-Caveat Lector- Page 3A Motorists race to court to challenge red-light cameras Photos called privacy threat By Valerie Alvord Special to USA TODAY SAN DIEGO -- The camera doesn't lie, or so they say. But attorney Arthur Tait and more than 300 clients have gone to court to prove that, at least in California, cameras can lie. Their cases are drawing attention to law enforcement's war against drivers who run red lights. Every day, cameras catch thousands of people in 60 jurisdictions across the USA as they speed through red lights. In San Diego alone, more than 60,000 traffic tickets are issued each year from the cameras at 19 intersections. Studies consistently show wide public support across the USA for camera enforcement at intersections. Running traffic lights, police point out, is extremely dangerous. Lockheed Martin IMS owns and operates 80% of red-light cameras across the country. And there's a waiting list of communities asking for cameras to be installed because demand for them is high. Drivers trying to beat red lights are responsible for about 800 deaths and 200,000 injuries each year, according to insurance industry figures. More than half of those killed are pedestrians or occupants of vehicles other than the ones running the lights. The rest are the drivers or occupants in their cars. But red-light cameras, which have been around for more than a decade, are picking up critics from California to Washington. They say that using pictures to convict motorists is an ''Orwellian'' threat to privacy. They challenge the theory that the cameras are infallible. ''In other criminal cases, you have a right to confront your accuser,'' Tait says. ''But with this technology, your accuser is a camera.'' Tait and his law partner, Coleen Cusack, represent accused red-light runners from San Diego to San Francisco who insist they didn't violate the law, even though cameras say they did. ''I don't believe I ran a red light,'' says Pam Scholefield, one of Tait's clients. ''I could have made this easy on myself and gone to traffic school, but I didn't because I believe the camera is wrong. There's something in the mechanism that triggers something that's incorrect.'' Tait became the guru of red-light camera law after he helped represent a San Diego man who had the money to mount a legal defense against a ticket last year. Publicity from winning that case brought in hundreds of referrals, he says. He and Cusack then ran an ad in a local free newspaper offering classes on how to defend citations. Some students became clients. All of the clients are fighting the tickets with similar legal arguments, including, they say, that the cameras can transmit faulty data and that the pictures don't clearly show who's driving. ''Some of the people who got tickets were not driving the car,'' Tait says. ''The tickets are sent to the registered owner regardless of who was driving.'' Tait was in court Thursday arguing that the red-light cameras are an unconstitutional use of police power because the program is designed to bring in revenue, not enhance safety. The hearing is expected to continue into next week. In an earlier court hearing, the attorneys won the right to extract the binary code from a camera computer chip and use it to try to recreate the operating program. Tait says he hopes it will prove his contention that the cameras malfunction and can't be trusted. Because of the court challenges, San Diego police officers began checking cameras and the sensors embedded in asphalt that trigger a photograph. They were looking to buttress the city's position that a picture can't be wrong. Instead, they found that sensors at three intersections had been moved, which threw the data into question. San Diego Police Chief David Bejarano immediately turned off all 19 cameras pending a complete audit, which he hopes will be finished in about two months. The city refunded the $271 fines levied against people nabbed at the three intersections in question. It's not just the sensors that are under fire, Tait says. ''This opens up a lot of evils. I'm concerned about the privatization of law enforcement and the fact that these tickets are almost impossible for the average person to fight. This is an empire that is almost impenetrable.'' Tait cites a report drafted by House staff members for Majority Leader Dick Armey. The report asserts that the cameras have compromised safety at intersections nationwide. It contends that at intersections with cameras, traffic engineers intentionally reduced yellow-light times, which makes rear-end collisions more likely. The yellow-light phase has been shortened, the report says, to increase the number of violators and generate more fines, which are split between municipalities and operating companies, such as Lockheed. That charge, Lockheed spokesman Mark Maddox says, is ''inaccurate and misinformed.'' Armey's allegations are ''insulting'' to the integrity of traffic engineers, says Thomas Brahms, executive director of the Institute of Transportation Engineers. ''We as a profession care very much about reducing injuries and reducing accidents.'' Brahms and Maddox say there is no question that cameras reduce the number of red-light runners and enhance public safety. In Mesa, Ariz., police credit a combination of increased yellow-light times and cameras with reducing fatalities from 20 in 1995 to eight last year. San Diego officials say there has been about a 45% drop in red- light violations at the 19 intersections where the cameras are installed. ''That has to translate into better safety,'' says Sgt. Ernest Adams, coordinator for the program. ''Every time you run a red light, you're risking your own life and the lives of other people.'' Adams says built-in safeguards give motorists a grace period after a light turns red and before a picture is snapped. No picture is triggered if a vehicle entered an intersection while the light was still yellow, he says. He also says police officers review every potential ticket before it is issued. It's no surprise that the program causes controversy, Adams says. No one likes getting a traffic citation, and cameras are indiscriminate. At least 10 police officers, he says, have been snapped running lights -- and have gone to court to challenge the tickets. -- Best Wishes ...if tyranny and despotism justified the American Revolution of 1776, then we do not see why it would not justify the secession of Five Millions of Southrons from the Federal Union in 1861. -Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Daily Tribune, December 17, 1860 (Howard Perkins, Northern Editorials on Secession). <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
