Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @06:04PM   Printer-friendly
from the follow-the-money dept.

The Chicago man who served as a go-between for a local transportation official and a major red light camera company, Redflex, was sentenced Monday to six months in federal prison.

In 2014, Martin O'Malley was the first to plead guilty in the trio of criminal cases involving Redflex. (This Martin O'Malley should not be confused with the former governor of Maryland and Democratic presidential candidate.)

O'Malley was paid $2 million for his services, which was more than anyone on Redflex's official payroll. But according to prosecutors, much of that money was funneled to John Bills, a former managing deputy commissioner at the Department of Transportation and a longtime friend of O'Malley's.

Bills helped steer the City of Chicago to do business with Redflex. Chicago was at one time the company's largest deal worldwide. Since losing the Chicago contract as a result of this corruption scandal, Redflex's 2013 pre-tax profits in its North American division (its corporate parent is an Australian company) plummeted more than 33 percent—from $3.4 million in the first half of 2013 to $2.28 million in the second half.

Pity for O'Malley that the "extremely careless" defense had not yet been invented.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:01PM

    by edIII (791) on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:01PM (#401969)

    There was a homeless black guy that got 15 years for breaking into a hamburger joint and cooking himself something to eat. If I'm wrong, I'm confusing it with a guy that stole $100, bought something to eat, and then brought back the change.

    Martin here got 6 months for colluding with others to bilk taxpayers out of millions in fines. Red light cameras are all corrupt, with plenty of examples where the timing is altered on orange lights to capture motorists. Nothing about them is fair, transparent, or designed to increase public safety. It's all about funneling additional dollars from fines into the city, and of course, they will pay a few million to a private company to help.

    One of these men performed actions that affected entire orders of magnitude greater numbers of people, as well as de facto stolen money. Yet, again, the white-collar worker gets a slap on the wrist. The blue collar worker gets utterly destroyed and effectively sold to the private prison corporations so they can steal from him in the form of Constitutionally protected slavery at 13c/hr.

    I hope Martin has to play the Mammas and Pappas game over and over and over again for the next 6 months.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:23PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:23PM (#401975)

    Yeah we've been playing this game for a long time. I can only hope that this new information age will lead to a greater level of justice, this bullshit has to stop. The court of public opinion is a shitty place, so just exposing people isn't enough (and in some cases too much, ruining lives because of one mistake).

  • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:41PM

    by isostatic (365) on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:41PM (#401982) Journal

    What is the difference between US red light cameras and the ones we have in the UK? Yours seem to have all sorts of troubles and people against them. Is it something to do with US car design? Or is it that you simply set the amber times too short? Is it that protectionist laws mean you buy inferior technology that isn't reliable as that in Europe? Or is it just an objection on principle to fine people going through red lights?

    • (Score: 2) by edIII on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:01PM

      by edIII (791) on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:01PM (#401989)

      Corruption & Privacy

      I have nothing against them at all, whatsoever... in principle though. In an ideal world, they would giving people tickets for grid-lock, and running red lights on turn signals too. Think Fifth Element type tracking.

      Or is it that you simply set the amber times too short?

      That's exactly what happens, except the amber timers are being manipulated to CAUSE people to run red lights. The overall timing on the green/red lights has progressively become dynamic anyways with traffic monitoring determining the sequences. While that is fine but lamentable, the amber light timing needs to be set in stone since we depend on knowing that to determine if it is safe to proceed. It isn't constant, nor transparent, and local governments have not been above tweaking the amber light timing to watch additional revenue flow into the cities coffers.

      Is it that protectionist laws mean you buy inferior technology that isn't reliable as that in Europe?

      The technology is fine, but those protectionist laws ensure we pay absolute top premium dollar for it. There may be some technical issues with it, but quite frankly, we could buy the equipment from Europe. We already get our cellphones from China.

      Or is it just an objection on principle to fine people going through red lights?

      We object in principle to the violations of our privacy. Red light tracking is one thing, but they also collect license plates and biometric information as much as possible. Of course, we strenuously object to corruption that causes executives and government employees to manipulate the technology for their financial gain.

      Basically, we can't trust it.

      --
      Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
      • (Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Wednesday September 14 2016, @10:30PM

        by curunir_wolf (4772) on Wednesday September 14 2016, @10:30PM (#402034)
        In addition, USians are used to getting due process, their "day in court" when accused of doing something. These red light systems usually don't offer such a thing. You get a ticket in the mail (which is NOT considered "service" in the justice system), and if you don't pay, it goes to a collection agency, and they can go right to garnishing your wages or putting a flag on your license so you have to pay it. All without due process.
        --
        I am a crackpot
        • (Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday September 15 2016, @12:11AM

          by edIII (791) on Thursday September 15 2016, @12:11AM (#402081)

          I agree, and due process in this instance is ridiculously easy.

          1) You get a *summons* in the mail no different than a ticket issued in person.
          2) You show up to either pay it, or receive a court date.

          Everything afterwards is the same exact process, except in #2 you get to look at a screen with the clerk showing timestamps, video, still shots, and proof of light positions, along with a mug shot of the license plate proving it at least your vehicle. Then you get to look back the clerk :) "Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"

          You can even ensure privacy by just snapshotting the intersection only during the times in which there are not supposed to be cars in it, and at angles that would only catch violators. So there is no 24 hours of footage to collect license plates from, and if you drive correctly, you're never on video.

          While you still have the option to go forward past #2, there is the explicit warning that the judge does not look kindly on wasting the courts time. So you better have a damn good argument to bring the court, and hope your skillset doesn't include "watched Judge Judy".

          I expect most people will settle at #2 and pay the clerk, especially when they did it. Even myself, as I still know I did it. The video would help quite a bit.

          That's easy, but won't work for their corrupt ways. They want systems that are designed to fail us, make it difficult to impossible to fight against, and effectively generate income.

          --
          Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
          • (Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Thursday September 15 2016, @02:14AM

            by bzipitidoo (4388) on Thursday September 15 2016, @02:14AM (#402106) Journal

            Red light cameras are totally about revenue. Safety is just a tired excuse. And a lie, as so clearly shown by the shortening of the yellow to unsafe and sometimes illegally short durations. One of them busted me for missing the light by less than 1 second. As it happens, that particular city's red light cameras are also operated by RedFlex.

            They weasel around the legal requirements by casting it as a violation of a city ordinance, instead of a moving violation. So it won't hand your auto insurer the excuse they need to raise your rates. The amount of $75 is also carefully set that most people decide it's not worth the time to fight, and simply pay up. For people who feel the camera wronged them, and wish to fight anyway, they set up this less formal system in which you can request a hearing. I did that. I was armed with evidence that they had mistimed the yellow light. The city's own website said the yellow was supposed to last 4 seconds in a 40 mph speed limit zone. I checked it and found they had shaved 0.1 seconds off. Also, the informal standard of 1 second per 10mph of speed limit is not enough. It's unsafe.

            The hearing went as I expected. The issue that the yellow was too short was summarily dismissed with the stupid argument that essentially boiled down to the notion that the city can commit no wrong, the system is perfect, and the timing couldn't possibly be in error. And I was found guilty. The evidence was 2 pictures, showing the light as red before the car had entered the intersection, and still red with the car all the way in the intersection. After finding against me, the judge informed me that I could take up the issue of the mistimed yellow in municipal court.

            I wish more people would fight them. Knowing that the system was not fair, I was expecting it hearing to be a kangaroo court in which I wouldn't have a chance. I fought to cost them more money than they were getting from me. Wanted to make their unfair and unjust scheme as unprofitable and costly to them as I could. I could have gone on to municipal court, but I had spent enough of my own time on the matter. If more people fought, these red light cameras and their slimy private operators would quickly go out of business. I have one other weapon I use, the boycott. I no longer shop in that city.

            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by edIII on Thursday September 15 2016, @02:36AM

              by edIII (791) on Thursday September 15 2016, @02:36AM (#402109)

              Just let them go the collections, and then sue collections if they violated due process and TELL them they're violating due process since the fee never went through a court at all. Any threats about garnishment, you tell them to call your bluff. That still requires a garnishment hearing and you can tell the judge about their extrajudicial activities and how you were deprived of due process.

              My issue went to collections and they shut up right away when I explained it to them. $75? You can bet that collections only paid $5 maybe for it. When they see that they need a lawyer to collect the $70 revenue, they just drop it and move on the next $70.

              You can work the collections system too. I've defaulted on hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, and it is all well past statute of limitations now. I was clear with ever single one of them. Meet me in court is what I told them, and without exception, every single one of them tried to go around me. They've failed :)

              All they ended up getting was maybe 10c on the dollar, and it was the collection agencies that lost the rest of it. Good, fuck em. They're all bastards trying to get around due process.

              People also need to look into the process itself. Normal tickets and moving violations all work in a "normal" court. You have a court date, and need to see a judge. Getting around that only works if you pay the fine and plead at minimum, nolo contendere. Otherwise, you must see the judge.

              Some tickets like these that are de facto extrajudicial do not work in the same way. If you object to the ticket and the fine for any reason, you actually need to sign something to that effect with the warning that the city can decide to sue you in civil court. I indeed called their bluff over $75, and indeed, they did dragged me to court.... 2 years later. Which pissed off the prosecutor so bad he was yelling at me on the phone since he asked 5 minutes into our convo how much the ticket was :D Flipped and told me I was insane for not paying it. Told him to shove it and I would have my day in court. He said he dropped the case, but never did. That's how it get to collections and once they heard that story, they wrote it off. Haven't heard a peep since.

              Try never giving up period and letting them know that death will occur before your wallet is pried open to pay them. Death FIRST is how you approach those bastards. I've won every time.

              --
              Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
              • (Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Thursday September 15 2016, @03:37AM

                by bzipitidoo (4388) on Thursday September 15 2016, @03:37AM (#402121) Journal

                Yes, refuse to pay can be the best way to fight these things. Far less effort to do that than go to the trouble of making time for a hearing. I realized any system they set up can't help but be biased in their favor. However, the car was not mine, it was my father's, and he didn't want to fight at all. They don't know or care who is actually driving, they only care about who owns the car. Just another unfair feature of this system. It was only when I came up with the data on the yellow light that he agreed to try a hearing. After losing, I urged him not to pay, but he didn't want trouble, and was afraid to fight that way.

                Refusing to pay is how I finally ended up beating outrageous medical bills from an emergency room visit. I tried to go through their dispute system, tried to get them to explain their prices. And no one could. Spent way too much time arguing with them. Well, if I don't understand a bill, and they can't explain it, I'm certainly not going to pay it. Told the medical providers that I was NOT going to pay $300 for a $2 bag of saline solution, and $450 for one aspirin. They turned it over to a collection agency who harassed me with phone calls for a while. Tried to call in ways that wouldn't give me a chance to tell them not to call me, you know, ring once and hang up before I can answer, or play a recorded message. But they finally gave up.

                What about your credit rating? Were they able to trash that? That's what they threatened to do to me, of course, but so far, the unpaid medical bill doesn't seem to have hurt my rating at all.

    • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:11PM

      by LoRdTAW (3755) on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:11PM (#401992) Journal

      What is the difference between US red light cameras and the ones we have in the UK?

      Nothing I'm sure.

      Yours seem to have all sorts of troubles and people against them.

      The trouble is they exist.

      Is it something to do with US car design?

      Don't be silly.

      Or is it that you simply set the amber times too short?

      "You" as in "we" don't set anything. The cameras are not government operated or owned. They are contracted to private contractors who get a cut of the "proceeds". They have been caught manipulating amber lights and positioning speed traps near exit ramps and roads where the speeds suddenly change and extort money from motorists. The local government who hires them doesn't seem to care as a) they don't want that responsibility and b) just want more money.

      Is it that protectionist laws mean you buy inferior technology that isn't reliable as that in Europe?

      Now that is just plain stupid.

      Or is it just an objection on principle to fine people going through red lights?

      Red light and speed cameras don't really do much to stop auto collisions. They just make money. And there are plenty of examples where such traps were rigged to catch motorists off guard and basically extort money from them. It's a scam.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @09:47PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @09:47PM (#402022)

      The fundamental problem is that the cities are contracting this out and giving the camera operating companies a share in the revenue. This leads to all sorts of obnoxious behavior, including on the part of the city (because, hey, revenue) like shortening yellow light times (often to unsafe levels). Add in the whole "right to face your accuser" part of the US Constitution, and the whole thing tends to be a recipe for disaster.

    • (Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Wednesday September 14 2016, @10:26PM

      by curunir_wolf (4772) on Wednesday September 14 2016, @10:26PM (#402032)
      Well, for one thing, people in the US are not wanker sheep that accept any ludicrous nanny-state scheme that comes along to track, manage, control, and social engineer them. Also, we have lots of guns. And 8-cylinder, 2-ton cars.
      --
      I am a crackpot
      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @11:00PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @11:00PM (#402048)

        Yeah, people in the US would never accept something like mass surveillance. Whoops.

    • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Thursday September 15 2016, @01:05AM

      by shortscreen (2252) on Thursday September 15 2016, @01:05AM (#402091) Journal

      You mean the UK ones don't have any troubles? Aside from people lighting them on fire?

      I'm sad to report that the glorious photo album of dozens of burnt Gatsos which used to be available at speedcam.co.uk seems to have been taken down (luckily I have it saved locally!), and so I can only offer a link to this brief collection of photos instead: http://english.controleradar.org/burning-gatso.php [controleradar.org]

    • (Score: 2) by Whoever on Thursday September 15 2016, @04:41AM

      by Whoever (4524) on Thursday September 15 2016, @04:41AM (#402136) Journal

      What is the difference between US red light cameras and the ones we have in the UK?

      The UK doesn't have many red light cameras: instead it has more speed cameras (at least, in the parts of the UK that I visit).

      The major difference is where the money from the tickets goes.