#Traffic

The mayor of Ridgeland, South Carolina is taking a stand in defiance of a state law that bans the use of speed cameras anywhere in the state ( view law). Mayor Gary W. Hodges earlier this month began issuing speeding tickets based on evidence provided by an automated traffic system set up in a recreational vehicle parked on Interstate 95 despite warnings from lawmakers.

“The program is up and running,” Hodges announced at an August 12 meeting. “There are those at various levels who think this is a bad thing — I for the life of me can’t figure out why people have a problem with this.”

Under court order, Redwood City, California was forced to admit that the red light camera installed at Whipple Avenue and Veterans Boulevard in March 2008 have done absolutely nothing to reduce traffic collisions. San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Clifford V. Cretan instructed the city council to respond to a civil grand jury report from June that blasted municipal programs throughout the county that raised $13.8 million from ticketing despite the lack of evidence of any safety benefit ( read report).

After a year of use, red light cameras have failed to deliver the promised safety benefits in Baytown, Texas. The Houston suburb activated the majority of its cameras on July 13, 2008. Since then, the number of accidents at eight camera locations has increased 40 percent, contrary to predictions from city officials. The increase in accidents has not been in minor “fender benders,” as is frequently claimed by photo ticketing advocates. Rather, the number of collisions resulting in an injury jumped 75 percent. Rear end collisions increased 39 percent. Results from comprehensive, independent studies elsewhere in the country have yielded similar results.

A San Diego, California Superior Court judge on Monday found elements of typical red light camera court evidence packages to be inadmissible hearsay. Eight consolidated cases were dismissed by Commissioner Karen A. Riley after she considered a motion to exclude evidence generated by automated ticketing vendor American Traffic Solutions (ATS). In light of the recent Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts ruling by the US Supreme Court ( view ruling), Riley found the accused had a right to confront ATS witnesses.

California courts are not alone in questioning the validity of red light camera and speed camera photographs as valid legal evidence. On Friday, the Queensland, Australia Court of Appeal ruled that automated ticketing cases require more than a pair of images in a folder to make a speeding case that will stick. The motorist, a non-lawyer, won her case against the government with only the help of her husband.

Redflex Traffic Systems of today reported to the Australian Securities Exchange that it had rebuffed the $275 million offer from toll road giant Macquarie Bank for outright control of the company. The Australian red light camera maker believes that it can spark a bidding war to drive up the purchase price and enrich shareholders.

According to a poll released last week by the Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company, UK motorists drive more erratically in the presence of speed cameras. The firm, which insures 3.8 million in England and Wales, commissioned ICM Research to survey how the driving public responds when automated ticketing machines are present. The firm concluded that, since 2001, photo enforcement may have contributed to thousands of accidents that would not have otherwise occurred.

Ridgeland, South Carolina wants to deploy a speed camera to ticket out-of-state drivers as they pass through the seven-mile stretch of interstate within the tiny town’s limits. The plan angered the state legislature to such a degree that it unanimously enacted legislation in June to prohibit photo enforcement — except during declared state emergencies ( view law). The Ridgeland town council refused to back down.

Editor’s Note: The following was originally written by Jim Walker for the National Motorists Association blog, and has been republished with permission from the NMA.

I have worked closely with the Michigan State Police for several years in their pursuit of correcting as many Michigan posted speed limits to the correct 85th percentile speed level as possible. Yes, we have a very enlightened state police administration that wants to see posted limits set for safety, not revenue.

I have testified before Michigan legislative committees in support of the State Police to help explain the science involved, helped to nominate the key officers for a Governor’s Traffic Safety Advisory Committee Award which they won in 2006, and helped the police find areas of state trunk line routes (numbered highways) which should be re-surveyed because the posted limits were set far below the normal speeds of traffic.

A motorist who avoids a police car is inherently suspicious, according to a ruling handed down by the Minnesota Court of Appeals on Tuesday. A three-judge panel found that even if the officer observed no illegal conduct, a traffic stop and interrogation is justified when a driver seems not to want to be around a patrol car.

Officials in Tasmania, Australia last week reluctantly admitted that some of its speed cameras produced unreliable readings. The automated ticketing machines on Tasman Bridge were found to be issuing speeding tickets to vehicles that were not speeding, forcing a refund of 440 tickets issued between June 5 and July 5. According to The Mercury, a test of the device against a handheld speed gun showed inaccurate readings.

California’s second highest court on Wednesday upheld the publication status of a key decision that called into question the legitimacy of red light camera evidence. The state Court of Appeal rejected the request of the cities of Santa Ana and Menlo Park to depublish a May appellate ruling of the Orange County Superior Court ( view the California v. Khaled decision) that found the red light camera photographs presented as evidence in court were inadmissible hearsay.

The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday ruled that a driver cannot be pulled over for failure to signal when that conduct did not affect any other driver. The decision came down in the case of Antoinette Feaster, 37, who was stopped and arrested on August 15, 2007 around 11am. Rutherford County Sheriff’s Department Officer Travis Robinson had set up a speed trap on the median of Interstate 24 when he saw Feaster’s Chevrolet Tahoe traveling about 8 MPH below the speed limit and making a lane change without signaling. Feaster’s attorney quizzed Robinson on the stand at trial about his recollection of the incident.

American Traffic Solutions (ATS) is following the playbook from its failed attempt to defeat an anti-red light camera referendum in College Station, Texas. The company on Monday used its law firm, Stoel Rives LLC, to file a lawsuit under the name of Christine Preston, a local resident seeking to prevent Mukilteo residents from having any say in whether automated ticketing machines are deployed on their streets.

“A controversy exists between plaintiff and defendants regarding whether the subject matter of proposed Mukilteo Initiative No. 2 is within the scope of the initiative power,” the ATS law firm’s complaint stated. “Proposed Mukilteo Initiative No. 2 would improperly interfere with the exercise of a power delegated by state law to a local legislative authority.”