Tucson's Not Doing It Right Either... The Tucson Citizen reported last week that Tucson will start using red light and photo radar cameras and it appears that they won't be doing any better than the ones run in Maricopa County. The article which appears on the Tucson Citizen's website says that "Suspected violators will have the photos reviewed by a police officer, who will then write a ticket if the case seems clear, and mail it to the vehicle's registered owner." One has to wonder why an officer would waste time reviewing the photo from the traffic cam, only then to just mail the ticket to the registered owner anyway.

The paper reports that ATS, the same company that took over Scottsdale's operations from Redflex, will be paid based on fines imposed. The Alaska Supreme Court has ruled in the past that such a payment system hardly encourages an unbiased witness. With money paid to the vendor only if someone is found responsible for speeding, it's easy to forecast the outcome for ATS.

You may have to be attorney Mel McDonald to get an appellate court to state the obvious, but at least they finally have! In a recent appeal, the well-known attorney argued that he had a right to confront the evidence against him--how novel!--and won! The appeals court agreed saying "Central to the adversarial process is the right for a party to confront the evidence presented against that party. There is nothing more fundamental than this right and it is questionable, at best, for a substitute person to testify as to information and evidence gathered by another. For there also to be a lack of disclosure of the fact that the testifying person lacked personal knowledge must be deemed fundamental error since it goes to the heart of “the integrity of the system.”

Imagine that! Substitute photo radar employee to testify as to information and evidence gathered by a machine and without personal knowledge of the facts and you have a winner!

In McDonald's case, the court reveals "the testifying officer disclosed that she played no role in the inspection of the equipment or in the determination of the validity of the citation. She explained to McDonald that the officer directly involved in the investigation was ill and that she had covered for that person. She was merely reiterating what she believed the sick officer would have testified to had that officer been well on the date of trial.”

To use this case to cite on your behalf, just CLICK HERE!

Avondale drivers will not be identified.
As Avondale prepares to go forward with plans to install photo radar, its contractor, American Traffic Solutions, will be sending citations to vehicle owners regardless of who was driving. Such action violates Arizona law which requires certification under oath that the person being cited was the actual driver. More appeals to follow...apparently Avondale wants to keep its prosecutors busy!
Dave Cherry interviews Susan Kayler on Call 12 for Action!
Cameras will be back on the Loop 101 on February 22nd and that's the day that Channel 12's Dave Cherry interviewed author/attorney Susan Kayler about what to do with those tickets. If you missed the Action at 5:15 a.m. and again at 6:15 a.m. click the link (title) to see the video!

Scottsdale Times Exclusive
Find a copy of the February 8th issue of the Phoenix NEW TIMES for exclusive articles about photo radar. Read Ray Stern's articles that reveal how photo radar affects drivers and how some escape it all together. Click here to read "Gotcha!" and click here for Stern's "How to Beat a Photo-Enforcement Ticket."

ASU Photo radar study incomplete, flawed.
As Scottsdale and Arizona leaders announce that the latest study by ASU's Simon Washington shows that photo radar works, Mr. Washington admitted that the study was not complete. In an interview with John Hook and Susan Kayler on Channel 10's Newsmaker Sunday just days after the unfinished report was made public, Washington said that not all costs of the photo radar trial had been considered and that the increase in speeders after the cameras were turned off had not been yet factored into his findings. While taxpayers wait for the final results, Washington took a plane to Redflex's native Australia for a six months sabattical.

Drivers still not identified.
Despite tales of Redflex compliance with the law by use of identifying information to issue citations, the private company is thumbing its nose at the Superior Court decision requiring more. The company still does nothing in most cases to identify drivers. The vehicle registration is checked, period. If you receive a ticket, question the Redflex employee in court. Tip: Your ticket will show no identifying information, no birthdate, etc. Evidence that nothing is done to determine who was driving prior to a "person" swearing it was you!

John Hook interviews Kayler and Washington on Newsmaker Sunday.
Tune in to Channel 10 at 7:30 a.m. as John Hook asks about ASU's photo radar study and the governor's plans to put the devices on Arizona roads.

Jason Barry of Channel 5 KPHO talks with author on the hottest photo radar issue!
Tune in to Channel 5 at 5 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. on Thursday, December 7th for revealing news about photo radar process servers. Reporter Jason Barry asks all the right questions, but you'll have to tune in to hear the answers. Don't miss it! Then post your thoughts on our FORUM page.

Scottsdale Times Exclusive
Pick up a copy of the Scottsdale Times, read the article by clicking HERE or visit their website at www.ScottsdaleTimes.com. Get the low-down from John Dickerson's exclusive article about what is happening to people who didn't know they had a photo radar ticket! John interviewed vehicle owners who faced fines, jail, and in one case, loss of her car because of faulty service of process and disinterested judges. This article proves that mistakes are made and made often when it comes to photo radar and the consequences can be severe. Get the details from the article now!

3 on Your Side interviews author
Set your TIVO to Channel 3's News and catch 3 on Your Side! Arizona's Family station interviewed author/attorney Susan Kayler about photo radar and whether you can really beat a ticket. Photo radar may be off Loop 101 for now, but it's still up and running on Valley streets. Get the information you need...and drive safely!

Superior Court Modifies Gillespie
In a recent appeal decision, the Maricopa County Judge who required that the photo radar company compare their photos to a driver's license photo has changed her mind. After Gillespie was decided, Redflex decided to ignore the decision to the extent that it required comparison to a driver's license photo and look at the name of the registered owner and the birthdate only. A year after Gillespie was decided, the Superior Court now says that may be enough for reasonable grounds to exist to "swear" the complaint. This decision came despite the fact that Redflex has never fully complied with the Gillespie case.

The lesson? If you don't like an appeal decision, just ignore it. The court will eventually come around to your position.

Question is, does that thinking apply to those charged with speeding? Stay tuned...

Superior Court Disregards Scattergram
A recent appeal case questioned the sufficiency of the evidence in a photo radar case. The Superior Court refused to consider the scattergram introduced by the photo radar company employee questioning its admissibility. The concern was enough to convince the appellate judge not to consider the scattergram evidence. May be a step in the right direction...

Fox News Diane Ryan reports photo radar case going to Supreme Court.
David Cain wasn't even speeding the day the camera photographed him, yet he received a photo radar ticket. Unable to convince a judge to take his word over that of a machine, Cain took his case to the Superior Court. His appeal was denied, but he later learned that Arizona courts fail to take the steps necessary to comply with state law concerning issuing tickets. Cain and his attorney went to Arizona's Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court without success. They are now on their way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Since jurisdiction can be raised at any time, Cain has a good shot at a win. Diane Ryan of Fox Channel 10 interviewed author/attorney Susan Kayler about the law and Cain's prospect on appeal. Tune in to Channel 10 News to get the latest information about this fascinating development!


Scottsdale car dealer offers high-speed vehicle
Reacting to news that a local man was arrested for breaking physics-defying speed barriers, a Scottsdale car dealer is promoting the fast moving vehicle at a lot on Hayden Road. Drivers interested in the vehicle that police say can reach 147 m.p.h. can see it for themselves. The creative dealer prominently displays the make of car that astonished even its manufacturer. Smile for the car dealer!

Scottsdale issues faulty tickets...again!
The National Motorist Association is blasting Scottsdale police for issuing citations to a driver for speeds his car is incapable of reaching. Questioning the accuracy of the photo radar devices on the Loop 101, the NMA said police should be concerned about accuracy of its equipment and the resulting unfairness experienced by untold numbers of drivers. Can we believe photo radar is designed for our safety when it is citing motorists for speeding when they were not speeding? How does this help safety? Scottsdale police have not publicly responded to criticism but last year they were required to refund thousands of tickets issued in error. To learn more about the NMA, click National Motorist Association!

Court throws out photo radar ticket AGAIN!
It's common knowledge that the Superior Court ruled in State v. Gillespie that the method used by Scottsdale to file photo radar tickets fails to confer jurisdiction on the court--which means, the court HAS to dismiss the ticket! Yet another person has appealed on the same grounds and WON!!! Once again the Superior Court is telling the Scottsdale court that it has NO jurisdiction in photo radar cases...Hey, Scottsdale, how many appeals will it take before your court follows the law? Read the latest case by COURT DECISION.

Photo Radar Fines Refunded 
Vehicle owners who received photo radar tickets in Scottsdale recently are getting refunds due to mistakes made by the photo radar company that processes the citations. Newspapers are reporting that changes to equipment were made without an employee review of the tickets before they were issued. Photo radar company employees have long maintained and sworn to under oath that ALL tickets are thoroughly checked. Now, Scottsdale has had to refund fines and defensive driving school costs because no one DOES review the tickets. This latest news comes on the heals of a court decision finding that Scottsdale photo radar tickets are illegal because no one reviews them. Are officials redfaced? Read the latest article here: COURT REFUNDS FINES!<>
ADOT Photo Radar Study Incomplete
A 119 page study just completed by the State of Arizona Department of Public Safety concludes that photo radar is an unproven technology and that the technology is not yet advanced enough to justify its use on Arizona freeways. As to whether photo radar is run legally in Arizona, the report says: "Whereas the violation processing and management elements will also need to be studied in detail to fully examine the viability of such a photo enforcement system, these aspects are beyond the scope of this project. Until the enforcement management process issues are addressed, no recommendation can be made from this study regarding the usefulness of proceeding with a field trial of photo enforcement for freeways."

DPS fails to explain WHY it does not address the legal issues surrounding photo radar, especially when there is so much information readily available (particularly from this website and others and from author/attorney Susan Kayler). The report does indicate that DPS does not recommend a field trial of photo radar on our freeways.

To read the full report, click this: DPS REPORT.

Read our Archives
For past photo radar articles, visit our PHOTO RADAR NEWS archives page.