of Hawaii is serious about not allowing police to merely assert that their methods to detect speeding are accurate. The court insisted that this accuracy must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt and, to show the court meant what it said, the "excessive speeding" case against motorcyclist Zachariah I. Fitzwater was thrown out on Wednesday.

In this case, Honolulu Police Officer Neal Ah Yat claimed that he paced Fitzwater driving at 70 MPH in a 35 MPH zone on January 24, 2007. On that day, Yat had been unable to get a laser speed reading on Fitzgerald's sport bike because it was too small. Yat fired up his cruiser and caught up to the motorcycle to begin pacing its speed from six car lengths behind.

At trial, the officer produced a five-month-old card that purported to certify the accuracy of his patrol car's speedometer. These "speed checks" are conducted once a year as part of a cruiser's routine maintenance cycle at Jack's Speedo Shop. Yat could not testify that he took the vehicle to be checked nor did he have any knowledge of how the accuracy was verified. The high court found this insufficient.

"In order for the results of speed checks to be admissible, the state must establish: (1) how and when the speed check was performed, including whether it was performed in the manner specified by the manufacturer of the equipment used to perform the check, and (2) the identity and qualifications of the person performing the check, including whether that person had whatever training the manufacturer recommends in order to competently perform it," Justice Mark E. Rectenwald wrote for the majority. "The required information was missing from the record here. It was not established by Ah Yat in his testimony. Nor was it established by the speed check card."

Without this essential element, the supreme court vacated the lower court judgment against Fitzwater which had imposed a $630 fine, 36 hours of community service and a thirty-day license suspension.

In September, the high court had struck down a speeding ticket because the state failed to produce evidence beyond the assertion of a manufacturer that a laser speed gun produced accurate readings (view decision). Since then, two appellate court rulings have overturned citations because the state has yet to mount a case sufficiently convincing to the judges.

A copy of the supreme court case is available in a 255k PDF file at the source link below. Source