SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
janrinok
on Saturday April 05 2014, @07:03PM
from the I-would-have-been-here-earlier-but... dept.
from the I-would-have-been-here-earlier-but... dept.
The legality of red-light camera evidence in California is set to be reviewed by the California Supreme Court.
Ars Technica reports, the California Supreme Court is hearing the case in an attempt to answer three basic questions:
- What testimony, if any, regarding the accuracy and reliability of the automated traffic enforcement system (ATES) is required as a prerequisite to admission of the ATES-generated evidence?
- Is the ATES evidence hearsay?
- If so, do any exceptions apply?
Cameras in Ohio are also facing state supreme court scrutiny. The SCOTUS has been silent so far on traffic cameras but has previously ruled on the need to be able to be able to question diagnostic equipment operators to ensure a fair trial to avoid hearsay.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
State Supreme Court to Rule on Red-light Cameras
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 23 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
OK, enough hype.
-- Larry Wall in the perl man page
(Score: 2) by hubie on Sunday April 06 2014, @12:00AM
You might be interested in the little town of Morningside, MD. They own about a half mile of road just outside the Andrews air base. They've set up two speed cameras and there have been many complaints about them [wtop.com]. My biggest problem with speed and red light cameras is that there is no accountability. Both the city and the contractor have a financial interest in issuing the most tickets they can, and there is no oversight to determine whether they are both doing it honestly (like in Morningside).