
The most convenient of all citations is by far the most fraudulent.
I received a standard-sized letter in the mail last week from the City of St. Louis Photo Enforcement Program. Nestling right in with the rest of law enforcement at our fine St. Louis City Hall is tricky, but it's somewhere this enforcement program doesn't belong.
Pictured above is the copy (certain censorship allowed) of my "Notice of Violation".
Let's examine it for what it is, and as it would be considered evidence against me in a court of law.
The left column shows what would typically be on a normal citation. All is normal--when, where, who, vehicle, what traffic code is allegedly in violation, and the officer issuing the citation, fine amount in dollars, and a prosecutor's signature. Apparently the robotic camera at Hampton and Wilson is named Kenneth Callmeyer...and it even gets a badge number. I'm going to be pretty cynical up front to get it out of the way, just so you know.
Notice how convenient they make it to pay this "violation". Just go to Violationinfo.com and pay. It's so easy, why wouldn't you just pay?
The images are the most troubling of all. There are two frames that are impossible to dispute that a silver VW Rabbit is running the red light in the intersection. Hey, I own one of those! But that's all it proves. The top right image is a crop of what we are supposed to believe comes from either or both of the frames below it. In reality, the crop of the license plate does not contain the same frame information (date/time/location) as the other two. It is a picture of the same license plate on my VW Rabbit, but it is impossible to prove it came from either of the indisputable frames of a VW running the red light.
If that isn't interesting enough, let's look at the type of violation this is. "This violation is a non-moving violation and no points will be assessed." Bingo! Ok, so what is it? Like a parking ticket? Nope. No proof of insurance? Sort of. Jaywalking? Almost. It's a "Safety Violation." Lower than than a speeding ticket, so it makes it impossible to plea bargain down like one would do by hiring the likes of Traffic Law Center. All of which, by the way, would cost well over $100. So just pay it, right? It's so convenient and doesn't hurt your record anyway. The worst they can do is turn it over to a collections agency.
Examining the violation, I'd lastly like to point out that my signature is nowhere to be found. Fitting too, because I completely reject such fraud.
Finally, I'd like to reference our United States Constitution's Sixth Amendment: "The defense must have an opportunity to 'confront' and cross-examine witnesses." Is that robotic camera going to show up in court? Or is officer Kenneth Callmeyer, badge 2747 going to be in its stead?
I love this city, and I want it to have all the revenue it needs to operate and keep us safe. But, do we even have to pay? Absolutely not.
“If you threw it in the trash,” says St. Louis Alderman Freeman Bosley Sr., chairman of the aldermanic Traffic Committee, “nothing would happen.”
The Post Dispatch quotes:
“The cameras are not sanctioned by the state, sometimes leaving cities to rely on model ordinances drafted by the for-profit camera companies — who get a slice of each ticket. [...]"
What about safety? Are we more likely to run non-surveillance red lights with less care knowing you can't get caught by a camera?
The first dozen cameras or so are already issuing 43 percent fewer tickets than they first went online. Is the city budgeting for this decline, or are they raking in the millions now only to find they successfully scared everyone into giving up their rights and not making near the same amount of cash?
Find the current camera locations here: http://www.photoenforced.com/missouri.html

