Supreme Court Decisions Reaffirms 6th Amendment Applies to Photo Enforcement


The Supreme Court has reaffirmed what Camera Fraud has been saying all along – photo enforcement is unconstitutional! Although there are several ways in which photo enforcement is unconstitutional, in Thursday’s ruling in Bullcoming v. New Mexico the highest court in the land found that a defendant has a right to confront their accuser. The court case was with regard to a DUI offense, but the ruling has broad applications. In the case, the lab technician who analyzed the Bullcoming’s blood sample for alcohol content was not available to testify in court, so the state found a surrogate to testify as to the lab results, procedures and methodology This is the SAME THING that happens in photo enforcement hearings on a daily basis. If applied to photo enforcement, the state would have to provide or make available the machine operator and anyone who processed the evidence for the defense. The court ruled that it is not sufficient to provide a knowledgeable representative to testify about facts in a report that he did not generate.

Unfortunately, this ruling alone will do little to stop photo enforcement, as photo enforcement hearings are done as civil trials, rather than criminal. As such, the rules are different and the state must only show a preponderance of evidence rather than prove their case as they would do if you received a moving violation from a real officer. States are able to get away with this scam because of the lower burden of evidence. This is of course the answer the question we have been forever asking, “Why is a ticket from a machine treated differently than an officer-issued ticket?” The answer is the same as it’s always been: MONEY.

Read more at The Examiner and TheNewspaper.com

About these ads

19 Responses to Supreme Court Decisions Reaffirms 6th Amendment Applies to Photo Enforcement

  1. StoptheTsa says:

    U.S. Conference of Mayors, which coincidentally is headed by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, this week approved a resolution endorsing nationwide adoption of red light cameras.

    http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43521646/ns/us_news-life/

    • Kirk Wines says:

      This MSNBC story was an informative and balanced study of this issue. Unfortunately, the article mostly ignored important studies which have shown that the cameras are associated with increased instances of certain types of accidents. The Insurance Institue for Highway Safety’s study, which is potentially biased by a confict of interest and is based on statistical assumptions, is definitely not accepted by all parties as the final word. Thanks for the link.

  2. StoptheTsa says:

    Department of Homeland Security to tackle gang violence which is on the rise. Two agenda from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will help police attack and dismantle criminal street gangs.

    “These terrorists — they’re holding the neighborhood hostage,” Ignacio Barba, Sr. said of the gang members.

    http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/south_bay&id=8213136

  3. http://www.cleveland.com/roadrant/index.ssf/2011/06/garfield_heights_seeking_elect.html

    In Garfield Heights they have the audacity to try to bring back cameras after being voted out.

  4. StoptheTsa says:

    New bomb and drug sniffer

    About the Quantum Sniffer QS-B220 The QS-B220 Quantum Sniffer, introduced in May 2011, is a bench-top explosives and narcotics trace detector that uses Ion Mobility Spectrometry (IMS) to rapidly detect and identify trace amounts of a wide variety of military, commercial, improvised, or homemade explosives and narcotic substances. The QS-B220 continues the Implant Sciences tradition of freedom from radioactive materials, low total cost of ownership, and high operational availability.

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/implant-sciences-signs-testing-agreements-for-quantum-sniffer-qs-b220-2011-06-27?reflink=MW_news_stmp

  5. photoradarscam says:

    Crooked PHX council orders more scam vans:
    http://www.ahwatukee.com/community_focus/article_dd5c8d20-a10d-11e0-919a-001cc4c002e0.html?success=1

    The article has it wrong. Rather than having police patrolling streets including school zones, now they will be sitting behind a desk looking at pictures or driving a van around. This results in LESS POLICE PRESENCE, not more.

    Nowhere in the article is any mention of any crash numbers declining due to the vans.

    Also notice that Redflex is monitoring intersections looking for the most profitable ones. Why isn’t the city dictating where the cameras go based on crash history? And why doesn’t the city do an engineering study to find out the TRUE CAUSE of crashes and evaluate all possible solutions? The answer is easy. It’s NOT ABOUT SAFETY, IT’S ABOUT MONEY.

  6. photoradarscam says:

    Typical. Red light cams are in for years. They lengthen yellow light times in Feb and citations drop by 72%, and ATS tries to claim credit.

    http://www.riverfronttimes.com/2011-06-30/news/red-light-yellow-light-red-light-citations-plummet-in-arnold/

  7. liucong says:

    I am very thankful to this topic because it really gives up to date information…

  8. Tokina Objektive Test…

    [...]Supreme Court Decisions Reaffirms 6th Amendment Applies to Photo Enforcement « CameraFRAUD.com – The Cameras are Coming Down[...]…

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,338 other followers

%d bloggers like this: