Page 1 of 1

City Code Enforcement/red-light cameras

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:03 pm
by Bry
Hey all, I am becoming increasingly concerned with all of the cameras going up on the public roads all over the nation. My little town of Palm Coast in the State of Florida has 56 cameras at all of the major intersections in town. I recently received a mailed notice accompanied by a web link showing a video my vehicle making a right hand turn on a red light without coming to a complete stop for a period of three or more seconds. The fine for this "crime" is $156. I have contested the ticket, and they have set a trial date for me. I have looked into the way that they are pursuing legal repercussions against people that refuse to pay their trumped up fines. They are using the cities code enforcement program to somehow suspend licenses. My question is this, what common laws apply to things that fall under the jurisdiction of city code enforcement? Have I unwittingly signed a contract giving these laws jurisdiction over me when I filled out paperwork to build my home here? My trial is set for tomorrow, so I won't be able to apply whatever information you provide me towards this particular case, but I am ever increasingly wanting to start community education courses to defend against these types of government invasions into our private lives. I greatly appreciate any and all information given. Thanks!!


Re: City Code Enforcement/red-light cameras

Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:45 am
by editor
Cameras are being used all over the country in this same way.

In some places, the locals have been able to put enough pressure on their city council to get them taken down. If everyone who receives one of these tickets would insist on a hearing, the system would choke. Win or lose, there is no way the court system could handle all the cases, and the tickets would stop. This kind of fraud is only profitable because most people don't want to be bothered-- they just pay the ticket.

Watch the Eddie Craig video, referenced in this Forum under Travel Rights. All the infractions charged in the camera tickets are based on the premise you are "driving" your "motor vehicle" for the purpose of "trafficing". If you're not doing those things, you aren't required to follow the Uniform Motor Vehicle Code. Even if you have a driver's license, and are a taxicab driver, or whatever. If you're off-duty, traveling not-for-hire, you're not subject to their crap.

Of course knowing that, and proving it in court are two different matters.

I have a friend who uses what he calls the "avoidance procedure." He puts his car in a trust, and registers it in the name of the trust, at a mailing address other than his own. He travels with his sunvisor down, so the cameras can't see his face. If a ticket gets sent from a camera, based on the car's license plate, they don't have his name and, therefore can't suspend his license.

The same goes for parking tickets, at least for places he's just passing through.

I'm not necessarily recommending his procedure, but it seems to work for him.

Re: City Code Enforcement/red-light cameras

Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 1:29 am
by scott
I've heard of some people putting a clear cover over their tags which distorts the camera's view.

Re: City Code Enforcement/red-light cameras

Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 1:43 am
by editor
I've heard of the license plate covers too.

A few months ago I spent a couple hours researching them. From everything I can tell, the covers don't work. If the human eye can read the plate, then the camera can too.

There are covers which obscure the plate once you are a certain angle from straight-on; 35% for example. The problem is the majority of cameras are placed with a position of 35% or less anyway.

You could try using an infrared light in the vicinity of the plate, to wash out the camera. Couldn't be seen by the naked eye. Of course if there were any cops in the area using infrared scopes you'd be lit up like a Christmas tree.

Re: City Code Enforcement/red-light cameras

Posted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 7:17 pm
by Bry
Update. I went to the "quasi judicial" hearing, as they. called it. The judge also said that the normal rules of evidence do not apply (lol!) I stood before the podium where they showed a picture of my license plate and asked if it was mine.
Me: looks like
Judge: were you driving the car?
Me: I plead the 5th
Judge: did you lend it out or was it stolen?
Me: I plead the 5th.
Judge: I'll just go ahead and presume you were the driver.
Me: you must presume me innocent until you can prove my guilt.
Judge: according to the statute, I have to go ahead and impose the fine
Me: this is not a moving violation, you can't affect my license.
Judge: no, if you don't pay the fine, the dmv will not alloow you to renew your registration until it is paid.
Me: so you are placing a lien on my registration?
Me: how can an out of state company place a lien on the registration of my property because they took pictures of my car?
Me: when was the last time the cameras were calibrated?
Judge: I think the last time we asked that, the answer was every 24 hrs.
Me: (now looking at the Arizona based companies representative) really? you send people out to every intersection everyday to inspect every camera?!
Guy: well... It's actually every quarter.
Me:oh ok so about every 90 days. When was the last time this one was checked?
Guy: I don't know.
Judge: I'm just going to have to go ahead and impose the fine.
Me: this isn't even America anymore.

Me: I appeal to a higher court.