ORLANDO, Fla. -- Attorneys argued over the constitutionality of red-light cameras in an Orange County Florida courtroom on Friday morning

 When red-light cameras were first installed in and around Orlando, they've ignited a red-hot argument.

 www.BanTheCams.org , Attorney Ted Hollander and others  claims the cameras are unconstitutional.

 "The treatment that a person receives when they obtain a notice of violation is far different from what someone would receive, when they get a ticket from a uniform traffic violation," Hollander said.

 Hollander was one of several attorneys representing more than 100 people who got tickets.

  The defense argues that the statute allows a habitual red-light runner anonymity, so long as they quickly pay for the ticket. If a ticket is quickly paid, it disappears from the driver's record, unlike a person who gets a ticket by a police officer

 We at www.BanTheCams .org feel that if you a habitual red light runner you should have points added to your insurance not a get out of points free card.

 One of the problems with red light cameras is that they ticket the owner of the car who may not be the driver at the time of the infraction.

 We had gone from where the accused was innocent until proven guilty…… to guilty until they proved themselves innocent.

 The way the camera law is written, the accused has the burden of proving they didn’t commit the violation. 

When one looks at the criminal justice system in America, one concept is that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. What this means is that the government must prove beyond any reasonable doubt the accused committed the violation. The burden is upon the government.

Let’s look at the elements of a moving traffic offense in Florida, such as running a red light: 

  1) Someone is driving a motor vehicle;

  2) Within this state; and

  3) Failing to do something required (i.e. stop at a steady red signal)

  First, we’ll look at a police officer pulling over a motorist for running a red light. The officer can testify to:  1) (Name of motorist) who  was driving a motor vehicle and that they were  identified by their driver’s license or other identification; 

 2) They were driving within this state/county/city (for court  jurisdiction); and

 3) They failed to stop at a steady red signal as required in s. 316.075 (the red light law).

  We’ll now look at the camera ticket: 

  1) No one from the state is here to identify the driver;

 2) The violation can be reasonably assumed to be within the state/county/city for court jurisdiction; and 3) The photographic evidence will show the violation by the motor vehicle.

 Here’s where this fails: No one from the state can identify the driver.   The camera can’t testify. If it could, it could not identify the driver.

  Looked at another way, let’s say there is video of a car driving away from  a burglary, but it  only shows the rear and the driver can’t be  identified.. Is it proper to seek an arrest warrant and cause the owner to   come to court to prove they did not commit the burglary, or would it be better to use that video and allow the police to question the owner before making any charges? In a hit and run crashes. A witness would get a tag number. This gives you a lead to investigate. You had to put the accused “behind the wheel” before a prosecution could take place.

 The standard is the same for a traffic violation- they must be proven beyond any reasonable doubt, which is why the driver must be identified. A camera cannot do this.

 Our state and U.S. Constitutions afford us protection from our governments, albeit (ȯl-ˈbē-ət, al) eroding  protection.

From what I have learned about the camera practice, the camera takes the photo and/or video, and this goes to the private company for processing. It is then sent to the law enforcement agency, where a representative reviews it and makes the enforcement decision. For evidence to be admissible in court in Florida, it must be verifiable as authentic. These records, which are generated by the department, once under seal are self-authenticating documents per F.S.  90.902. Camera photos and/or videos sent electronically are another matter- they are not generated by the department or a government agency.

 Attorneys for the state say the cameras keep our roads safe.

 A ruling isn't expected until after Tuesday.

 We at www.BanTheCams.org  believe traffic cameras are a crime against American justice, and we should work hard to root them out, wherever they are.

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Title
Comment	smaller | bigger
Name
Email
Write the displayed characters
Subscribe via email (registered users only)
	Add Comment Preview