Press Release: “FACT vs FICTION”

SCOTTSDALE, AZ, Aug 29, 2008 (Direct news media distribution)

FACT: Demonstrators were peacefully holding anti-photo enforcement signs in Scottsdale on Shea Boulevard the night of August 27, 2008.

FACT: Despite initially saying the demonstrators needed sign permits, the Scottsdale Police officers who were present changed their story after one demonstrator said that he had the only permit he needed— the Constitution of the United States.

FACT: The person who was arrested was not a demonstrator, but rather a journalist who was videographing the event for local media site “”

FACT: The person who was arrested never held up a sign the entire evening.

FACT: Scottsdale Police never arrested the two persons who were actually holding signs.

FACT: Scottsdale Police claim that holding a sign near a photo radar van is “Obstruction of Government Operations,” when in fact the photo van in question is owned and registered to a private corporation.

FACT: Detailed video footage of the incident was taken by the person arrested, at which point the camera was then handed over to one of the actual protestors. The video taken seems to strongly contradict the story provided by the Scottsdale Police, and is being reviewed by attorneys.

Redflex Group is a privately-held company based in Australia performing law-enforcement activities in the United States1.

American Traffic Solutions, Inc., is headquartered in Scottsdale AZ, along with the company’s Orwellian “Global Network Operations Center,” which is “linked to all active cameras and data collection devices worldwide”2., founded in 2008, is a non-partisan group dedicated to “Slowing, Stopping, and Reversing the Theft of our Privacy.” They can be reached online at Limited media interviews or questions may be requested via email at



7 Responses to Press Release: “FACT vs FICTION”

  1. hooleyboy says:

    WAR! FreedomPhoenix and CameraFRAUD! It would be nice to hear from some witnesses. Or even see the tape. This tape should be made public. It would be nice to get some of the money the state is investing in Cameras and have it spent on educating police officers better.

  2. RPr says:

    looks like they are going to start taking your homes if you dont pay your photo extortion radar tickets

  3. Lucky225 says:

    FACT: The obstruction of justice statute the journalist is charged with REQUIRES VIOLENCE OR THREATS OF VIOLENCE — *AND DOES NOT APPLY TO ARRESTS*

    Arizona Revised Statutes:
    13-2402. Obstructing governmental operations; classification

    A. A person commits obstructing governmental operations if, by using or threatening to use violence or physical force, such person knowingly obstructs, impairs or hinders:

    1. The performance of a governmental function by a public servant acting under color of his official authority; or

    2. The enforcement of the penal law or the preservation of the peace by a peace officer acting under color of his official authority.

    B. This section does not apply to the obstruction, impairment or hinderance of the making of an arrest.

    C. Obstructing governmental operations is a class 1 misdemeanor.

  4. Lucky225 says:

    FACT: Journalist wasn’t lawfully detained, therefore not required to give his true name.

  5. Atticus Basilhoff says:

    Lucky225 – Your postings are proof that idiots should not try to interpret the law. Please spend the $50 or so and have someone who practices law explain to you exactly why what is going on is not illegal. unconstitutional, or immoral. The cameras are for revenue enhancement, and since you and your ilk want to speed at will without being captured on camera, perhaps you all would be willing to pay an additional $1000 per year at the time you register your vehicles to offset the loss of revenue if the cameras come down. I doubt it, since the entire argument is about “you” and “your rights”. And breaking the law at will is “your right” as you see it.

  6. AZ ATTORNEY says:

    Atticus, take your own advice:

    13-2412. Refusing to provide truthful name when lawfully detained; classification

    A. It is unlawful for a person, after being advised that the person’s refusal to answer is unlawful, to fail or refuse to state the person’s true full name on request of a peace officer who has lawfully detained the person based on reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing or is about to commit a crime. A person detained under this section shall state the person’s true full name, but shall not be compelled to answer any other inquiry of a peace officer.

    B. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 2 misdemeanor.

  7. lurxst says:

    So camera robots are now public servants?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: