State Declines to Prosecute High Profile ‘Serial Speeder’ Case

After a high profile arrest and making a big deal about a ‘serial speeder’ case in which a Peoria man was alleged to have been caught by a speed camera 55 times (12 of which were criminal), the state has silently dropped the charges and refuses to pursue the case to trial, as 3TV reports.

Featured in the video news story is local attorney Michael Kielsky, who specializes in defense of photo enforcement tickets.

Unlike in civil court where most photo tickets are heard, with the criminal charges the defendant is allowed to pursue full legal discovery for any facts, information, and witness testimony that may pertain to the case. It seems that the state and/or camera operator Redflex did not want to risk divulging critical evidence that would become public record, and/or more likely, the state did not want to risk establishing a legal precedence that could be cited and used as a defense for others fighting photo tickets should the state lose. How else can we explain the state’s lack of fortitude in prosecuting to completion someone accused of multiple counts of the same offense? Neither the DPS or County Attorney will comment.

Clearly, the state had intended for the defendant to do what the uninformed do and simply roll over and pay the fines and take the punishment without a fight. But every time a case is brought to a court that seriously challenges the legality of photo enforcement and scrutinizes the evidence provided by an unattended machine operated by an independent third party, the government backs down in order to protect the money making scheme. There is no other logical reason for the state backing down from trial for 55 speeding violations.

In other news, the Winnipeg Free Press is reporting an INCREASE in accidents after installing red light cameras.

Across the pond, the UK Daily Mail presented results of a new study that concludes that cameras did NOT change driver’s behavior.

And finally, the town of Brentwood lowers speed limits in order to install speed cameras to fill city coffers, as reported by the Washington Examiner.

22 Responses to State Declines to Prosecute High Profile ‘Serial Speeder’ Case

  1. photoradarscam says:

    The people should be outraged that the state would fail to pursue this high number of criminal and civil allegations – and furthermore – to be silent on the decision to NOT pursue it. This is no different really than not pursuing murder charges against an alleged high profile murder defendant. In fact, their failure to pursue the charges could lead one to make an accusation of malicious prosecution by making the arrest and issuing all of those citations to begin with.

    • LoneWolf says:

      I enjoy reading your articles and I like your websites. Don’t let Mr Perfection, aka 4409, discourage you from contributing here. His attacks against other members here is rude and unjustified.

  2. Stacey says:

    Paradise Valley Protest – 10/10/10 at 10 o’clock. Will let you know where when I feel like it. hahaha

    I got to get the address and stuff.

    Phoenix, AZ
    1,122 Volunteers

    Welcome to CameraFRAUD. We are united in our effort to get rid of every speed camera, red light camera, and photo radar van here in Arizona and across the country. We were suc…

    Check out this Meetup Group →

  3. Craig says:

    The state is right to not to pursue this case. The common reason they give is for SAFETY.

    By not pursuing the case, the state is SAFE as the secret on how they fleece motorists will not come out in court. They are SAFE from us realizing what a money making deal they have.

  4. It’s not that the State did not pursue the case, they did (however inadequately), they just would never produce the constitutionally required evidence in response to my discovery requests, until finally, the judge agreed that, between their unwillingness or inability to produce discovery, and the amount of time that had passed, dismissing the last of these cases was justice.

  5. Will Kay says:

    I never had any doubt that if anyone ever had the opportunity to truly challenge the state and call their bluff that they would fold…and they have. 🙂

  6. Doesn’t look like he’s going very fast to me 😉

  7. 4409 says:

    Sorry but photoradarscam you write articles like you worked for the Arizona Republic….WTF

    Very Strange

  8. LoneWolf says:

    Just because you’re having a bad hair day doesn’t mean you have to pick on other peoples’ imperfections as a way to distract yourself from your real issue which, of course, is your mangled hair.

  9. LoneWolf says:

    Don’t look like photo enforcement will be on November’s ballot. The highly controversial, critically important, and greatly publicized proposition 111 will be on it though: “Re-name the position of Secretary of State to Lieutenant Governor.”

    Prop 112 must’ve been pushed by Redflex and ATS in lieu of our scary close-call signature gathering: “Change petition drive deadline by two months earlier than current deadline.”

    If prop 203 (legalization of Mary-J) passes, I predict over half the people in this state will be coming down with some very painful but undetected disease..

  10. The original press release by a proud AZ DPS who apprehended this dangerous speeding criminal when they finally were able to catch up to him can be read here:

    Note the media event they staged for the MSM. This as about one week after they issued a release stating their budget might get cut by 15%. (unless you pass the 1% sales tax increase)

  11. AngryAZ says:

    And finally, the town of Brentwood lowers speed limits in order to install speed cameras to fill city coffers, as reported by the Washington Examiner.

    This is exactly what Tucson has been quietly doing for awhile but seems everybody here is scared or doesn’t care what our city leaders are doing.

    • Dr Jett says:

      Check out to learn about the Federal laws that are violated daily by police departments in every state in the country. The highway traffic engineering studies that are required every 5 years have never been done because the studies would raise all of the speed limits to a reasonable that people actually use. The problem is that the traffic ticket revenue would plummet because the current laws are based on revenue generation instead of safety.

  12. Man-In-Black says:

    Virtually everyone nationwide agrees that traffic violations are “quasi-criminal”, even if they are designated as civil.

    This case shows that what is needed is legislation that gives “criminal” protections to the accused in all traffic cases.

    They could simply adopt the Rules of Criminal Procedure (as applicable) in civil traffic cases, or create Rules of Traffic Procedure to give the accused the equivalent rights of criminal procedure.

    The Man-In-Black

  13. Ernest T.Bass says:

    i like that…its too bad i cant let him know it !!! seems the men in black that control camerafraud dont allow freedom of speech….. unless of course its what they want to hear

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: