How to beat the speed camera
 

Driver finds loophole in speed camera ticket

By: Hayley Peterson
Examiner Staff
May 2, 2010

A Bethesda woman escaped her speed camera ticket after she uncovered maintenance problems with Gaithersburg's cameras.

Peggy Lucero was nabbed by a speed camera in a 30-mile-per-hour zone on Route 355 in Gaithersburg. Instead of paying the $40 fee like most Maryland motorists, Lucero dug up records on camera maintenance and asked the State Highway Administration to validate the area's speed limit.

"I devoted five months of my life to unearthing the contradictory and circuitous path of trying to find justice in this mess," Lucero said.

Maryland law requires police to test speed cameras for proper functioning daily. But Lucero discovered the camera that ticketed her wasn't tested the day it photographed her license plate.

Officials failed to perform daily tests on a second camera down the road, as well, records revealed. A police officer tested the second camera on Dec. 18, 2009, and did not return for the next checkup until Dec. 28. Records also showed two-day and four-day gaps between tests in December 2009 and January 2010.

State highway officials responding to Lucero's request for a speed study discovered the Gaithersburg stretch of the road had not been assessed for an appropriate speed in five years. Highway officials concluded the limit lagged by 10 miles per hour.

State highway traffic engineer Andrew Bossi recommended Gaithersburg increase the speed limit and warned that the 30-mile-per-hour zone posed a danger to drivers.

"Motorists would brake significantly at each camera location, followed by accelerating immediately afterwards," Bossi wrote to city officials in a March 3 e-mail. "The current conditions may pose a more significant risk for rear-end and sideswipe conditions."

But Gaithersburg pushed back.

"At the [March 22, 2010] meeting our Mayor and City Council were unanimous in the desire to not raise the 30-mile-per-hour speed limit in this area," city Public Works' Engineering Services Director Ollie K. Mumpower wrote. In fact, the city wants to extend the speed limit a half mile down the road, where it increases to 35 miles per hour.

Either way, Lucero's off the hook. She brought the camera logs and speed study to court, and the judge promptly tossed her ticket.


hpeterson@washingtonexaminer.com

-------

If Orwell was alive today he'd rename his book from 1984, to 2010. :(

and one for the rest of us.....
go team go-

I'm still curious about how a well-placed 30-06 round would affect one of those cameras.

The part in bold is what caught my attention the most.

It's outrageous the way these little spithole towns deliberately lower the speed limits just so they can increase revenue by writing tickets.

It's perverse.

It could be worse.

Italy: Prosecution Advances in Red Light Camera Fraud Scandal

I would actually prefer that happen here, and the sooner the better. Because it would be the death knell of these scum-sucking cameras and the greedy politicians that install them for one purpose and one purpose alone-

To increase revenue.

another case of a corperation driving government policy for profit.

a police officer checks the camera?

I hate them because they violate due process.

To get around that, they have made whatever the camera monitors (speeding, red light) a civil penalty. So now we have a situation where the same activity could be criminal or civil depending on who catches you. And if it is civil, you generally have zero recourse. Many places that employ cameras to watch traffic have no such standards, and it really is as simple as whatever the camera says is what is believed by the judge (if you even get to see a judge).

Sniper, there was a case in SoCal I believe where it was discovered that a certain red-light camera was timed to snap pictures a second BEFORE the light went red.

Similar to prohibition. A stupid law poorly enforced leads to public distrust and loss of respect of the law.

I like that they're civil infractions. You can simply ignore civil infractions.

Then they send a collection agency after you or they tack the fine on to your property tax. At least that's what they do here.

You don't like to play catch me if you can? ;)

beep beep!

Not really. Don't want a lien on my home or a ding on my credit report because of a stupid red-light "ticket". Then again, I don't run red lights, so not much to worry about.

Here if you don't pay your tickets they don't renew your drivers licence.

Same thing down under - if you don't pay, they don't renew.

Red light Camera's and speed camera's here have sign's warning you they are there - and you can requst a copy of the photo if you don't believe them. And the photo shows the light as well as the car, so if it goes off on Amber instead of red you have proof you are OK.

Not all of the camera stalks have a camera in them - but you don't know which ones are live this week, so you treat them all as potential traps. Increasing the number of points where they can be placed ain't revenue raising because the number of camera's has not changed - but it does impact driver behaviour.

It's easier to just watch your speed and slow down and stop when the lights go amber. I hate last minute jumping on the brakes when you realise you're not going to make it - and you hope the guy behind you has brakes which are better than yours.

Gaithersburg is far from a little hick town. It's a DC suburb and part of Montgomery Co. They need the money, so that's why they have the camers. They're soooo easy to defeat in AZ, especially on a bike. I can do 80-90mph between the sensor wires in the road the cameras are none the wiser. You can ignore the tickets here and, if you can dodge the process server for 120 days, the ticket then goes away. Since I don't open my door for unexpected company, I'm not worried about getting served. Also, if you get one of these tickets in the mail, don't be tempted to enter your case # in the website and view the photo. That could be considered evidence of having been served.

I figure eventually they're all going to be outlawed, so any redlight or speed camera ticket i might have accrued would be rendered null and void anyway.

They're flat out government theft of property as far as i'm concerned. Nothing more than a scam.

Sadly, it'll go like this:

1. Suits will be filed
2. Judge will order it treated as a Class ("Class-Action")
3. Notices will be sent to red light camera ticket victims
4. 90% of them won't be responded to
5. Lawyers and politicians will pocket the rest of the money
6. Settlement will be reached for pennies on the dollar of those who DID respond
7. Lawyers will take their cut of that
8. Red light camera victims will be lucky to be awarded $0.05 on the dollar
9. Gov't will make payments to victims via an approved payment plan of 5% per year over 20 years.
9. Politicians will move right onto another similar scam measure to line its pockets and keep their lawyer buddies employed in perpetuity.

Long story short, as they say - possession is 9/10 of the law. Once someone else has your money, you're not getting it back - the victims here certainly aren't going to be "made whole", they're just going to receive some sort of restitution on paper that in reality costs the victimizer very little and makes the lawyers involved very rich.