SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @06:46PM
> Pity for O'Malley that the "extremely careless" defense had not yet been invented.
::rolleyes::
(Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:01PM
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.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:23PM
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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
I am a crackpot
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday September 15 2016, @12:11AM
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
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
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
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
Nothing I'm sure.
The trouble is they exist.
Don't be silly.
"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.
Now that is just plain stupid.
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
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
I am a crackpot
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @11:00PM
Yeah, people in the US would never accept something like mass surveillance. Whoops.
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Thursday September 15 2016, @01:05AM
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
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.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @07:55PM
Pity for O'Malley that the "extremely careless [cnn.com]" defense had not yet been invented.
Phoenix666, if you want to inject obvious political point scoring, please at least have the decency to be correct.
First, lack of mens ria [wikipedia.org] is a well known defense for many (but not all) crimes, and it would have actually gotten him out of this crime if he had been able to prove it. So your political snark fails on a literal level.
Second, different crimes have different requirements and different burden of proof. For example, "I didn't mean to do that" will get you out of a shoplifting charge (imagine a iPad accidentally fell into your purse without your knowledge), but it will not get you out of a manslaughter charge. So your political snark fails on a philosophical level.
Third, I am happy to provide examples of people who have been conviced of cronyism in the past. For example, US Army Major John L. Cockerham [wikipedia.org]. Your turn. Please name one person prior to Hillary Clinton who has been charged and convinced with negligent (not willful, but negligent) mishandling of classified information. I'm guessing you can't as the FBI noted in their press release. So your political snark fails on a factual level.
Well, I guess it did get me to respond, so it succeeds a bias clickbait, so there is that.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:24PM
And although the FBI may not have been involved, there are indeed reported felony prosecutions of soldiers for putting copies of classified documents in a gym bag and then not returning them out of fear of discovery; placing classified documents in a friend’s desk drawer and forgetting them; tossing documents meant to be destroyed in a dumpster rather than in the appropriate facility.
Three cases are alluded to in the above sentence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:32PM
Prosecutions are not convictions.
IIRC, one of those took a weird plea bargain, none were convicted at trial.
The problem is not that clinton got the privilege of the benefit of the doubt, but that those so persecuted did not.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 15 2016, @04:30PM
Do you have names, or other things which can be looked up? As always, circumstances matter a LOT in criminal proceedings, and the WSJ article you linked is paywalled.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Thursday September 15 2016, @02:49PM
What reputation management tool are you guys at Camp Clinton using these days? I remember evaluating several when I ran things but I felt that $100K and $80K for a software license was silly when they were nothing more than a wrapper on a Google search. Obviously Clinton-as-presidential-candidate generates better cash flow than Clinton-as-Secretary-of-State...
So, how do you find the keyword cloud map, is it pleasing to the eye? Do you feel it's able to adequately measure the delta of your interventions? Also, just curious, do you draw your paycheck from the campaign, the Clinton Foundation, or Edelman PR?
Because we all know that no one writes apologia for Hillary Clinton who is not paid.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 15 2016, @04:41PM
Because we all know that no one writes apologia for Hillary Clinton who is not paid.
Seriously? So out of the 300+ million people in the US, literally 0 people actually believes in her or supports her? I guess it could be true. Or maybe you should you engage in some introspection and examination for bias.
If it makes you feel better, I am not being paid by the Clinton campaign (and lest you mince words, I'm not being paid by her at all in any fashion). Not that I expect you to believe the assertions of an AC... For what it's worth, I rather dislike her. I'm just tired of the constant attacks in regard to supposed mishandling of classified information.
People like to tote out the citation of the "make it a nonpaper" and how the FBI hasn't prosecuted her for it. Lots of people in the news and online like to rant about things for which they know nothing about. Several supposed smoking guns are in fact benign for those who actually know terminology and procedures. The requests are admittedly unusual, but there is nothing wrong with them.
It's like with George W. Bush. He's done a lot of despicable things, but the 9/11 "truthers" are full of garbage. Or Barack Obama and the "birthers." There are so many other things to attack them on which are real, don't go making stuff up.
If you want to go after Clinton, go after her mismanagement of records. Go after the alleged corruption of the link between the Clinton Foundation and meetings (I say "alleged" because it is currently a developing story and it could or could not be true). There are lots of things you can use to impeach her character or her qualifications. Don't go inventing non-stories about classified information mishandling.
(Score: 3, Touché) by jmorris on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:01PM
Good grief, they are jailing Chicago public officials for only stealing $2M now? If that became a trend Chicago would be leaderless. The anarchists would finally get their real world field trial of their philosophy I guess, doubt anyone would like the outcome though.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:57PM
That wasn't enough to bribe the State AG to drop the investigation?
(Score: 2) by bradley13 on Thursday September 15 2016, @05:53AM
No need to worry for the poor government officials just yet. He's just a private citizen who worked for the company. No one who worked for the city government has yet been found guilty; only one person (a "former" official) has even been charged.
It wouldn't surprise me if no one currently working for the government is ever found guilty. This *is* Chicago, after all...
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.