The police were told they had to report what impact the cameras would have on traffic.
They did not. They simply installed them.
A couple of years later they were warned they had to report what impact the cameras would have on traffic.
They did not.
Instead they chose intersections that were not on the 100 most dangerous intersections in the Denver area, and it appears they shoes intersections in the more affluent part of town.
The few cameras they have generate more than $7,000,000 per year for the police.
A fantasy of mine.
Many of those cameras are on aluminum cylindrical poles. All one would need to do is bring a nylon rope and a maul. You strike the pole with the maul, making a fairly significant crimp. You then lasso the pole and pull it down.
Or just use a paint gun.
Those cameras are highly dependent on the people cited not showing up for court or understanding how to fight them. When you are before the Judge, you plead not guilty and then make sure at trial that the photo reviewer shows up to testify. Most of those guys are far away, and they rotate a lot too. You don’t have to lie about being or not being behind the wheel either, it’s the State’s burden to prove you were, if asked take the 5th.
Make open file disclosure requests prior to trial for the contract between the city and company running the cameras, ask for the certified calibration of the unit, research your states MUTCO (Municiple Uniform Traffic Control) standards or engineering specifications for light duration, etc... There is always an out somewhere in all the material you can dig up, and more often than not they’re going to just dismiss your case rather than have that stuff dug up because they know the other 98% of the people they cite will just pay it and they don’t want to kill the gravy train trying to fit a square peg (you) into a round (serf) hole.