People not paying Speed-Camera tickets in Arizona (Features man on Monkey mask)

[black_diamond]

Dave Vontesmar hates photo enforcement.
Vontesmar drives nearly 30 miles a day from his home in north Phoenix to his job at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport and passes through the photo-enforcement gantlet on Interstate 17, Arizona 51 and Interstate 10.
But when state Department of Public Safety officers served 37 unpaid photo-enforcement tickets to Vontesmar recently, he wasn't fazed.

The photos all show the driver wearing a monkey mask.
"Not one of them there is a picture where you can identify the driver," Vontesmar said. "The ball's in their court. I sent back all these ones I got with a copy of my driver's license and said, 'It's not me. I'm not paying them.' "
The latest data from the DPS shows more motorists are disregarding the violation notices upon arrival in the mail.
When the system was just getting set up in October, 34 percent of drivers paid their tickets. By June, that statistic had dropped to 24 percent.

Program effects


DPS officials repeatedly point out that the success of the photo-enforcement program is not measured in revenue it generates - about $20 million for the state through the end of July - or the number of notices of violation issued.
"Our whole goal is not to issue tickets, just to get people to drive the speed limit," Lt. Jeff King said.
King instead prefers to focus on the program's positive effects on Arizona's highways, particularly in the Valley where fatalities, a factor that closely correlates with speed in wrecks, have dropped by 10 to 20 percent since the same time last year. His anecdotal evidence also points to drivers slowing down.
"The whole purpose behind it is voluntary compliance, and (the cameras) work really good," King said.
DPS statistics support the notion that the program is slowing some drivers down, too. Photo-enforcement cameras activated about 78,000 fewer times in July than in December, though King notes other factors such as the economy could have contributed to fewer drivers being on the road.
King said there are plenty of people who willfully disregard the violations that arrive in the mail, generated by the 78 fixed and mobile units around the state.
DPS officers target such drivers, dubbed frequent fliers, who have 15 or more active violations. King said that number could fluctuate from 100 to 600 motorists.
Drivers have 30 days to respond to a notice of violation after it arrives in the mail. Motorists can either pay the fine, challenge the ticket or inform the DPS that the recipient is not the driver and return the paperwork with a copy of their driver's license. Drivers who challenge tickets could end up in Justice Court.
Those who ignore the notice may be served with a hand-delivered ticket.

A case in point


Vontesmar, a flight attendant, chose to inform the DPS that he was not driving when confronted with the 37 violations at his job three weeks ago. DPS officials estimate the car registered in Vontesmar's name was caught by cameras more than 90 times, but time had lapsed on the majority of violations by the time officers tracked Vontesmar down.
Vontesmar is confident that he won't have to pay the fines, an amount that could exceed $6,500.
"It's obviously a revenue grab," he said of the program. "They're required by law to ID the driver of the vehicle. If they can't identify the driver or the vehicle by the picture, what are they doing to identify the driver?"
Typically, the DPS uses driver's-license photos and vehicle registration to confirm the identity of motorists, but there is a special unit assigned to go after frequent fliers.
In this case, officers sat outside Vontesmar's home and watched him drive to work. "We watched him four different times put the monkey mask on and put the giraffe-style mask on," Officer Dave Porter said. "Based on surveillance, we were positive that Vontesmar was the driver."
Porter said that it would be up to justices of the peace to determine what to do with Vontesmar's tickets, but the officer said there is enough evidence to reissue the tickets in Vontesmar's name, despite his claims that he was not the driver.
Some frequent speeders cover their faces, use post-office boxes or fictitious addresses to beat the system, said Officer Jeff Hawkins, who is working 50 such cases.
"They generally do it under the pretext that they're not going to be caught," he said. "These are what you probably consider as people who don't really respect the law at all."

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...onkey0908.html

I love it! I think it was in CA people are taking and covering them up with cardboard boxes!

[Mattk]

This is pretty dumb and quite sad. He gains nothing from speeding through a fixed and known speed camera. He can speed where there are no cameras or police officers. He's just disrespecting the law for fun. Why else would you break the law and then tell the local newspaper about it?

[10000rpmlover]

not only in CA, but also in parts of upstate NY, people have taken to cover up the cameras with styrofoam cups, duct tape and even underwear, what you have to realize is that these cameras are being used in rural, deserted areas, mainly back roads and old freeways that most people do not use, as such these are the long routes, for people who rather take the longer way instead of bottle necking the normal ways, in NY we have tons of these, in NJ also, those roads that you can take to avoid the tolls etc. the fact that even some cops around my area have been the subject of citations while going home from work, yes there is one of these idiotic speed traps near where I live, in the past 4 months it has been duct taped, broken and turned around to look away from the road and I would no doubt believe it if it came down to some of the state troopers from the local detachment doing it themselves

[RC45]

Originally Posted by Mattk This is pretty dumb and quite sad. He gains nothing from speeding through a fixed and known speed camera. He can speed where there are no cameras or police officers. He's just disrespecting the law for fun. Why else would you break the law and then tell the local newspaper about it?

What's even sadder is you take on the matter.

The face in the picture i sclearly not him - and if these where "real" offenses, they would issue a warrant and arrest his arse for contempt of court.

The fact they have to go through all these hoops is all the validation anyone needs of the unconstitutionality of these photo-enforcement farces.

This country is close to a social meltdown, and then "photo enforcement revenue colelciton" will be the least of anyone's worries.

Biiger more intrusive government is never a good idea.

[Mattk]

I don't agree with the speed cameras either as they do not encourage safe driving at all. However, I disagree with breaking the law just for fun. That's just disrespectful. You don't just obey laws which you agree with.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by Mattk I don't agree with the speed cameras either as they do not encourage safe driving at all. However, I disagree with breaking the law just for fun. That's just disrespectful. You don't just obey laws which you agree with.

... a civil disobedience... not for anarchy.

[black_diamond]

Originally Posted by nthfinity ... a civil disobedience... not for anarchy.

The difference is speed cameras have been ruled unconstitutional by upper and lower courts--who's the one being disobedient?

I would rather live a little dangerous then have cameras on every corner like in the UK.

[Kaz]

lol that reminds me of Clarkson's Bill Oddie mask

[Mattk]

The difference is speed cameras have been ruled unconstitutional by upper and lower courts--who's the one being disobedient?

I did a Google search. The US Supreme Court has not touched this at all. I did, however, find a report about a hick local court judge in Arizona saying that the different penalties for speed camera fines and other speeding fines discriminated between two classes of people. Creative, but also a bit silly and I'm pretty sure a local court judge is not allowed to interpret the US Constitution or set any kind of precedent at all. Probably because they are usually not smart enough to do so.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by Mattk I'm pretty sure a local court judge is not allowed to interpret the US Constitution or set any kind of precedent at all. Probably because they are usually not smart enough to do so.

Absolutely incorrect on the first part. Their job is to interpret law and judge it against both the State constitution and laws therein, and against the national constitution. It can win/ lose from there, and go to a State or Federal appellate court; from there State Supreme, or US Supreme.

[Mattk]

I would assume a state superior court can interpret the constitution and apply it to state laws to set precedents. I'm pretty sure (like in every other country) a local court judge cannot make law and is bound by the superior court's precedents.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by Mattk I would assume a state superior court can interpret the constitution and apply it to state laws to set precedents. I'm pretty sure (like in every other country) a local court judge cannot make law and is bound by the superior court's precedents.

How do you think cases get to Supreme courts?

[Mattk]

First instance determination. To my knowledge, though, most American states have first-instance superior courts and then the state Supreme Courts. If there was something significant, one would think they would start at the superior court, or at least have the local court judge refer a question of law to the superior court. Inferior courts can only apply the law as it stands. The local judges are not allowed to simply invalidate a law.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by Mattk Inferior courts can only apply the law as it stands. The local judges are not allowed to simply invalidate a law.

Indeed, you are right.

A specific example; a local law dictates how speed limits can be set based on a number of factors ranging from road with, density of driveways, sight distance, and the 85th percentile.

One city took it upon themselves to dictate how their roads can be set regardless of the state determination.

An Ann Arbor judge's decision to throw out two speeding tickets last January - along with the way the city sets speed limits - was upheld on appeal in Washtenaw County Circuit Court on Friday. But while Ann Arbor officials took steps last March to avert further challenges, the attorney who won the case said he doesn't believe the city could beat a new challenge. Two Ann Arbor residents who were ticketed for speeding last year challenged the legality of the posted speed limits. They based their argument on a 2006 state Motor Vehicle Code that requires the use of the number of access points - driveways and intersections along a half-mile stretch of road - to set speed limits. The fewer access points, the higher the speed that must be set under the law. One of the ticketed drivers, James Walker, is a recognized expert on speed limits. He's testified before state lawmakers on setting 85th percentile speed limits. National studies indicate that setting limits at or below the speed that 85 percent of drivers travel reduces friction between drivers and boosts safety. Walker said Ann Arbor's posted limits typically fall in the 10th to 30th percentile of the speeds drivers actually travel. Walker's attorney, John Shea, argued that the city cannot legally set a limit other that what's allowed under the access-point law unless it adopts the 2006 Uniform Traffic Code, which allows cities to use the 85th percentile formula. Assistant City Attorney Bob West argued in January that state legislators couldn't have intended when they wrote the access-point law to use such a "simplistic" formula to set speed limits. While 15th District Judge Julie Creal agreed, she said she couldn't ignore the law. West argued Friday that the law is "fatally flawed." True or not, Circuit Judge Timothy Connors said Friday, courts only apply laws. He said changes should be addressed to lawmakers. After Creal threw out the tickets, the city repealed its adoption of the access-point portion of the Motor Vehicle Code in favor of its own rules. Contact reporter Susan Oppat at [email protected] or 734-482-1166. City Attorney Stephen Postema said he doesn't believe the city code conflicts with state law, even though it doesn't use either the 85th percentile or access points to set speed limits. He said the city has some flexibility through the Home Rule City Act to create its own code. However, a provision of the act specifically orders that "no provision of any city charter shall conflict with or contravene the provisions of any general law of the state." Shea said the question now is whether anyone who gets a ticket in Ann Arbor will spend a couple thousand dollars in attorney's fees to overturn city code. If they do, he said, he believes they would win

[MidEngine4Life]

Ha ha thats awesome. Reminds me of my drive to work. Its about 15 miles of 2 lane road in the back way to the airport that is hardly ever used, but the cops find it necessary to bust us for doing 65 in a 45 out in the boonies.

Ive been lucky so far. Took my STi up to 145 on one stretch the other day. My co-workers however, havnt been so lucky