• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Tacoma Judge Correct on Redlight Cameras

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
A bit off-topic, but I know one of our forum owners considers red-light traffic cameras an issue, so I'm hoping it will be allowed.

Dateline 12/7/12

"Washington City Charges Public $670 to Exercise Constitutional RightTacoma, Washington courthouse clerk demands $670 payment to exercise rights under the Confrontation Clause in red light camera case...The judge singled out the Sixth Amendment issue and dismissed the charges against Schmadeka."

Article here: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/39/3968.asp

Found out about it here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/the-agitator

Don't be thrown off by the Huffpo web address. Radley Balko does great work on a certain liberty issues. He worked for Reason. And, had his own website/blog, The Agitator, before taking the job at Huffpo. It looks like he simply got Huffpo to host his Agitator blog.
 
Last edited:

slapmonkay

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
1,308
Location
Montana
Article link seems broken. Page not found error.

Edit: you have an extra 'I' at the end.
 
Last edited:

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Kevin was a poster here for awhile. He is a fighter when it comes to certain issues.

I have met him and I know he was helping Pooh, Green, Orange whatever his new name was too.
 

Vitaeus

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
596
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Thank you, Citizen, for the link and how the holy hells did that "policy" get past any City Attorney? Talk about shearing the tax payer to support the government, but that does not even come close to the common sense test.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Thank you, Citizen, for the link and how the holy hells did that "policy" get past any City Attorney? Talk about shearing the tax payer to support the government, but that does not even come close to the common sense test.

+1

It wasn't intended to shear the taxpayer, though. It was intended to protect the income of red-light cameras. If you can get a Confrontation Clause wedge into the scheme, you jeopardize the whole scheme. The private company running the program isn't going to be able to afford to send a reps all over the country testifying. Not without raising prices, which will raise fines, which will raise a ruckus with already-annoyed citizens. The whole point was to trick/coerce people into waiving their right to confront witnesses.

You could probably do worse damage by insisting on confrontation and demanding chain of custody of evidence. "Mr. Camera Rep, who downloaded the camera data and forwarded it to your office? Across whose fiber-optic network? Oh, I am sorry. Are those people in the courtroom today?"
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
I cited melendez-diaz in a speeding ticket case regarding the certificate of calibration of the LIDAR unit .. back in 2010 I think.

Judge tossed out the evidence and w/o the COC, the case fell apart and I was found not guilty.

In melendez, the court ruled that: 1) defendant need not get the witness there -- this is a burden by the state
2) no costs to the defendant can be associated with it + other stuff

Everyone should read this case.

Its a 2008 case that has stretched out its roots very wide ...
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
*insert incredulous, creative, non forum approved expletives here*

Here, Here!!!!!

Sure glad my states legislature has prohibited the collection of ANY fines based upon the use of "traffic cameras".....

My biggest issue from this-- traffic or intersection cameras, is the requirement that I must prove that I was not operating my vehicle at the time of offense. I have frequently loaned most of my vehicles to others at their times of need. All the camera companies do, from my understanding, is send a photo of the driver and the license plate to to the registered owner. It is then required of the registered owner to prove innocence! Completely turning the legal standard UPSIDE DOWN of INNOCENT until proven guilty!
 

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,670
Location
S. Kitsap, Washington state
Here, Here!!!!!

Sure glad my states legislature has prohibited the collection of ANY fines based upon the use of "traffic cameras".....

My biggest issue from this-- traffic or intersection cameras, is the requirement that I must prove that I was not operating my vehicle at the time of offense. I have frequently loaned most of my vehicles to others at their times of need. All the camera companies do, from my understanding, is send a photo of the driver and the license plate to to the registered owner. It is then required of the registered owner to prove innocence! Completely turning the legal standard UPSIDE DOWN of INNOCENT until proven guilty!

In WA the camera cannot show the driver in the photo frame.

most people just say they weren't driving even if they were. the court will ask who was driving the car, but to my knowledge they can't actually cite that person. I sat in Bremerton Municipal Court and watched RLC citation contests, one guy claimed up to 6 people were operating his car that day, and gave the judge six names (ha, collect that!) I found it funny all the people who go for mitigation and then tell their sob stories and get their tickets reduced to 70 bucks...

There was one guy I saw, who came into court with whole tupperwares full of files and told the judge he intended to contest, and she asked for his story and he begins by saying "well these bins of files are my brief, if you'll give me 6 hours I can explain..... DISMISSED!
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

I thought that was hilarious....
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Off topic. Nothing to do with Open Carry.

Correct.

However, the Social Lounge subforum description says, "Really want to talk about your new car or the movie you saw last night? This is where such topics should go. All other forum rules still apply here including the prohibition on discussing long gun carry, bashing other gun groups or LEOs and personal attacks."

And, since this thread topic is:

  • of interest to the Washington subforum
  • of interest to a large concentration of the Washington subforum who are particularly active both as OCers and forum participation
  • involves a constitutional issue

I opted to start the thread in this subforum for maximum exposure to the people affected, rather than slavishly observe the subforum selection rules. The rules are a means to an end, not an end in themselves.
 

amlevin

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
5,937
Location
North of Seattle, Washington, USA
Correct.

However, the Social Lounge subforum description says, "Really want to talk about your new car or the movie you saw last night? This is where such topics should go. All other forum rules still apply here including the prohibition on discussing long gun carry, bashing other gun groups or LEOs and personal attacks."

And, since this thread topic is:

  • of interest to the Washington subforum
  • of interest to a large concentration of the Washington subforum who are particularly active both as OCers and forum participation
  • involves a constitutional issue

I opted to start the thread in this subforum for maximum exposure to the people affected, rather than slavishly observe the subforum selection rules. The rules are a means to an end, not an end in themselves.

By keeping it in the WA SubForum it also helps keep all the comments on laws in effect in other states from drowning the "conversation".
 

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Hopefully he meant continue running those red lights with cameras when it is otherwise safe to do so.
 
Last edited:
Top