Redflex Lackey Scrambles to Save Scam

Mike Williams looks at his BlackBerry while fielding questions from the Appropriation Committee

Mike Williams looks at his BlackBerry while fielding questions from the Appropriations Committee

Redflex Lobbyist Mike Williams testifies before the House Appropriations Committee about how freeway cameras save lives, see pictures here. Using comments like “any statistician will tell you..,” he assures the Committee that banning the cameras outright isn’t the “right thing to do.” He touted numbers like “nine lives were saved” according to the “DPS study.”

It became clear that Mr. Williams was parroting the numbers handed to him by DPS as he kept asking them to intervene and clarify. But he was all alone when Rep. Biggs reminded him that DPS had backed off on referring to their data as a study. Rep. Biggs went on to grill Mr. Edwards about what his baseline was for comparison for the nine lives that were saved by the cameras. Mr. Edwards began many of his statements with “my understanding is…” and he would say the baseline was from the previous year, then he would change his mind and decide his understanding was the baseline was from the first three months that statewide photo enforcement began. It was a long way from “any statistician will tell you…”

I know, it’s a little hard to follow, but I think the above paragraph accurately portrays Mr. Williams’ confusion. You can see it here, fast forward to about 1:44:00, then enjoy the show.

Earlier, the issue of recording streaming video came up, same link as above, at 1:36:20. Rep. Heinz spoke and said he didn’t see what all the concern was about, and assured the Committee that there wasn’t a Big Brother conspiracy to photograph us picking our noses in our cars. Rep. Biggs pointed out that much of the concern about video stemmed from a previous hearing when a female representative from Redflex (Molly Edwards) was asked if the cameras record streaming video, and she said “No.” At the same meeting , the Redflex lobbyist (Mike Williams) was asked the same question, and he said he “Wasn’t sure.” Finally, DPS (Commander Woodward) was asked if the cameras record streaming video, to which he said yes.


27 Responses to Redflex Lackey Scrambles to Save Scam

  1. That guy is a buffoon. It’s always a good show when he’s there. You don’t see that much stammering and dancing in a Las Vegas show.

  2. RPr says:

    he stated the cameras saved 9 lives last year.

    what about the 24 lives lost at camera locations in pinal county?

  3. Doc says:

    Administraitors- Please go to Headline:
    “Proposal to Track Uninsured With Red-Light Cameras Has Cities Seeing Big Money”
    The article is about CHICAGO alderbeeyatch Edward Burke. I can’t imagine the city of Chicago wanting to violate ANYBODY’S Constitutionally Guaranteed Rights…can you?

    Next stop…the NAZI Zone! SIEG HIEL!

    Anyway, so there needs to be a phone “lock-up” @ the good alderbeeyatch’s office, & then, cameraFRAUD Chicago!

    Remember…F R E E D O M ! ! !-Doc from Prescott

  4. Stacey says:

    I think Mr. Heinz forgot his clown nose.

  5. Doc says:

    It appears that mr. williams is sufferring from a lower bowel obstruction. His crainium is firmly impacted in his rectum…along with his blackberry…

  6. geez says:

    “what about the 24 lives lost at camera locations in pinal county?”

    Just another one of Bubu’s “mis-statements”

  7. geez says:

    “what about the 24 lives lost at camera locations in pinal county?”

    Just another one of Bubu’s “mis-statements”
    P.S.: Forgot to add good post!

  8. Are just supposed to believe you geez or are you going to back up your assertion? I think I believe a Sheriff over an anonymous Internet troll.

  9. Dan G. says:

    Sheriff Babeau’s officers are the ones that are at the scene of EVERY accident in Pinal county. Yet somehow, geez’s automatic nuh-uh conjectures are supposed to be MORE believable?!?! UNBELIEVABLE!!

  10. lilgerman says:

    Nine fatalities prevented, eh? How does one prove a negative? Oh that’s right…you can’t!

    I’d be willing to venture that “any statistician” (with no political agenda to support) would confirm that nine fatalities more or less is within the normal, expected statistical variation in a sample of the size and complexity we’re discussing here in Arizona. Heck, if the cameras were not there, perhaps 18 lives would’ve been spared.

    What a bunch of monkeys they are, defending the indefensible with meaningless, trumped-up “statistics”.

  11. Gruff says:

    lilgerman, what’s worse is there are people who don’t care for the reality, they just want to believe what they want to believe and will fall for every press release distributed by DPS and the camera companies. They never let little things like facts and history stand in their way.

  12. Doc says:

    Gruff, lilgerman, etc.,-Now when do little issues such as facts & history (& truth, & all that kinda’ stuff…) stand in th’ way of bu//s#!t, retoric, lies, you know…th’ real stuff?!?! Especially when th’ drive-bys, employees of th’ scamera corps, & th’ A2Z mob are spouting their caca? Next, you’ll start expecting cmdr tommy woodward to start bein’ a honest, decent cop. Try & be realistic, o.k.?

  13. Glyph says:

    Y’know, I honestly believe that Lt. King and Comdr.. Woodward are really just good cops who are defending an institution that they wholeheartedly believe in because they’ve seen it work for so many years. I think they’re defending photo radar because they think its the next step in the evolution of their field. If either of these guys pulled you over, I think you’d get a fair shake.

    But the likes of James Warriner, now he scares me. He’s a tool of the Surveillance-Industrial Complex, and has no qualms about looking right into the news camera and saying you’re license and registration will be suspended if you don’t pay your scamera ticket, due process be damned. Once he retires from DPS, I imagine he’ll go work for a tobacco company.

  14. Doc says:

    Glyph-The thing about woodward to me is th’ way he spoke to the Senate Transportation comittee about the streaming video. A good cop would have come clean with that info @ the start. & since he’s the top cop in that organization, he KNEW how the citizens of Az (most of them, IMHO…) would feel about it. Or he wouldn’t have said it the way he did. I wonder what kind of response any of us would get if we spoke to a group of legislators the way he did in that meeting. He KNOWS he’s on shakey ground with it, so he put it in typical tuff cop fashion…”and we’re keeping it for 90 days.” As if it’s his right just ‘cuz he’s who he is. That s#!t just doesn’t fly with me. He’s bound by th’ same laws & rules as we are. But when cornered, he starts barkin’ “commands”…1 of my unanswered questions is why didn’t a legislator in that meeting stand up right there & tell him to knock that s#!t off. Th’ legislators know it’s wrong, too. It occures to me that most cops start off with a genuine, sincere, & honest desire to simply uphold the law. But, just like most politicians, the longer they do it, th’ easier it is to force th’ law down someone’s throat, while they do whatever they want. NOT ALL OF ‘EM…but a damn sure lot of ’em! Hence th’ phrase, “TERM LIMITS”. How do ya’ limit th’ time a guy’s a state trooper? Ya’ don’t. But, ya’ do limit th’ time he gets to be th top cop. Just my opinion, Thanks for readin’ it!

    Remember…F R E E D O M ! ! !-Doc from Prescott

  15. dgpjr777 says:

    What about the convicted Felon on your web-site, does he have a term limit ? Oh never mind he is out trying to commit more Fraudulent Schemes. Pratice what you all preach !
    FREEDOM- Keep convicted felons behind bars ! Right JS ?

  16. guttersn1pe says:

    dgpjr – the relevance of your comment escapes me.

  17. camerafraud says:

    Convicted felon?



  18. capitalfraud says:

    Glyph wrote of James Warriner: “Once he retires from DPS, I imagine he’ll go work for a tobacco company.”

    Dude, you couldn’t be more wrong if you tried.

    Warriner is going to work for Redflex or ACS when he retires. Like this guy.

  19. Vince says:

    Who are these convicted felons??

  20. Michael Milstead says:

    dgpjr777 you seem to miss the point all charges were dropped.

  21. Mark S says:

    ME is a convicted felon, if you can prove it….

    According to LAB, the only people that are posting against the scameras are convicted felons only to learn how not to get caught. Remember, LAB, Deuce, dgpjr are all perfect, like Christ. They don’t ever break the law or commit any sin. They are perfect, according to their own posts.

  22. Actually Mark, they are not perfect. LAB has admitted on multiple occasions that he is not law abiding.

  23. Mark S says:


    I know they aren’t perfect. It is like a lot of these churchgoers that tell us not to sin and yet they do.

    It was either deuce or dgpjr that said that everyone here are nothing but lawbreakers. Every time we get in our cars and drive somewhere, we break at least one, if not many, laws while driving. People don’t realize it. One of the worst laws being broken is not the speeding law, but the unsafe lane change law. It is the number one broken law, just that the police don’t pull everyone over for it. Mostly it is about the failure to signal 100 ft before making the lane change, therefore the unsafe lane change. Unsafe lane changes result in many more accidents than running red lights or speeding.

    I know, I have to be especially more aware of the idiots that attempt to change lanes into me on a daily basis, since I am on a motorcycle.

    People just don’t pay attention when driving. Talking on the phone, texting, putting on makeup, reading e-mail on a laptop computer, etc. I see it on a daily basis. Yes, speeding can be a problem, but also going too slow is also a major problem.

    These cameras are only set up to enforce ONE law and only against certain vehicles. How can you only enforce one law against certain vehicles?

    Impeding the flow of traffic is a major issue on the freeways here. Too many times I see people driving 5 or more UNDER the speed limit, thereby causing people to switch lanes to go around them. This is more dangerous than someone going 5 miles over. LAB, you have admitted to being one of these people that drive slow. You are more of a danger than someone keeping up with the flow of traffic, though it may be above the speed limit. One of these days LAB, you will get a ticket for traveling too slow. That day will come. And will you abide by the ticket if it was taken by a camera?

    Thank you and have a nice night.

    Oh, and BTW, I am not perfect. I am a sinner and I know I break traffic laws, though I try not to.

    I would rather be an open sinner than a false saint!

  24. Mark, when I testified to the Approp committee last week, that was one point I tried to get across. I said, if you REALLY want to improve safety, pass laws regarding distracted driving, and I mentioned cell phone usage as a prime candidate. I think it fell on deaf ears, but it just seems hypocritcal that the same reps that support the cameras will do nothing to create laws against cell phone driving which would be far more effective than any camera, since cameras CAUSE accidents.

  25. Doc says:

    PhotoRadarScam-1st, Thanks for your work! Testifying before the Senate is a Big Deal, & it is appreciated!

    2nd,OUR legislature not passing a cell phone law is not surprizing. Up here, the biggest offenders are L.E. You never see a cop driving past you w/o a cell phone skewered to his/her ear.

    In Great Britan, they put a legislator in jail (I forget for how long…) for getting into an accident while gabbin’ on his cell phone. Over there, where they manufacture the ANLP technology, if you get seen drivin’ w/cell phone, th’ bobbies can pull you over for it; the 1st offense fine is 1500 euro.

    Remember…F R E E D O M ! ! !-Doc from Prescott

  26. Linda says:

    Nice shot,thanks for share.

  27. Rik69 says:

    I was just curious; “Do snow birds get photo traffic tickets or just Arizona residents?”
    Another concern of mine is “What is the potential cell damage from microwave energy being beamed at our heads on our daily commute?” Those microwave energy beams are on 24/7 awaiting a potential law breaker to trip the camera unit. I have not seen any data or studies done as to the safety of daily commuters that have to transverse by these microwave energy photo cameras. I know it is the same energy as used in my microwave cooking device that says to check the seals regularly to prevent cooking humans outside the unit.
    Another concern is non sun hours; “Why don’t the photo radar unit use an orange flash and related camera equipment so as not to produce night blindness in our older population?” When a speeding car passes me and the very bright white flash also blinds both the speeder and I. My eye sight takes three to five seconds to readjust somewhat to normal and no telling of the speeder’s eye sight. This is very dangerous especially when the portable photo vehicle is placed in a curve on Star Pass, Tucson, AZ at night on the dark in an area with no street lights.

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: