Trust Us!

The city and the Almighty Mayor have been telling us to "trust us" since the infallible red light scam-era system was implemented here in Albuquerque. It seems that the cameras are not as reliable as the city, the mayor, the chief of police, and APD spokesman John Walsh have led us to believe.

KOAT TV is reporting that one of their own received a citation from the scam-era at Carlisle and Montgomery (watch the story here). It turns out that the information provided by RedFlex was incorrect and the timing of the scam-era system was off. KOAT Production Manager Gary Williams proved that the system was creating erroneous citations by taking a broadcast camera to the intersection and timing the light.

(Sidebar)
How many other citations were erroneously issued? How many people simply paid up because they didn't have the ability to defend themselves?
(End Sidebar)

Mr. Williams was able to prove that the RedFlex scam-era system was not operating properly. The evidence was so convincing that even the Martyville Kangaroo Courts were unable to sustain the erroneous citation.

Before you go defending the red light scam-eras with the "system worked" argument... how many of you have access to the type of broadcast video equipment required to prove this type of case? The truth is that very few people understand the workings of the RedFlex system.

At a "hearing" there is no one available to testify as to the condition of and the calibration of the equipment installed at the intersection in question. The accused is simply shown a tape showing their vehicle violating either the speed limit or entering the intersection after the light has turned red. They are then pronounced guilty and are ordered to pay up.

The nature of the system presumes guilt by denying the accused the ability to defend themselves. The scam-eras are assumed to be infallible, ergo the defendants are guilty. Yet, as we now know, the city cannot prove that the red light scam-eras are operating accurately, just as you cannot prove that they are not. Even in a civil court where the standard is "preponderance of the evidence," we don't believe that the city's case would prevail. Of course, the city got around that whole judicial thing by setting up their Kangaroo Courts.

Now, after having bagged the wrong driver - a driver who had the ability to prove the all seeing, all knowing scam-era wrong - John Walsh has the nerve to tell us that APD will look investigate the Carlisle/Montgomery intersection to see if there truly is a problem.

In other words, "trust us" this is an isolated problem and doesn't really prove that the scam-eras are not working properly. "Horse hockey!" As Colonel Sherman T. Potter of M*A*S*H would have said. Without special equipment, the average defendant doesn't have the ability to effectively defend themselves in Marty's Kangaroo Courts. The city's position (who it just so happens the Kangaroo Judge works for) is that the cameras PROVE guilt. So, unless you work for a TV station, send in your money 'cause you're not going to win anyway.

We've been SCREAMING about the problems of due process that are inherent to this system. This story only proves our point. The scam-eras are NOT INFALLIBLE! You do not enjoy a presumption of innocence. And most importantly, you DO NOT APPEAR IN FRONT OF AN IMPARTIAL JUDGE. Why would ANYONE support such a clearly unfair and unjust system?!

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

Decriminalization and What's Behind It

It will be busy over at the city's hearing office if The Mayer (Councilor Mayer) gets her way. The Mayer is leading the charge to decriminalize some 72 misdemeanor offenses. Things like violations of the noise ordinance, failure to obey a police officer, purchasing ephedrine (which is used to make meth), illegal wood burning, and of course The Mayer's very own HEART (not head) ordinance, just to mention a few.

We're sure that the reason for decriminalization of these dastardly deeds will be to take the burden off the court system. In fact, at first glance it seems like a pretty good idea. However, when you look deeper you'll find a few facts that are very disturbing.

The ordinance O-06-25 (scheduled to be heard Monday, April 16) if enacted, will make all of these criminal offenses civil offenses. If this sounds familiar to you it should. It's the exact theory that Albuquerque's photo enforcement program runs under. Running a red light in one of these intersections is a civil offense (apparently committed by your vehicle because the driver is unknown). The same will become true of the 70 plus offenses that are currently petty misdemeanors.

Like the red light camera program, you will be issued a civil citation that will require you to pay up or request an administrative hearing. The fine structure should also sound familiar, $100 for the first offense, $250 for the second, and $500 for the 3rd and all subsequent offenses for the rest of your life (and that of your children if they could get away with it).

This is where we really start to have problems, the first of which is that of due process. As we've already established, the complainant and the hearing officers both work for the administrative branch of government, in this case King Mighty Marty I. The opportunity for a fair and impartial hearing is immediately diminished by the very fact that the mayor is the hearing officer's boss.

In addition, by changing a criminal offense to a civil offense you also change the standard of judgment from beyond a reasonable doubt, to a preponderance of the evidence. In other words, a lower standard that leans towards guilt rather than innocence. A standard that favors the accuser. A standard that favors the city in these cases, even if they were heard before a judge, which they're not.

Finally, when you pay your fine (not if you pay), the money is then collected by the city. Let's see... control the accusing agencies, control the hearing officers, cut out the court system, and collect the money; motive and profit opportunity. Sounds like the perfect system for a banana republic or a tyrannical dictatorship; certainly a system where you are guilty until proven innocent.