Arizona: Racketeering Suit Filed Against Speed Cameras

The Newspaper
by The Newspaper

A motorist is using federal anti-racketeering statutes to go after the red light camera and speed camera program in Tempe, Arizona. Dan Gutenkauf filed his complaint last week in the US District Court for the District of Arizona and happened to land the same judge, Frederick J Martone, who presided over the recent American Traffic Solutions (ATS) vs. Redflex case which is currently under appeal. The suit names Redflex employees, police officials, politicians and judges as defendants.

“I feel this lawsuit is very comprehensive and I have spent a lot of time over the last two years doing the legal research, gathering evidence and drafting the complaint,” Gutenkauf told TheNewspaper. “And I have my appeal victory from the lower court propelling me into federal court.”

In his filing, Gutenkauf carefully laid out the circumstances of his February 17, 2009 trial in Tempe Municipal Court before Judge Mary Jo Barsetti. Traffic aide Bianca Gallego and Tempe Police Officer Aaron Colombe both testified that they had no way to confirm whether Dan Gutenkauf or his identical twin brother, Dennis, had been behind the wheel, based on the photographic evidence and that no attempt at positive identification was made before the ticket was issued. Both Gutenkauf brothers are listed on an insurance policy for the van that was photographed.

Barsetti found him guilty over numerous objections Gutenkauf made about the admissibility of the evidence provided by Redflex. Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Eartha K. Washington overturned the ruling on appeal, and Gutenkauf received a refund check in December 2009 for the $197 fine, but Gutenkauf wanted to recover the additional $699 he spent in filing the appeal. Tempe agreed to pay back the $699, but only if Gutenkauf signed a contract containing language preventing him from filing suit against Redflex. Gutenkauf refused, knowing the company’s manuals direct employees to “issue citation” based solely on a match between the sex of the driver in the photograph and the vehicle registration records, not on the positive identification required by Arizona statute.

“Matthew Degraw knew that the photo speed enforcement citations sent to Daniel Gutenkauf through the mail by Redflex’s back office citation program contained knowingly false representations, creating the false impression that the actual driver had been identified, in a fraudulent scheme and artifice for the purpose of obtaining money from him by false pretenses,” Gutenkauf’s filing stated.

Gutenkauf argues that the police officer who certified the citation violated the same law requiring positive identification before approving the ticket. This violation, combined with his inability to cross-examine the witnesses against him represented a deprivation of his constitutional right to due process, he argued. Tempe officials have not yet filed a response.

[Courtesy: Thenewspaper.com]

The Newspaper
The Newspaper

More by The Newspaper

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 11 comments
  • Garythompson Garythompson on Oct 13, 2010

    I hope he succeeds. As for the DC ticket you might find useful advice from the forums at one of the speedtrap or radar testing sites useful. I don't know if referencing other sites specifically is permitted as I am new here.

  • Zackman Zackman on Oct 13, 2010

    Whenever devices like these are invented, it's always for the sake of safety or something like that. It's all very idealistic in the beginning, then reality rears its ugly head and it is stripped of its ideals to expose what it becomes, even if it wasn't the original intent. Everyone, it seems, is trying to pick each others' pockets and find that elusive pot of gold at rainbow's end - but it's not there. It won't be, never has, never will. Since driving has become a necessity and not an option for too many folks, traffic regulation and law enforcement and its possible penalties have local cash-strapped/bankrupt governments licking their chops at the prospect of creating a windfall of additional revenue at their citizen's expense, deserved or not. Guess what? People fight back. For every action there is a reaction, and the consequences may be embarrasing. Really, does anybody truly win?

  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Thankfully I don't have to deal with GDI issues in my Frontier. These cleaners should do well for me if I win.
  • Theflyersfan Serious answer time...Honda used to stand for excellence in auto engineering. Their first main claim to fame was the CVCC (we don't need a catalytic converter!) engine and it sent from there. Their suspensions, their VTEC engines, slick manual transmissions, even a stowing minivan seat, all theirs. But I think they've been coasting a bit lately. Yes, the Civic Type-R has a powerful small engine, but the Honda of old would have found a way to get more revs out of it and make it feel like an i-VTEC engine of old instead of any old turbo engine that can be found in a multitude of performance small cars. Their 1.5L turbo-4...well...have they ever figured out the oil dilution problems? Very un-Honda-like. Paint issues that still linger. Cheaper feeling interior trim. All things that fly in the face of what Honda once was. The only thing that they seem to have kept have been the sales staff that treat you with utter contempt for daring to walk into their inner sanctum and wanting a deal on something that isn't a bare-bones CR-V. So Honda, beat the rest of your Japanese and Korean rivals, and plug-in hybridize everything. If you want a relatively (in an engineering way) easy way to get ahead of the curve, raise the CAFE score, and have a major point to advertise, and be able to sell to those who can't plug in easily, sell them on something that will get, for example, 35% better mileage, plug in when you get a chance, and drives like a Honda. Bring back some of the engineering skills that Honda once stood for. And then start introducing a portfolio of EVs once people are more comfortable with the idea of plugging in. People seeing that they can easily use an EV for their daily errands with the gas engine never starting will eventually sell them on a future EV because that range anxiety will be lessened. The all EV leap is still a bridge too far, especially as recent sales numbers have shown. Baby steps. That's how you win people over.
  • Theflyersfan If this saves (or delays) an expensive carbon brushing off of the valves down the road, I'll take a case. I understand that can be a very expensive bit of scheduled maintenance.
  • Zipper69 A Mini should have 2 doors and 4 cylinders and tires the size of dinner plates.All else is puffery.
  • Theflyersfan Just in time for the weekend!!! Usual suspects A: All EVs are evil golf carts, spewing nothing but virtue signaling about saving the earth, all the while hacking the limbs off of small kids in Africa, money losing pits of despair that no buyer would ever need and anyone that buys one is a raging moron with no brains and the automakers who make them want to go bankrupt.(Source: all of the comments on every EV article here posted over the years)Usual suspects B: All EVs are powered by unicorns and lollypops with no pollution, drive like dreams, all drivers don't mind stopping for hours on end, eating trays of fast food at every rest stop waiting for charges, save the world by using no gas and batteries are friendly to everyone, bugs included. Everyone should torch their ICE cars now and buy a Tesla or Bolt post haste.(Source: all of the comments on every EV article here posted over the years)Or those in the middle: Maybe one of these days, when the charging infrastructure is better, or there are more options that don't cost as much, one will be considered as part of a rational decision based on driving needs, purchasing costs environmental impact, total cost of ownership, and ease of charging.(Source: many on this site who don't jump on TTAC the split second an EV article appears and lives to trash everyone who is a fan of EVs.)
Next