Redflex Corruption

[Jim]

I got a ticket in the mail yesterday. Here is the "evidence" against me. If I were doing 79 in the 65 as claimed, I would have been in the trunk of the car in front of me. I am car #2 behind the truck. A car from Colorado is passing me, and he may have been going 79, but I don't know. If he was, it looks like I got his ticket.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HH3NTQrE12k

AZDPS and Redflex are clearly lying about the quality control they claim to do, and they have no problems sending a ticket to an innocent victim to help tighten the budget problem and fatten the corporate profits. If they looked at the videos as they claim to do, I never would have gotten this.

Something tells me I am not the first person to whom this has happened. Is anyone interested in starting a class action lawsuit against a company which gathers evidence for the state without a private investigators license, and has profit as its motive behind "law enforcement"?

[big_load]

Meanwhile, the bandits have been heavily lobbying the NJ state legislature to bring back the red light cameras. The final report on the terminated program has been delayed many months. I'm not surprised. It will take a lot of cherry-picking to make the final data disagree with all the interim releases that showed safety decreases rather than increases.

[hikeaz]

Maryland Officials Plant Support For Speed Cameras

15 Jan 2016 12:31 AM PST

Officials in Montgomery County, Maryland have been coordinating with individuals to create the impression that "dispassionate citizens" support the use of speed cameras. A freedom of information request filed by the Maryland Drivers Alliance recently uncovered emails in which Police Captain Thomas (Do as I say not as I do) Didone helped edit letters to the editor in the local newspaper praising photo ticketing.

On at least two occasions, Alan M. Freeman, a partner at a Washington, DC law firm, had letters appear in the Gaithersburg Gazette. Freeman has been on the county's "Citizens Advisory Board" for more than a decade, focusing on traffic issues and issues affecting the western county. In the first letter, Freeman bashed a local resident who criticized the placement of a particular camera at a highly profitable location.

"The recommendation of the county police to post a camera on Gold Mine Road was endorsed by a citizen advisory panel that considered only objective public safety data," Freeman asserted in the February 23, 2011 letter. "Like so many others, Ms. Link's real objection seems to be that she doesn't like to obey the speed limit, and she likes it even less when she gets caught."

In a March 12, 2014 letter praising speed cameras, Freeman does disclose that he has been on the county speed camera board "since its inception." He gets personal once again to bash a resident who wrote to point out, contrary to Captain Didone's claim, that the cameras have not reduced speeding. Instead, the letter cited rising citation numbers as evidence that the only thing rising was county revenue. Freeman labeled the letter as an "unoriginal and uninformed critique" and "pure poppycock." Captain Didone helped write that letter.

"Attached is my initial draft letter to the Gazette," Freeman wrote in a February 27, 2014 email -- written the day after the anti-camera letter appeared.

Freeman made clear in his note to Captain Didone that his intention was to create the impression that "dispassionate" citizens favor speed cameras.

"I welcome your input and suggestions," Freeman added. "BTW, I thought about going after the ad hominem attack on Tom, but feared that would be seen as over-personalizing this, and I want it to be seen as a dispassionate citizen response. Happy to chat by phone if you like."

The Maryland Drivers Alliance asked for the emails as part of a larger effort to obtain records from the Citizens Advisory Board for Traffic Issues (CAB-TI) meetings, which have taken place strictly behind closed doors, excluding citizens from participating. Captain Didone refuses to release the board's agendas and the names of members, insisting the state's Open Meetings Act does not apply to the county-controlled group.

"Since the CAB-TI's agendas were not limited to just selecting speed camera locations, and because no minutes or agendas were kept, there is no way for the public or the press to have any idea what other matters might have been discussed or what other matters might be discussed in future meetings," the drivers' rights group explained.

[AZDigger]

I wasn't speeding, and certainly not the 79 MPH the photo system claims.

My recommendation, pay the fine and consider it a donation to the widow's of fallen police officers. I never question any traffic citation as I should've had 25 for every one I received, I assume the same holds true for you and most people here. Was this ticket issued on the AZ Trail, or Pueblo Canyon? Or should it be in another forum?

[Jim]

I wasn't speeding, and certainly not the 79 MPH the photo system claims.

My recommendation, pay the fine and consider it a donation to the widow's of fallen police officers. I never question any traffic citation as I should've had 25 for every one I received, I assume the same holds true for you and most people here. Was this ticket issued on the AZ Trail, or Pueblo Canyon? Or should it be in another forum?

The original thread post is now re-posted at the top of every thread page. If you look closely, you can see this thread and my post originated in 2009, I think. This long since resolved, with myself going to court and it being dropped by the DA becuase of a no show by Redflex.

[hikeaz]

Florida: Accidents Increase At Red Light Camera Locations

Posted: 21 Jan 2016 12:46 AM PST

Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles reports that accidents increased at intersections where red light cameras are in use. State law requires the agency to monitor the performance of automated ticketing machines and submit an annual report on its findings.

This year's audit is the first to include an independent analysis of crashes. It found that accidents increased 15 percent overall at red light camera intersections after the devices were installed. These were not minor fender benders, as the number of incapacitating injuries jumped 29 percent, and there were two additional fatal collisions. Crashes involving pedestrians and bicyclists jumped 17 percent at camera locations. Officials were quick to caution that other factors besides the cameras may account for the negative result.

"The probability of a crash occurring increases as people drive more, and daily vehicle miles traveled in Florida increased 4.7 percent from 2011 to 2014," the report explained. "The crash analysis should be put into context of the overall complexity of the issue at hand, as other factors may contribute to the change in number of crashes outlined in this report."

Seventy-one cities and counties in Florida use red light cameras which issued a total of 963,039 tickets worth over $150 million in fiscal year 2015. Of these, 253,744 tickets worth $40 million were issued for right hand turns on red, despite a state law that prohibits tickets for such turns made in a "careful and prudent manner."

Cities like Orlando, Tallahassee and West Park insisted that they judged the success or failure of their programs by whether or not the number of violations dropped. Statewide, there were 22,225 more tickets issued, even though 67 fewer red light cameras were in use. The number of operational cameras is expected to drop substantially as cities continue to dump red light camera programs.

Boca Raton, Campbellton, Cocoa beach, Coral Springs, Daytona Beach, Doral, Hallandale Beach, Holly Hill, Hollywood, Juno Beach, Kenneth City, Margate, North Miami, Oldsmar, St. Petersburg, Tallahassee, Temple Terrace and West Palm Beach told the state agency that they had either already stopped issuing tickets or would do so by year's end.

[big_load]

The effort to bring red light cameras back to NJ continues, despite overwhelming public opposition and the demonstrated increase in accidents at intersections with cameras. It could be one of those situations where lobbyists collect big fees and politicians rake in campaign contributions and blow some hot air, but the legislation somehow keeps falling short of coming up for a vote.

ETA: Police in NJ are searching for an unidentified culprit who pointed a red light camera away from an intersection, toward the sky. This despite the fact that using the cameras has been illegal for a year now. I wonder what the charges will be.

[hikeaz]

The effort to bring red light cameras back to NJ continues, despite overwhelming public opposition and the demonstrated increase in accidents at intersections with cameras. It could be one of those situations where lobbyists collect big fees and politicians rake in campaign contributions and blow some hot air, but the legislation somehow keeps falling short of coming up for a vote.

In my meetings with Tempe officials before they dropped the cameras I often asked them if they were concerned that the city may be sued for negligence (at the least) as accidents increased at all but one of the survielled intersections. This was the same for years and years; but in spite of increased harm to their citizenry they continued renewing the Redflex contract. Like I have said before.... when GM knew there was harm being caused by fiery ignition switches but ignored it to make money, THEY were vilified and thrown up against the wall, economically. But somehow these POS politicos keep on throwing the citizens health and well-being away (not to mention their rights) for more money.
"Someone robbing Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul".

Redflex (and their kind) travel all over the US to work to oppose any referendums that may hamper their windfall. The LAST thing the politicos and the photo-ATM guys want is a VOTE by the citizenry.

[hikeaz]

Jury Delivers Guilty Verdict In Redflex Bribery Trial

Posted: 27 Jan 2016 12:44 AM PST

A jury on Tuesday found John Bills guilty of taking bribes from Redflex Traffic Systems. The former deputy head of the Chicago, Illinois transportation department abused his position to fill his pockets with cash from the Australian firm in return for his help in expanding the Windy City's red light camera program into the largest of its kind. The federal jury unanimously found Bills guilty on all counts.

Bills refused to plead guilty and turn states evidence, as bagman Martin O'Malley and Redflex executives Aaron M. Rosenberg and Karen Finley did. Instead, Bills played an odd defensive strategy that hoped to convince jurors that federal prosecutors failed to prove his involvement in the corruption beyond a reasonable doubt.

"If a defendant performed acts that advanced a criminal activity but had no knowledge that a crime was committed or was about to be committed, those acts alone are not sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt," Bills attorney Nishay K. Sanan offered as his proposed instruction to the jury. "A person acts corruptly when that person acts with the understanding that something of value is to be offered or given to reward or influence him in connection with his official duties. A corrupt intent exists only if there is a specific quid pro quo for the public official to engage in a specific official act in exchange for something of value. Vague expectations of some future benefit are not sufficient to make a payment a bribe."

US Attorney Zachary T. Fardon countered with bank statements, receipts and other records showing Redflex handed $2 million to O'Malley which was doled out to Bills in the form of $643,000 in cash, a condo in Arizona, trips, a Mercedes CLK320 convertible and other benefits. Fardon insisted that it was enough that Bills "influenced" the awarding of the contract to Redflex after accepting the financial benefits.

For its illicit $2 million investment, Redflex pocketed $124 million from Chicago's red light cameras. (Pretty good return! - This so-called 'safety' measure sure is lucrative) The Australian firm would have made even more from the city's speed camera contract had a whistleblower not tipped off the Chicago Tribune newspaper about the bribery scheme.

Bills is to be sentenced on May 5, while Redflex lobbyist John Raphael is scheduled to be sentenced on March 30 for facilitating bribes in Columbus, Ohio. Finley, meanwhile, was granted the court's permission to relax in Kauai, Hawaii from February 5 to February 17 to work on her tan.

[hikeaz]

Texas: Camera Company Reveals Anti-Referendum Strategy

Posted: 26 Feb 2016 12:49 AM PST

After being defeated at the ballot box seven times in Texas, red light camera companies have come up with a new strategy to rescue their programs. Instead of going to court to block the vote in Jersey City, American Traffic Solutions (ATS) convinced the city council last week to place a second measure on the ballot that would undermine Proposition One, the charter amendment submitted by the Houston suburb's voters.

Last year, residents outraged by the automated ticketing system successfully circulated a petition calling for a referendum on photo enforcement during the May 2016 election. Proposition One, if adopted, would immediately prevent the city from collecting any camera revenue. To counter this, the city council added its own measure to the ballot, Proposition Two, which would amend the total ban on red light cameras to say that the city could continue automated ticketing until at least the year 2024 -- possibly longer with five year extensions.

"Barry Klein and his group did a great job going around the city getting citizens to sign the petition," petition co-sponsor Jim Pulliam told TheNewspaper. "We turned that petition in to the city, which really surprised the hell out of them, and of course they were able to work with ATS to come up with this Proposition Two. We knew something was going to happen, but we didn't know exactly what."

Jersey Village officials argue that an immediate ban would cost the city millions because ATS would demand a massive settlement payment if the program were shut down. The city is in this position because it overreacted to the legislature's 2009 attempt to sunset red light camera authorization statewide. The sunset bill failed, but many jurisdictions like Jersey Village rushed to evade the legislative intent by renewing contracts for fifteen years, or more.

Jersey Village's contract with ATS does contain an escape clause. As part of the 2009 amendment, ATS gave the city the right to terminate the agreement with sixty days' notice if "the collections for the program are less than the fixed monthly fee due to ATS for three consecutive months," which would happen if the camera ban took effect. ATS would keep all of the profit after receiving the termination notice as payment for the costs of winding the program down. (Profit? I thought it is about safety?!) The original initiative sponsors are confident that voters will not buy into the city's monetary argument, and they will go door-to-door to ensure that residents are not confused by the dueling propositions.

"We're planning to tell them that they need to vote for Proposition One and against Proposition Two," Pulliam said.

More individuals have already signed the anti-camera petition than typically vote in a Jersey Village election. The sentiment is common in Texas, where residents have voted to oust red light cameras in Conroe, Dayton, Houston, Baytown, League City, Arlington and College Station by margins of as much as 77 percent against.

[hikeaz]

Arizona To Slash Red Light Camera Tickets With Definition Change

Posted: 15 Mar 2016 01:48 AM PDT

A great deal of money rests on a seemingly minor word change in the legal definition of an Arizona intersection. Earlier this month the state House voted 57 to 3 to conform its definition to the language used everywhere else in the continental United States. The move would slash the number of red light camera citations issued in the state by effectively giving motorists more time to clear an intersection before seeing a flash in their rear-view mirror.

"Basically we are one of the very, very few states who does not comply with the federal Manual of [Uniform] Traffic Control Devices," bill sponsor J. Christopher Ackerley (R-Sahuarita) explained to the House Transportation Committee last month. "We don't define our intersections the way the rest of the country does, and I think it makes sense for us to define intersections where people are expecting to stop."

In 48 states, an intersection begins at a stop bar or crosswalk line. A driver may legally cross these lines while the light is green or yellow and can continue through to the other side of the intersection even if the light turns red. Arizona's current law sets the red light camera trigger back between 24 and 38 feet (to the elongation of the curb line), so that drivers have less time to legally clear the intersection. The existing definition has the same effect as shortening the yellow light duration by 0.2 to 0.6 seconds, depending on the speed of traffic and size of the intersection.

The Federal Highway Administration has noted that Arizona's existing definition of an intersection is "not consistent" with binding federal regulations, and in 2009 the agency slammed the city of Tucson for painting confusing and illegal intersection marking lines in an effort to generate red light camera violations. While the bill has come up in the legislature in past sessions, the definition change has never been enacted. Governor Jan Brewer (R) vetoed the bill in 2012.

"It really came down to monetary [concerns]," Transportation Committee Chairman Rick Gray (R-Sun City) explained. "If you put them where the federal requirements are, then it's harder to catch them on a red light camera and make them pay."

Arizona's current governor, Doug Ducey (R), has not said whether he would sign or veto the measure. Ducey will not have a chance to sign bills that would have banned photo enforcement or put the issue up for a referendum vote because both the state House and Senate fell in line with the photo enforcement industry's wishes and killed the measures.

[hikeaz]

GREAT NEWS!!!!!!

Arizona AG Halts All Photo Radar Use

Posted: 16 Mar 2016 09:26 PM PDT

Attorney General Mark Brnovich sent shockwaves through the photo enforcement industry on Wednesday in finding that red light camera and speed camera companies have been violating the state's private investigator statute. Under the law, anyone other than a police officer who gathers evidence for use in a court trial must be a licensed investigator. Failure to obtain a license is a class one misdemeanor.

"The private investigator licensing statutes specifically exempt eleven categories of persons from its licensing requirements," Brnovich wrote. "Photo enforcement system contractors, however, are not identified in the list of persons exempted from the private investigator licensing requirements."

A previous attorney general ruling had sided with the state police in saying the requirement did not apply to the freeway photo radar program. Brnovich overruled his predecessor, arguing the text of the statute in question is unambiguous and not open to interpretation.

"A third party which contracts to operate a photo enforcement system in the state clearly falls within the definition of 'private investigator' under Arizona Revised Statutes Section 32-2401(16)(b)," Brnovich wrote. "By definition, persons who contract to operate a photo enforcement system engage in a business to 'secure evidence to be used... in the trial of civil or criminal cases and the preparation therefor.' ...This interpretation -- that photo enforcement system contractors must comply with private investigator licensing laws -- is also reinforced by the fact that photo enforcement system contractors are not exempted from Arizona's private investigator licensing requirements."

State Representative Sonny Borrelli (R-Lake Havasu City) brought the issue into the spotlight. At a recent hearing, Borrelli asked American Traffic Solutions (ATS) lobbyist Stan Barnes whether anyone in the photo enforcement industry had been properly licensed. Barnes immediately sent a text message to the head of ATS to get an answer. None was provided at the hearing.

"Three weeks ago, I asked the office of the attorney general to look into and issue an opinion regarding photo radar," Borrelli said. "Today, I am extremely pleased with the opinion that was issued, and hope this will put to rest an issue that has plagued the state of Arizona for far too long. I want to thank Attorney General Mark Brnovich and his staff for the work that went into this issue, and look forward to photo radar in this state becoming a thing of the past."

Brnovich says there is nothing stopping companies like ATS and Redflex from obtaining licenses for its employees. The process requires strict background checks (uh-oh), registration, payment of fees and completion of a three-year apprenticeship.

"Ultimately if this becomes the law in Arizona we will comply just like we have with every other regulation promulgated by the state of Arizona pertaining to road safety cameras," ATS spokesman Charles Territo said in an emailed statement. (Either that or we'll fund an opposition campaign)

The argument that photo enforcement firms had to be licensed was first advanced in Louisiana by Denice C. Skinner, who filed a complaint against a speed camera operator with the Louisiana Board of Private Investigators in 2007. The board agreed with Skinner, but the industry found a judge to block enforcement, and the board lacked the resources to appeal the decision.

I'm tempted to go to Havasu just to shake Sonny Borrelli's hand

[Jim]

FINALLY!!

[big_load]

Unfortunately, it'll probably be easy to get the proper license(s). Getting enough previous fines overturned and refunded that could possibly leave a mark, but the liability must fall on government entities and may not easily be passed on to the vendors. Even if it is, they would probably just do a quick bankruptcy and pop right back up.

[hikeaz]

Unfortunately, it'll probably be easy to get the proper license(s). Getting enough previous fines overturned and refunded that could possibly leave a mark, but the liability must fall on government entities and may not easily be passed on to the vendors. Even if it is, they would probably just do a quick bankruptcy and pop right back up.

They sure go through a lot of gyrations and work-arounds to provide us all of this 'safety'; don't you think? If I did not trust my government so much I would think that it's a money-grab, but they wouldn't do that; would they?

[SuperstitionGuy]

If I did not trust my government so much I would think that it's a money-grab,

It is primarily a power grab so they can tax or fine you into submission!

[hikeaz]

More tyranny.........

New Mexico: Another Settlement Costs Redflex $3 Million

Posted: 23 Mar 2016 01:04 AM PDT

The legal bills for Redflex Traffic Systems continue to mount. Last week, the Australian firm asked a federal judge to approve a $3.5 million settlement over strongarm tactics used to collect on ignored red light camera citations in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

In 2011, Albuquerque residents voted to kick Redflex out, but city officials (ignoring the wishes of the citizens they vowed to 'serve') did not want to let the issue drop (because, of course they are concerned about the citizen's safety) . They granted Redflex permission to generate up to $20 million in "new" revenue by collecting on 89,000 unpaid tickets, many of which were by then a decade old. Redflex outsourced the collection task to Creditwatch, which used automated phone calls to pester motorists until they paid up. The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, David Willet, received nineteen calls from Creditwatch on his cell phone in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a federal statute that prohibits the use of prerecorded calls to mobile phones without prior consent.

Facing potential penalties of up to $75 million under this law, Redflex and Creditwatch decided to accept the settlement which caps liability at $3.5 million. Redflex is liable for paying up to $2,970,000 of this amount with Creditwatch paying the $530,000 remainder. Under the deal, 42,000 vehicle owners who received a red light camera ticket collection call from Creditwatch on their cell phone between August 21, 2010 and January 15, 2016 are eligible for a settlement payment of "up to $200." After fees of $1,155,000 are paid to the class action attorney firms Keogh Law and Treinen Law Office, however, the likely maximum payment is $55. Those who wish to opt out of the class action settlement have 75 days to do so.

The settlement does not end the legal woes at Redflex, which is currently under investigation at home by the Australian Federal Police. Redflex also faces ongoing Federal Bureau of Investigation scrutiny in the United States. Next week, John Raphael will be sentenced for his role in the Redflex bribery scandal in Ohio, while Karen Finley, former chief of US operations, will be sentenced on June 21. Redflex faces a potential $300 million judgment in Chicago, Illinois that its insurance company does not want to pay.

[big_load]

Redflex faces a potential $300 million judgment in Chicago, Illinois that its insurance company does not want to pay.

I figure two activities have been underway in their insurance providers for a while now:

1. Review of the risk assessment and premium setting.
2. Scouring the contracts and any exposed paper trail to turn up reasons to void payouts. They could well have legitimate grounds, too, if they can show that Redflex misled them about something, especially after a conviction at the executive level.

[Alston_Neal]

Sure after my insurance goes up $40 a month stop it.......you're welcome.

[hikeaz]

Define tyranny......

Scottsdale, Arizona Initially Ignored AG Opinion On Cameras

Posted: 19 Apr 2016 01:04 AM PDT

For nearly two weeks, Scottsdale, Arizona allowed its private vendor to issue over a hundred red light camera and speed camera tickets in defiance of a ruling from the state attorney general. On March 16, Attorney General Mark Brnovich ruled that it is a class one misdemeanor for a photo ticketing company to provide evidence for use in a court of law unless it holds a private investigator license (read opinion). Scottsdale's camera vendor, American Traffic Solutions (ATS), is unlicensed. Unlike other cities that immediately suspended ticketing on March 16, Scottsdale officials held several conference calls with ATS to decide what to do.

"Okay," Scottsdale Police Lieutenant Robert Bonnette Jr emailed the ATS program manager on March 16. "We are looking into how we work tomorrow if this is how our legal just interpreted it to me."

Scottsdale did continue work the next day, and for a full week after the ruling until city photo ticketing program manager Darcy Nichols notified ATS about the need to shut down some, but not all, of the program's cameras.

"Per our earlier conversation via conference call, please discontinue the deployment of mobile and semi-portable speed enforcement until further notice," Nichols wrote in a March 23 email. "Additionally, please suspend all process service until further notice."

The mobile cameras were responsible for generating a significant amount of revenue. In February, the devices had generated 393 tickets, but the presence of photo ticketing vans on the streets would have sent a clear signal that the program was still active. The speed and red light cameras mounted on poles at city intersections would continue issuing tickets for another five days. The final shutdown order was executed on March 28 at 3:25pm.

"ATS has ceased processing events for the city," ATS deputy general counsel Kristen Young wrote in a March 31 letter to Scottsdale. "This includes violation processing, affidavits processing and processing of returned mail. ATS has removed or otherwise ceased deploying all mobile speed units or transportable photo enforcement units. ATS has suspended all hearing support services, including preparation of evidence packages. ATS has disabled the cameras at all fixed sites."

ATS insists that the shutdown is only temporary and that it will either secure a change in the law allowing it to operate without a license, or it will obtain a license. The company even offered to only charge Scottsdale for ticketing services rendered up to March 16, even though tickets were being issued up until March 28.

Tyranny

[chumley]

tyranny
Tyranny is a noun that describes a repressive and arbitrarily cruel regime. Don't accuse your mother of tyranny just because she won't let you play video games all weekend long.

One of the root words of tyranny is the Latin tyrannia which means the "rule of a tyrant" and a tyrant is a "cruel master."

Today, it can mean the repressive regime of a dictator or it can also mean being controlled by something metaphorically harsh like time or work.

tyranny
n a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator (not restricted by a constitution or laws or opposition etc.)

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/tyranny

I hate the concept of photo-enforcement, and I personally think it treads in some very murky legal waters. I also think that to assign words like tyranny to this overreach -- which could easily be fought through due process -- truly cheapens actual tyranny.
:STP: