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This discussion has been archived.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.
You will step on the night soil of many countries.
(Score: 2) by mojo chan on Sunday April 06 2014, @09:05AM
It seems like even the testimony of a cop or an employee of the camera operator would be hearsay. They have not examined the devices for themselves, they have not verified their operation. Instead they had a very high level overview of how the cameras work explained to them, probably not even by the engineer who developed them, and then took the word of the installation and calibration reports at face value.
If accused I'd want to see source code for the embedded part of the system, full schematics and then question the engineers who developed it and the people who installed it.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)