Slashdot Mirror


Baltimore Issued Speed Camera Ticket To Motionless Car

SternisheFan sends this story from the Baltimore Sun: "The Baltimore City speed camera ticket alleged that the four-door Mazda wagon was going 38 miles per hour in a 25-mph zone — and that owner Daniel Doty owed $40 for the infraction. But the Mazda wasn't speeding. It wasn't even moving. The two photos printed on the citation as evidence of speeding show the car was idling at a red light with its brake lights illuminated. A three-second video clip also offered as evidence shows the car motionless, as traffic flows by on a cross street. Since the articles' publication, several lawmakers have called for changes to the state law that governs the way the city and other jurisdictions operate speed camera programs. Gov. Martin O'Malley said Tuesday that state law bars contractors from being paid based on the number of citations issued or paid —an approach used by Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Howard County and elsewhere. 'The law says you're not supposed to charge by volume. I don't think we should charge by volume,' O'Malley said. "If any county is, they need to change their program.'"

27 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Not legal here. by HexaByte · · Score: 4, Informative

    In my own area, a Judge has ruled they are not legal.

    --
    HexaByte - he's a square and a half!
    1. Re:Not legal here. by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Funny

      Lawyers. The judge outlawed lawyers.

    2. Re:Not legal here. by crypticedge · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, theres sufficient evidence that shows they make the roads more dangerous because of sudden stops to avoid said tickets, and have done little to curb others that would run it anyway. They also have a habit of taking pictures during green lights and submitting tickets for those.

    3. Re:Not legal here. by mythosaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm no grammarian, but I'm pretty sure "they" is either Judges or Areas...

    4. Re:Not legal here. by Dishevel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As a pedestrian I try to always understand that in a battle of "Who can pay less attention to where they are going" the pedestrian will always lose.
      So I do not play that game. I assume the drive does not see me till I know he does.
      When I ride a motorcycle I do the same.
      Pedestrians that step onto a road hoping that cars see them and stop need to fail at this before they pass on their defective genes to offspring.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    5. Re:Not legal here. by hawguy · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you're going to put that in, than I also demand something about people cruising 20mph under while in the inside lane, because those are the people I tailgate. If you want to go slow, that's fine, just get out of the way of those who don't.

      If you're going to put that law into place, then how about computer controlled speed governors on every car, restricting them to the speed limit (with maybe a short override allowable for merging/passing)

      If I'm driving 65 in a 65mph zone and pass a block of cars driving 60mph, I don't need an idiot tailgating me until I complete the pass. He may want to drive 80mph, but that doesn't mean that I should have to drive 80mph to pass a car.

    6. Re:Not legal here. by freeze128 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Current laws require these photos to be reviewed by a live human police officer who has to testify that the suspect car was in fact speeding. In this case, the failure can be attributed to "Human Error".

    7. Re:Not legal here. by Jesse_vd · · Score: 5, Funny

      My father was a lawyer, we used to go on road trips to fight the speeding ticket we got on the last road trip.

      My favourite defence was the calibration log. "Manual says it has to be calibrated at each shift, do you have records showing it was calibrated on the morning of _______? Nope? Thanks, have a nice day."

      And then we'd sit in the back and watch every other defendant use the same questions and get let off :)

    8. Re:Not legal here. by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well let's see, TFA is about speed cameras, so that can't be it.....I know! PURPLE MONKEYS!!!

    9. Re:Not legal here. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "In my own area, a Judge has ruled they are not legal."

      If "they" means red light cameras, they probably should not be legal.

      I did a bit of internet research last year, and found out that of the U.S. cities that surveyed the results of their red-light-camera use, many of them (a majority) found that they actually increased both the number and average severity of collisions.

      How is that possible? Some of the reasons are complex, but others are simple. For example: instead of just cruising through an iffy judgment call when the light is about to change, motorists now (fearing a traffic ticket that can be $100 + in some places) slam on their brakes, and get rear-ended by the inattentive driver behind them.

      Others cities have been caught deliberately shortening the duration of their yellow lights to create more ticket revenue.

    10. Re:Not legal here. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      can't provide recent calibration test records.

      And in-court sworn testimony from the person who signed-off on the calibration and the calibration of that calibration instrument, all the way back to NIST.

      We only give so many speeding tickets because we have a RADAR gun - people focus on what they can measure. I've been thinking of using OpenCV to create a tailgating gun. That's an actual danger, unlike speeding which usually isn't.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    11. Re:Not legal here. by jxander · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which side does more violating than the other is entirely moot. Pedestrian is going to lose either way.

      --
      This signature is false.
    12. Re:Not legal here. by meerling · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It shouldn't have gotten to that point because the machine shouldn't have triggered on that, and the contractor should have caught the error, but besides all that, there is a lot more than 'human error' involved, it's human indifference, and most likely intentional.

      Remember, "The department has said that a single officer can review up to 1,200 citations in a given day.". So if you have an awesomely diligent cop reviewing these things, who's working on it non-stop for a full 80 hours, that means he's devoting about 24 SECONDS to each one. So loading the data, reviewing the pictures and the video, making a decision, and clicking on whatever buttons and possibly filling out supplementary information required of him (whatever that may or may not be) all in 24 seconds. Yeah, the donut eating coffee swiller is just rubber stamping them. Hell, he probably doesn't even notice what color the car is, nor does he care.

      This system isn't designed to improve safety or help anyone, it only does one thing, and that's to make money for the local government and the contractor.

    13. Re:Not legal here. by CanadianRealist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd agree that fair is not the right word to be using here. "To be brutally honest" would probably be better (and more correct) than "To be fair".

      As a pedestrian I'm amazed at how stupid many drivers are. As a driver I'm amazed at how stupid many pedestrians are.

      Whether walking (or biking ) I treat it like a game where the drivers are actively trying to kill me and won't be punished if they do. That is definitely not true, and wouldn't be fair if it was, but thinking that way is a great survival tactic.

      As a driver I've many times let someone "steal" my right of way since that seemed preferable to being in an accident, even if it would have been the other driver's fault.

    14. Re:Not legal here. by c0lo · · Score: 5, Funny

      As a non-pedestrian

      How do you get to/from your car? Teleport?

      He doesn't. Was born in a trailer, will live in a car or a trailer, will die in a trailer.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  2. Obviously guilty by roman_mir · · Score: 5, Funny

    He is guilty. Clearly guilty of embarrassing some government officials with his so called 'evidence'. Lock him up.

  3. The camera was only out by 38mph! by kawabago · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well within the manufacturers margin of error!

  4. Its all relative! by Kenja · · Score: 4, Funny

    From a point of view at the center of the solar system that car was moving at 30 km/s!

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  5. 90's Era Germany by hovelander · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This happened when I was in the military in Germany in the early 90's. Just about to leave for the US and I got a speeding ticket in my mailbox for my 67 VW Beetle. Thing is, that Beetle never even made it onto the autobahn or any other street since I had the engine out of it the whole time and didn't finish the project before I had to leave country. I also wasn't allowed to leave until the false ticket was paid. Back then, if you contested the ticket, you had to write in to get access to the photos. I didn't have enough time left in country for that, so I had to pay the ticket or get an Article 15 (which is like a speeding ticket for your life in the military). I had thought, and still think, that it was a scam played on GI's about to leave the country. I'll have to dig that ticket out and finally request the photos from that bit of glory...

  6. Re:Crooked cop by agallagh42 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The cop who signed off on this ticket is obviously not doing his job. This should at least be fraud, if not something more serious. Of course, there's no chance of the thug with a badge getting any sort of charges laid against him. There is no justice in the US.

    Not fraud. Perjury. The cop is basically swearing that he witnessed the accused committing the act of speeding, and it is quite obvious that he did not. He lied to the court, in a round about way.

    --
    Carpe Cerevisi - Seize the Beer
  7. Re:Crooked cop by SternisheFan · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the article: " The city's speed camera contractor, Xerox State and Local Solutions, says each potential citation goes through two layers of review to weed out any that have a deficiency, such as an illegible license plate. Then a Baltimore police officer must review the citation before approving it for issuance to the vehicle owner. Each citation says the officer swears or affirms that the car was going at least 12 mph over the speed limit "based on inspection of the recorded images." The officer's signature is also printed."

  8. Re:Crooked cop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perjury.

    Signing off on the ticket matches the definition of perjury. The officer willfully and falsely certified that the driver violated an ordinance (speeding over the limit), one which had a financial penalty to the driver (possibly above and beyond the $40, given insurance and other unknown factors). If I recall correctly, the statements for signing off on tickets for revenue enhancement cameras include statements that signing is under penalty of perjury.

    The only out would possibly be mens rea, the intention. If the cop did so accidentially, then it could be incompetence (and not malice). Since the job was explicitly to examine these photos, then you're into malpractice territory. Doesn't speak well to the cop, nor to the program. If this is one case of a major foul-up, how many more were there, ones paid off false due to fifty dollars being less cost than missing a day of work to dispute it.

    Note: IANAL. Also, obviously, I am strongly against the police acting as The Sherrif Of Nottingham, levying fines and taxes for their own benefit. Revenue cameras tend towards injustice; especially so when they change conditions like shortening the time of yellow lights to increase said revenue.

  9. Re:Crooked cop by ehiris · · Score: 4, Informative

    Did you ever see how they "sign" the citations? They are printed signatures in low dpi meaning noone really reviews them on a case by case basis.

    I got a ticket once and tried to dispute it based on the fake signature but the judge was as crooked as the cop who showed up in court because he admitted the case even though the fake printed signature should have invalidated the complaint to begin with.

    Someone high up in position of authority is filling up their pockets and the pockets of their cronies with money from those shotgun-approach speeding tickets.

    Meanwhile, those freeway speed cameras are gone as they were ruled illegal but I did not see a dime back and I still had to deal with my insurance rates going up because of the points.

  10. We had speed cameras on the freeway in Phoenix by mark_reh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    for a couple years. They were eventually removed because people simply ignored the tickets that came in the mail. Tickets delivered by mail are not delivered by a sworn peace officer so they were unenforceable. The state contracted with a private company because sending process servers out to deliver tickets would be too expensive.

    There were other ways around the tickets, too. Two car families would register husband's car in wife's name and wife's car in husband's name. If the face in the photo doesn't match the license photo of the registered owner, the ticket would not be mailed. One guy in Scottsdale collected >30 tickets without having to pay because he wore a gorilla mask when he drove past the cameras. He admitted to owning the car and the mask, but denied being at the wheel and no one could prove that he was behind the wheel when the photos were snapped.

  11. My idea by rk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have an idea for making traffic safety laws about traffic safety and not revenue generation:

    Pass a law that says all proceeds from moving violation citations go into a statewide fund. Then every 12 months, the funds are distributed evenly to every licensed driver in the state who has a 36 month clean driving record. Good drivers get rewarded by bad drivers, who pay into the fund with their tickets, and municipalities can't turn traffic laws into a cash cow with bullshit like speed traps, red-light cameras with short yellow lights, and other shenanigans.

  12. Re:Crooked cop by ShadoHawk · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, last year we had a dead cop signing them! (I am from Baltimore.) http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/10424713107/dead-baltimore-cop-signed-certified-red-light-camera-tickets.shtml Not sure if we can fire him.

  13. Re:Crooked cop by Dishevel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you are supposed to look for the infraction and do not it is lazy.
    If you attest to a court that you did when you in fact did not you are perjuring yourself.

    --
    Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?