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This discussion has been archived.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 sjames on Sunday April 06 2014, @02:22AM
There are different problems depending on the camera system, and in practice the right to face your accuser is often denied with the camera systems. For example, some cameras don't clearly show the traffic light in frame. Other than "that's how it's supposed to work" how do we know that in this particular instance the light was actually red? (pretty much any answer other than an eye witness is questionable). Was the length of the yellow long enough? Far too often the courts (for reasons I can't imagine) allow a general representative answer the questions, not the actual technician that worked on the camera last, and often not even an employee of the camera company.
If the right to face your accuser and rules of evidence were strictly followed, many camera cases that went to court would fail.
This as opposed to a security camera where anyone viewing the footage can answer all of the relevant questions. They clearly see the defendant committing a crime.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday April 06 2014, @02:53AM
All the camera systems in my area record the stop light as well as the car, and have polarized class in front of the lense so that the winshield reflections would be removed. The single image has everything you need to determine that the infraction occured.
What is missing is if the shortening of the yellow. They are not supposed to trigger if the car crossed the line on the yellow, but a short yellow tricks many drivers into doint this.
Also remember these are INFRACTIONS, not crimes. So that whole bit about facing your accusers may not apply. I'm not sure this has been ruled on by the SC.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.