Baltimore issued speed camera ticket to motionless car - Polidicks

[url]http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/sun-investigates/bs-md-speed-camera-stopped-car-20121212,0,6559038.story[/url] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/kITcl.png[/IMG] The Baltimore City speed camera ticket alleged that the four-door Mazda wagon was going 38 miles per hour in a 25-mph zone — and that owner Daniel Doty owed $40 for the infraction. But the Mazda wasn't speeding. It wasn't even moving. The two photos printed on the citation as evidence of speeding show the car was idling at a red light with its brake lights illuminated. A three-second video clip also offered as evidence shows the car motionless, as traffic flows by on a cross street. The camera that wrongly ticketed Doty on April 24 is in Northeast Baltimore in the 1700 block of E. Cold Spring Lane, at the intersection with Hillen Road. It is the seventh city speed camera that The Baltimore Sun has shown to have produced inaccurate citations bearing erroneous speed readings. Doty's is the first case in which the vehicle was clearly stationary. City officials gave no explanation for how it happened. Doty, a lawyer who lives in Lauraville, said he and his wife were amazed that the ticket was issued, calling it "shockingly obvious" from the images that the car was stopped. He has challenged the ticket and is scheduled to appear in District Court on Friday. "It was like someone was so obviously asleep at the switch," he said Wednesday. "I thought that was not supposed to happen." The city's speed camera contractor, Xerox State and Local Solutions, says each potential citation goes through two layers of review to weed out any that have a deficiency, such as an illegible license plate. Then a Baltimore police officer must review the citation before approving it for issuance to the vehicle owner. Each citation says the officer swears or affirms that the car was going at least 12 mph over the speed limit "based on inspection of the recorded images." The officer's signature is also printed. The Sun asked city officials why Doty's ticket was issued. Transportation Department spokeswoman Adrienne Barnes offered no explanation but said the agency would have more to say at Friday's meeting of a task force set up by Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake to study the city's entire speed and red light camera program. The city has 83 speed cameras and 81 red light cameras. It isn't clear from the signature on the citation which police officer reviewed Doty's ticket, and police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi didn't say when asked, but added, "The department finds any error unacceptable." The department has said that a single officer can review up to 1,200 citations in a given day. Xerox spokesman Chris Gilligan did not address Doty's citation. He noted in a statement that a "system-wide audit of the Baltimore photo enforcement program is ongoing and has resulted in implementing an additional manual review of citations at all camera locations." The Sun recently published an investigation focusing on the city's speed camera program, which has generated more than $48 million since it began three years ago. The investigation found that citations can be inaccurate and that judges routinely throw out tickets for a range of problems. The Sun has also shown that it is impossible for motorists to verify the alleged speeds with the information printed on tickets issued by Baltimore County, Howard County and the State Highway Administration. Since the articles' publication, several lawmakers have called for changes to the state law that governs the way the city and other jurisdictions operate speed camera programs. Gov. Martin O'Malley said Tuesday that state law bars contractors from being paid based on the number of citations issued or paid — an approach used by Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Howard County and elsewhere. "The law says you're not supposed to charge by volume. I don't think we should charge by volume," O'Malley said. "If any county is, they need to change their program."

This should confirm that speed cameras are evil corporate dummies.

My area got speed cameras in the last year and they had to shut them off under court order because they were giving out bad tickets and because the company that operates them is based in Nevada, and the only way to appeal one of the tickets is to go to Nevada and deal with them there. So a local court ordered them all disabled while a law suit is conducted.

wow he went 13 over and he had to pay JUST $40 wtf i got pulled over for doing 51 in a 40 once and my ticket was $150

Could be people ticketed by this particular speed camera in the past be able to sue then?

Obligatory [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvYxXBMqEOM[/media]

[QUOTE=meppers;38818463]wow he went 13 over and he had to pay JUST $40 wtf i got pulled over for doing 51 in a 40 once and my ticket was $150[/QUOTE] He went -25mph over the speed limit, not 13 over. So he won't owe anything. Also, if you don't want to pay the ticket, don't speed.

[QUOTE=meppers;38818463]wow he went 13 over and he had to pay JUST $40 wtf i got pulled over for doing 51 in a 40 once and my ticket was $150[/QUOTE] You're crying about $150? Here in socal anything above 5 over is a $360 ticket.

[QUOTE=meppers;38818463]wow he went 13 over and he had to pay JUST $40 wtf i got pulled over for doing 51 in a 40 once and my ticket was $150[/QUOTE] Maybe you shouldn't've been speeding.

It's pretty ridiculous here in Maryland. Speeding tickets cost $40 and i believe they're activated if you go 12mph over the posted speed limit. Red light traffic cameras are even more expensive at $75. The lights change from yellow to red in half a second here.

I've seen a lot of speeding tickets in my time. Some areas are way more expensive than others. Some charge based on how much over the limit, others base it purely off of speed. I've seen tickets as small as 50 and as high as 350. In georgia you can pretty safely go less than 10 over and not get a ticket. GSP in my area look more for stupidity than speeding. Don't get clocked for speeding at 80 though, those are expensive. way expensive. Like 400 to 500 expensive. and if you call the call center to pay it, please don't bitch at them, they likely have nothing to do with the courthouse and even less to do with your ticket.

ITT: we discuss how much we can break a law in certain areas without getting caught [highlight](User was banned for this post ("ITT" - Orkel))[/highlight]

Honestly, these things are set up in such ways that they can grab the most money off of unsuspecting drivers, not to actually enforce the speed limit...

I knew a camera near us that was broken. It would take pictures of cars regardless of speed. Someone I knew went through it like 10 times to test it and it went off every time. He ended up getting like $200 in tickets because even though the thing was broken, it caught him without his seat belt on every time.

[QUOTE=RusMar;38818893]I knew a camera near us that was broken. It would take pictures of cars regardless of speed. Someone I knew went through it like 10 times to test it and it went off every time. He ended up getting like $200 in tickets because even though the thing was broken, it caught him without his seat belt on every time.[/QUOTE] What an idiot. Not wearing seatbelts is universally retarded.

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;38818979]What an idiot. Not wearing seatbelts is universally retarded.[/QUOTE] My opinion on wearing seatbelts is the same as my opinion on drugs - what a person wants to do with their body is their own business.

[QUOTE=Stopper;38819038]My opinion on wearing seatbelts is the same as my opinion on drugs - what a person wants to do with their body is their own business.[/QUOTE] Darwinism will catch up

[QUOTE=Stopper;38819038]My opinion on wearing seatbelts is the same as my opinion on drugs - what a person wants to do with their body is their own business.[/QUOTE] Not wearing seatbelts won't get you high

[QUOTE=Stopper;38819038]My opinion on wearing seatbelts is the same as my opinion on drugs - what a person wants to do with their body is their own business.[/QUOTE] Except not wearing a seatbelt can be dangerous to not just yourself but other drivers as well. If you get launched onto the roadway it can cause other accidents due to people trying to react to this hunk of meat laying in the road. Not to mention if you have anyone else in your car you become the risk of becoming a deadly projectile that can kill or seriously injur any other passenger. So just buckle up, it doesn't resally fucking inconvenience anyone in any way.

[QUOTE=Stopper;38819038]My opinion on wearing seatbelts is the same as my opinion on drugs - what a person wants to do with their body is their own business.[/QUOTE] What kind of comparison is this? Drugs to a safety harness? How do you even think that?

Wow, 13 miles over the speed limit and only a $40 fine... That'd be a $440 fine in Australia.

[QUOTE=Stopper;38819038]My opinion on wearing seatbelts is the same as my opinion on drugs - what a person wants to do with their body is their own business.[/QUOTE] Have fun getting launched either slamming straight into the steering wheel or out the windshield.

[QUOTE=Stopper;38819038]My opinion on wearing seatbelts is the same as my opinion on drugs - what a person wants to do with their body is their own business.[/QUOTE] I don't even get why people still argue against seat belts... It takes a whopping 3+ seconds to put it on, and it's not even that uncomfortable.

My policy on seat belts differs based on what seat I'm in and certain conditions. If I'm in either front seat, I always wear it no matter what. If I'm in the back, I won't wear it unless the weather is bad or there are notable traffic issues. And its nice because occupants in the back do not have to wear them in this state so no legal issues.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;38819785]My policy on seat belts differs based on what seat I'm in and certain conditions. If I'm in either front seat, I always wear it no matter what. If I'm in the back, I won't wear it unless the weather is bad or there are notable traffic issues. And its nice because occupants in the back do not have to wear them in this state so no legal issues.[/QUOTE] Why though? It takes two seconds to put it on, and it might save your life.

[QUOTE=Paramud;38818603]Maybe you shouldn't've been speeding.[/QUOTE] Speeding is hardly an issue in most aspects (generally always safe on highways regardless of how fast you're going) and it is only accountable for a very minimal amount of traffic incidents. Its just a way to make your local municipality cash.

Maybe my hatred of seat belts comes from having to use Chevy Blazer and Trailblazer seat belts for a long time and those things were like a garrote made of razor wire. I just can't stand the way they feel. The only time I've actually been alright with a seat belt was when I had to take my car to the shop for a week and a family member rented a 2013 Hyundai Sonata. That car was literally the greatest thing I have ever drove. And if I had the money, I would get that above almost any other vehicle in existence. But that is largely irrelevant and has made me sad now because I can't afford one.

[QUOTE=RusMar;38818893]I knew a camera near us that was broken. It would take pictures of cars regardless of speed. Someone I knew went through it like 10 times to test it and it went off every time. He ended up getting like $200 in tickets because even though the thing was broken, it caught him without his seat belt on every time.[/QUOTE] My grandma sent me an email with this exact joke before.

[QUOTE=Jedi_Rayne;38818521] Also, if you don't want to pay the ticket, don't speed.[/QUOTE] I agree While I dislike invasive rules like 'you must wear a bike helmet or get an $80 fine', I fully support speed rules. They don't just arbitrarily stick up a speed limit sign whenever they feel like it and it's not even to protect [I]you[/I] - it's to protect the people that might find themselves under your one tonne chunk of metal

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;38819785]My policy on seat belts differs based on what seat I'm in and certain conditions. If I'm in either front seat, I always wear it no matter what. If I'm in the back, I won't wear it unless the weather is bad or there are notable traffic issues. And its nice because occupants in the back do not have to wear them in this state so no legal issues.[/QUOTE] the front seats of cars are not designed to withstand large forces applied from the back during a crash (since the seatbelt doesn't attach to the back of the seat, it attaches to several stronger points near the seat) if you are sitting in the back during a crash without a seatbelt, the force of you slamming into the back of the seat right in front of you can buckle the seat and kill the passenger in front [editline]13th December 2012[/editline] observe: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQNe4uTxJ38[/media] [editline]13th December 2012[/editline] vs this [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxA7i2DaDT0[/media]