Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[MO] Supreme Court tosses red-light camera violation, says city ordinance violates state law
Springfield [MO] News Leader | 3/2/10 | Amos Bridges

Posted on 03/02/2010 2:06:38 PM PST by Huntress

Link only: http://www.news-leader.com/article/20100302/BREAKING01/100302022/1007/NEWS01/Supreme+Court+tosses+red-light+camera+violation++says+city+ordinance+violates+state+law


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: Missouri
KEYWORDS: donutwatch; lping; policestate; redlightcameras; revenuetickets
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 03/02/2010 2:06:39 PM PST by Huntress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Huntress

http://www.news-leader.com/article/20100302/BREAKING01/100302022/1007/NEWS01/Supreme+Court+tosses+red-light+camera+violation++says+city+ordinance+violates+state+law


2 posted on 03/02/2010 2:06:50 PM PST by Huntress (Who the hell are you to tell me what's in my best interests?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bamahead

/mark


3 posted on 03/02/2010 2:09:43 PM PST by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huntress

Good for them.


4 posted on 03/02/2010 2:10:26 PM PST by Dubya (JESUS SAVES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huntress

This is just another scam which screws the general public by not really inicreasing motor vehicle safety, yet making the companies who produce these damn cameras rich on the take of their portion of the ticket prceeds.

Makes you wonder who the camera company executives are related to in the first place.


5 posted on 03/02/2010 2:11:24 PM PST by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, Guts and Guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dubya

Too late to dump that stock............Ha-Ha!


6 posted on 03/02/2010 2:12:00 PM PST by blackdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KoRn
It's a plain violation of Amendment 7:

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

L

7 posted on 03/02/2010 2:12:37 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Huntress

So what was stopping appeals of these “administrative” processes to the “traditional criminal court system”?


8 posted on 03/02/2010 2:13:31 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

On second thought, you’re right. Thanks.


9 posted on 03/02/2010 2:14:54 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Huntress
Wichmer, who said there’s no estimate yet about what that could cost, also expressed his concern that some of the 8,000 people who have paid red light fines will seek reimbursement now that the process has been tossed. He said the city has collected $803,000 in fines to date.

Sucks to be that city...

10 posted on 03/02/2010 2:16:25 PM PST by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Hope the City Council hasn’t spent the money already.....


11 posted on 03/02/2010 2:22:23 PM PST by Pecos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

I loved the story from last year about the thieves who found out that the traffic cams were high end Nikon digital cameras inside the housing...so they got themselves a truck with a cherry picker and made off with a whole bunch. Then sold them on eBay to the tune of over $30,000. Very enterprising.


12 posted on 03/02/2010 2:38:41 PM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nnn0jeh

ping


13 posted on 03/02/2010 2:39:20 PM PST by kalee (The offences we give, we write in the dust; Those we take, we engrave in marble. J Huett 1658)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZULU
Makes you wonder who the camera company executives are related to in the first place.

That would be far too obvious. Think of the 'consulting firms'. It's the Chicago way.

14 posted on 03/02/2010 2:40:19 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Sounds like a slam dunk case to me. It’s amazing how politicians won’t even consider the Constitutionality of any legislation they consider, and or pass. They just do as they wish, because they know the courts are likely to rule on the side of big government. It has almost become unusual for courts to rule on the side of the individual/liberty.


15 posted on 03/02/2010 2:45:05 PM PST by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Huntress

Damn, one of the best revenue scams ever. Gosh, it wasn’t about traffic safety after all. Does this really need a /sarc/ tag?


16 posted on 03/02/2010 3:18:01 PM PST by Steamburg ( Your wallet speaks the only language most politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huntress

Cheers, from Springfield! Glad to see these down. First, they didn’t have all of the yellow light timing synced to the same speed, and now this. I’m hoping my city council rep (Ibarra) does the right thing, and pushes for these cameras to take a permanent hike.


17 posted on 03/02/2010 3:31:15 PM PST by BattleHymn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
I beg to differ. First, the 7th Amendment does not, and never was intended to, apply to the States. When the Constitution was drafted it was clearly understood by all concerned that each State was responsible for its own courts. Thus the specific jurisdiction of the courts and the right to jury trial in civil cases are matters for that State to decide.

As to the Missouri case, the MO Supreme Court decided on statutory grounds. The City of Springfield has municipal courts only because the statutes of the State create and empower those Courts. Springfield tried to do an “end run” around giving people charged with red light camera violations their day in front of a municipal judge with all of the rights a defendant in those courts would have. The Mo Supremes said (all seven of them); whoa - you can't pull that stuff ‘round here.

This case has been watched by other cities since it was filed and this case will kill the movement to red light cameras in many of those cities. I can't say it happened soon enough for me.

18 posted on 03/02/2010 3:47:58 PM PST by Dogrobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Huntress

A close friend of mine was recently given a tour of the St Louis traffic control center. he says that center monitors ALL traffic cameras and sensors south of I-70, and is authorized by the MoDOT.

His description of the center, in his words, was Orwellian. The capabilities of the center to track, time, and survey motor vehicles in Missouri. The center monitors hundreds of traffic cameras aimed at specific intersections and has sensors that monitor speed, density etc. They can lock on to any vehicle, or GPS device and follow that vehicle across the state. They select random vehicles in intervals and follow them as a gauge of traffic speeds and density.

Red light cameras are a municipal item. But traffic cameras are monitored by the state, including homeland security.
There are hundreds of monitors at that St Louis center including cameras at airports, railroad bridges, highway intersection, river bridges, and many other locations.

When you drive in Missouri, smile. You may be on candid camera.


19 posted on 03/02/2010 7:21:28 PM PST by o_zarkman44 (Obama is the ultimate LIE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KoRn; Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; akatel; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Alexander Rubin; ...



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
View past Libertarian pings here
20 posted on 03/04/2010 6:03:03 AM PST by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson