Photo cop hits red light

[Sam]

I never have liked these things at all. Luckily I have never lived where they are utilized. At least one city was using them for money makers when they got caught shortening the cycle time of the light to turn red. I don't know if they got the use of them back or not.

It is certainly going to create a world of headaches for A LOT of people and also make A LOT of people VERY HAPPY!!!
*************************************************************
http://www.startribune.com/462/story/306804.html

Photo cop hits red light
A judge struck down the Minneapolis ordinance because police ticketed car owners without determining who was really driving.
David Chanen, Star Tribune
Last update: March 15, 2006 – 8:15 AM
(PHOTO)
The "photo cop" camera looms over cars stopped at the traffic light at E 35th St. and 2nd Ave. S. in Minneapolis Tuesday afternoon.

Jeff Wheeler, Star Tribune


Related Content

How the ruling might affect you
Local
Photo cop hits red light

A Hennepin County judge has temporarily put a lens cap over the cameras that capture drivers running red lights at 12 of Minneapolis' most accident-prone intersections.
The ruling Tuesday to shut off the cameras doesn't necessarily mean the thousands of people who have paid the $142 fine will be getting a refund, and further legal action may be needed to sort out that issue. The "Stop on Red" program, started in July, generated about $1 million in the first six months. Nearly half of that was paid to the camera company.

More than 26,000 people have received tickets under the city's Stop on Red ordinance, which presumes the owner was the driver during the offense. The owner must prove that someone else was driving to avoid a conviction.

But District Judge Mark Wernick said the ordinance is invalid because it provides vehicle owners with less due process rights in court than the state statute. State law for a similar violation requires the state to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" who was driving. But Minneapolis' ordinance shifted the burden to the owners to prove their innocence.

And communities cannot have ordinances in conflict with state law, the ruling noted.

"This [ordinance] is patently un-American," said Howard Bass, one of the attorneys working for the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota who filed the motion on behalf of a 29-year-old man who was ticketed.

He was one of about 3,000 vehicle owners who have contested their tickets by saying someone else was driving. The courts couldn't say how many tickets were dismissed.

The cameras were turned off Tuesday, and the city attorney's office has five days to decide whether to appeal. Assistant City Attorney Mary Ellen Heng said they were obviously disappointed by the ruling because the cameras were a strong tool to reduce accidents. The city believed that it had the authority to use the cameras, but she didn't know whether officials had looked at the specific legal issues raised by the judge before enacting the program.

The ruling has created a logistical headache for the Hennepin County courts. More than 7,000 people whose tickets are pending will be sent a letter informing them to hold off on payment until the city makes its next step, said Chief District Judge Lucy Wieland. Another 3,000 people whose licenses were suspended because of a Stop on Red ticket will regain driving privileges. It wasn't clear Tuesday what the process would be for returning licenses.

Much of the work will be done by hand, she said.

Checks that haven't yet been cashed for fines will be returned by the county. If the city doesn't appeal Tuesday's ruling, all the pending citations would be dismissed, Wieland said.

How it works

The cameras take three pictures of each incident, but none show who the driver is.

Such cameras are used in 34 states and more than 60 U.S. cities, and St. Paul has been considering the program.

In the ruling, the judge wrote that he knew that drivers who run red lights pose a safety threat and these systems deter unlawful driving conduct.

But other cities, such as Washington, D.C., and Portland, Ore., received authorization from their state legislatures before enacting an ordinance, he wrote.

Bass, the attorney involved in the lawsuit, said Minneapolis knew it didn't have the authority to create its own ordinance because a bill to get state approval failed several times in the Legislature in the past few years.

"Tuesday was a good day for due process rights in Minnesota," he said.

The defendant was Daniel Kuhlman, who received a ticket after his vehicle went through a light Aug. 11 at the intersection of W. Broadway and Lyndale Avenue N. He said he wasn't driving the car and wouldn't give up the name of the person who was behind the wheel.

Kuhlman said the ordinance was unfair, and he went to the state's Civil Liberties Union.

"I think a large percentage of people getting tickets are legitimate red-light runners," he said. "But what I read about cases from other states, I didn't see how the judge could rule any other way."

He seemed a little awestruck that his suit may mean that thousands of people don't have to pay fines. "I hope it doesn't make the police angry with me," he said.

[SuperTrooper]

Most states and municipalities that use these systems pass a law that says that as the owner of the car you are the responsible party. States that install automated toll collection systems do the same thing.

Car magazines sell plate covers that prevent your plate from being read from angles other than directly behind. I have NO IDEA if they work, but if a city I drove in has these red light cams installed I would buy one.

[The_Polly_Roger]

I don't have a plate on the front of my car . . .

Maybe I should blow though a red light and give the finger to the camera at the same time

[Island_Dog]

Canada startd using these years ago. I drove a truck at the time, and my state doesn't require a front plate, so I'd just drop the tailgate to block the camera angle and then drop the hammer down the road. And before someone babble about being reckless, I'll state for the record that I only did this in the areas where traffic was sparse and the road was long and wide open. Anyone who has traversed throught Northern Ontario is knows the stretches that go by when you don't see another person forever.

[Sam]

Most states and municipalities that use these systems pass a law that says that as the owner of the car you are the responsible party. States that install automated toll collection systems do the same thing.

Car magazines sell plate covers that prevent your plate from being read from angles other than directly behind. I have NO IDEA if they work, but if a city I drove in has these red light cams installed I would buy one.

They do work and are usually banned and or you can get a ticket if use one.

I have no idea if this true or not but something was going around that if you sprayed your tag with PAM ( or perhaps other ) nonstick cooking oil it would keep it from taking a useful phot..... It may only be an urban legend...I have no idea I never looked into it.

[smacky]

The_Polly_Roger wrote:

I don't have a plate on the front of my car . . .

Maybe I should blow though a red light and give the finger to the camera at the same time

Most of the cameras in DC take a picture of the back of your car as you go through the light, so that wouldn't work!

[flyboy55]

I would bet that some smart guy with a little time on his hands could put together a small unit from easily obtainable parts that would overload the video chip in these surveillance cameras either temporarily or permanently, much like pointing your digital video camera too near the sun will fry its video chip in a matter of seconds.

In fact, I would bet that it's already been done.

Of course, that would be destruction of public property and therefore illegal, but from a technical standpoint it would be sweet little project.

Cheers.

[Sam]

There is a device that is out there....that can make a radar gun or such devices read whatever speed, you want it to read. I used to see plans and parts kits for them years ago and then some company was making and marketing complete units. I have no idea if they are still in business.

Well all you would to do is cover the back license plate instead of the front one. But again they made a law against using such items to defeat the cameras in most if not all places where they are used.

[The_Polly_Roger]

Police and Emergency vehicles have an IR transmitter that triggers red lights in busy intersections to cycle to green.

People were selling kits for your car to trigger this sensor. In 2006 it became illegal in California (and I think Nationwide) to use these devices.

Although the light the device emits is invisible to the human eye the traffic and red-light cameras can pick it up and therefore bust the user.