|
|
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Family Values
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 4,075
|
Does this ruling end speed cameras and red light cameras?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/14/AR2009071403565.html?hpid=topnews
Any legal eagles out there have an opinion?
__________________
- Joe Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt |
||
07-15-2009, 10:50 AM
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South of Heaven
Posts: 21,159
|
It sure seems like they'll have to at least send a lab tech to each and every contested case now.
|
||
|
07-15-2009, 10:56 AM
|
|
|
Registered
|
It might affect DUI and other criminal cases, but no chance on camera tickets. At least in AZ, when you contest a camera ticket, there is a witness in court against you. It's a rep. from the company that makes the cameras.
__________________
2022 BMW 530i 2021 MB GLA250 2020 BMW R1250GS |
||
|
07-15-2009, 11:00 AM
|
|
|
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Higgs Field
Posts: 22,599
|
It sounds like it will affect drug cases far more than anything else. Maybe, if we are lucky, this will be another nail in the coffin of the "War on Drugs". If the lab tech has to show up for each and every minor possesion violation, they will quickly become overwhelmed and unable to support this requirement.
Rick, I don't see how a rep from the company passes muster as a "witness" in a traffic camera case. Doesn't a witness have to be present to, well, - witness - the violation? Of course with the rules of "evidence" being wha they are in traffic court, it would not surprise me in the least to learn that witness requirements have been similarly corrupted.
__________________
Jeff '72 911T 3.0 MFI '93 Ducati 900 Super Sport "God invented whiskey so the Irish wouldn't rule the world" |
||
|
07-15-2009, 11:10 AM
|
|
|
Dog-faced pony soldier
|
More likely governments will simply raise taxes to cover the new overhead costs of prosecution.
No way in hell they'll get rid of their "cash cow" cameras - especially not in times like these.
__________________
A car, a 911, a motorbike and a few surfboards Black Cars Matter |
||
|
07-15-2009, 11:17 AM
|
|
|
Registered
|
Quote:
__________________
2022 BMW 530i 2021 MB GLA250 2020 BMW R1250GS |
||
|
07-15-2009, 11:20 AM
|
|
|
|
Registered
|
The machine (red light camera, etc) is a recording instrument. The person is there to testify the instrument was set up correctly, properly calibrated, passed check tests, functioning normally, etc. Nothing weird about that.
Anyway, on first glance, the decision seems perfectly reasonable. Why shouldn't the party seeking to introduce a laboratory report into evidence be required to lay the appropriate evidentiary foundation by producing the laboratory technician to testify?
__________________
1989 3.2 Carrera coupe; 1988 Westy Vanagon, Zetec; 1986 E28 M30; 1994 W124; 2004 S211 What? Uh . . . “he” and “him”? |
||
|
07-15-2009, 11:33 AM
|
|
|
Checked out
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: On a beach
Posts: 10,127
|
I agree, I'm surprised that hasn't always been the rule. Can't see how any written report can be admitted into evidence without proper authentication/foundation.
|
||
|
07-15-2009, 11:36 AM
|
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South of Heaven
Posts: 21,159
|
Quote:
It is just one of MANY rights that were usurped by the government(s). |
||
|
07-15-2009, 11:53 AM
|
|
Only Porsche
Only bike
1989 Porsche 911 Carrera 3.2
