Speed Camera Called a Scam Motorists Can’t Win


GiGi Erneta
Infowars.com
June 11, 2013

In a recent court decision, Judge Ruehlman of Hamilton Ohio called the case of the Elmwood Place Camera a scam, describing it as “nothing more than a high-tech game of 3 Card Monty.”

His comments got the Police Chief William Peskin, and the Village of Elmwood, hot under the collar.

Judge Ruelman, however, said this about his comments: “They may be a little colorful but they’re easy to understand.”

The speeding tickets generated by Optotraffic, from an uncalibrated machine without the possibility of a trial, has stacked impossible odds against citizens. In Baltimore, one of these dependable “speed cameras” gave a speeding ticket to a motionless car.

Optotraffic received 40% of the revenues from the Elmwood Place camera and tickets were written as a Notice of Liability, a civil charge not criminal, to the tune of $105 per violation. Since the witness was never present when the violation occurred, no cross-examination was possible, rendering the Automated Speed Enforcement Program in violation of the Ohio Constitution.

So how do you stand up against the machine? You can fight back and win if you know the law. In 2010, Infowars reported on Arizonians who stood up and fought back by covering cameraswith wrapping paper, boxes, and note paper. Even the Easter Bunny helped out with the cause. In July of 2010, the photo enforcement cameras in Arizona came down.

As a result of the Elmwood Place case in Hamilton, House Bill 69 is pending, which would end the use of Speed Cameras in the State of Ohio.

Learn more about your rights on the Alex Jones Channel, “Secrets Police Don’t Want You To Know.” Former Deputy Sheriff Eddie Craig sheds light on facts, including that driving from one point to another for non-commercial use, is a “right” not a privilege.


Infowars.com Videos:


Comments are closed.