Lawmaker burns traffic camera ticket, urges Tennesseans to ignore them

[don-o]

Lawmaker burns traffic camera ticket, urges Tennesseans to ignore them

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/politics/legislator-burn-your-red-light-camera-tickets-33c26513-bdd3-126b-e053-0100007faa35-381036031.html

By Tom Humphrey of the Knoxville News Sentinel

NASHVILLE — State Rep. Andy Holt is urging Tennesseans to ignore traffic camera tickets and emphasizing his point by burning a citation in a video that apparently has received more than 325,000 Facebook views.

"What do you do if you get one? Throw it in the trash. Personally, I prefer to burn mine," says Holt, R-Dresden, in a lengthy news release issued in conjunction with posting the video on his Facebook page Wednesday, which shows him using a cigarette lighter to set the ticket aflame.

But Knoxville Police Chief David Rausch said in an email Thursday that Holt is not offering sound advice.

"No one likes to be caught violating traffic offenses, regardless of how they are caught, but they have a legal obligation to properly address it. Burning a citation or throwing it away is an emotional response that may feel good, but it does not make the violation and accountability go away," Rausch said.

excerpted

[driftdiver]

Lawmaker burns traffic camera ticket, urges Tennesseans to ignore them

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/politics/legislator-burn-your-red-light-camera-tickets-33c26513-bdd3-126b-e053-0100007faa35-381036031.html

By Tom Humphrey of the Knoxville News Sentinel

NASHVILLE — State Rep. Andy Holt is urging Tennesseans to ignore traffic camera tickets and emphasizing his point by burning a citation in a video that apparently has received more than 325,000 Facebook views.

"What do you do if you get one? Throw it in the trash. Personally, I prefer to burn mine," says Holt, R-Dresden, in a lengthy news release issued in conjunction with posting the video on his Facebook page Wednesday, which shows him using a cigarette lighter to set the ticket aflame.

But Knoxville Police Chief David Rausch said in an email Thursday that Holt is not offering sound advice.

"No one likes to be caught violating traffic offenses, regardless of how they are caught, but they have a legal obligation to properly address it. Burning a citation or throwing it away is an emotional response that may feel good, but it does not make the violation and accountability go away," Rausch said.

excerpted

Gotta have that revenue.

[don-o]

I like fire


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mtnro1fwOSU

[Relic]

That's bad, it's against the law.

[SirLinksALot]

That's bad, it's against the law.

If you don't like the law, change it. That's what this lawmaker ought to do.

[don-o]

Throwing tea into Boston Harbor was illegal. Negroes riding in the front of an Alabama bus or attempting to register for college was illegal too.

[PoloSec]

Don't be surprised if this guy gets charged with attempted arson, you know it is crossing minds of the liberals, it is no grueling task to recon how progressive liberal socialists think.

[Bill Cipher]

Would that count as obstruction of justice or destroying government property?  Or arson?

[NavyCanDo]

It may very by state, but here in WA, the easiest way to get a dismissal of a photo enforcement ticket is to claim you were not the person who was driving the vehicle. All you do is fill out a form called Declaration of Non-Responsibility.

Once the document is filed with the court is that one of the clerks dismisses the ticket in the system. A judge does not even review the form. The form Declaration of Non-Responsibility asked you who was driving the vehicle. You do not need to incriminate any other party, but just so you know if you put a person’s name there the court does not follow up and then send them a ticket. Under law Automated traffic safety cameras may only take pictures of the vehicle and vehicle license plate and only while an infraction is occurring. The picture must not reveal the face of the driver or of passengers in the vehicle. The ticket is just dismissed. You can make up a name as well; John Smith and put an address, and the court would not be the wiser and will dismiss the ticket. Your declaration is enough for the court to dismiss the ticket. JUST REMEMBER, you do not need to go to court or to contested hearing to proceed with this option, all you do if file this with the court once you get the ticket. If you to present this at a contested hearing in person.

The city actually loses money when a ticket goes to court. The court must go through the standard process of producing a docket and arranging for a judge to hear the case. With the additional cost and labor, dismissal of the ticket becomes a more practical option.

I have never received one, but being the most of the revenue goes to Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions (ATS) the camera providers, I would not fill guilty for following the above process.

[TomSea]

It may very by state, but here in WA, the easiest way to get a dismissal of a photo enforcement ticket is to claim you were not the person who was driving the vehicle. All you do is fill out a form called Declaration of Non-Responsibility.

Once the document is filed with the court is that one of the clerks dismisses the ticket in the system. A judge does not even review the form. The form Declaration of Non-Responsibility asked you who was driving the vehicle. You do not need to incriminate any other party, but just so you know if you put a person’s name there the court does not follow up and then send them a ticket. Under law Automated traffic safety cameras may only take pictures of the vehicle and vehicle license plate and only while an infraction is occurring. The picture must not reveal the face of the driver or of passengers in the vehicle. The ticket is just dismissed. You can make up a name as well; John Smith and put an address, and the court would not be the wiser and will dismiss the ticket. Your declaration is enough for the court to dismiss the ticket. JUST REMEMBER, you do not need to go to court or to contested hearing to proceed with this option, all you do if file this with the court once you get the ticket. If you to present this at a contested hearing in person.

The city actually loses money when a ticket goes to court. The court must go through the standard process of producing a docket and arranging for a judge to hear the case. With the additional cost and labor, dismissal of the ticket becomes a more practical option.

I have never received one, but being the most of the revenue goes to Arizona-based American Traffic Solutions (ATS) the camera providers, I would not fill guilty for following the above process.

I wonder if nowadays, a lot of cities have these "traffic judges". You go into the courthouse and these "judges" have their little offices and deal with the offenders but there really isn't a real court process, one just waits in line for the next judge.

[Optiguy]

That's bad, it's against the law.

We have a constitutional right to face our accusers. How do you cross examine a camera?

[Oceander]

We have a constitutional right to face our accusers. How do you cross examine a camera?

The camera isn't the accuser; the prosecutor is.  The witness is the reader of the images captured.  You cross examine that witness the same way you cross-examine a radar gun: by cross-examining the person who evaluated the film, the operator, the equipment maintainer, the manufacturer, by having the calibration of the equipment verified as of the time it took the image, and by obtaining a satisfactory chain of custody from use back to the last time it was properly calibrated. 

If you can discredit one or more of those, you may be able to get the evidence excluded entirely, at which point there is no case against you because the prosecutor no longer has a shred of evidence. 

[Optiguy]

The camera isn't the accuser; the prosecutor is.  The witness is the reader of the images captured.  You cross examine that witness the same way you cross-examine a radar gun: by cross-examining the person who evaluated the film, the operator, the equipment maintainer, the manufacturer, by having the calibration of the equipment verified as of the time it took the image, and by obtaining a satisfactory chain of custody from use back to the last time it was properly calibrated. 

If you can discredit one or more of those, you may be able to get the evidence excluded entirely, at which point there is no case against you because the prosecutor no longer has a shred of evidence.

A radar gun is a tool operated by the officer citing you for the violation. In this case, it is the camera initiating the citation. It operates autonomously.