This reminds me of a court battle I fought and won in Garland Texas.
I received a camera red light ticket in the mail claiming I ran a red light. The letter stated I should send $75, or if I felt this fine was sent to
me because of some mistake I could request a hearing with a employee of the camera red light company to resolve the matter. The letter further stated
if I request a hearing there would be an additional charge of, I forget now, I think $40.
I requested the hearing. At the the camera red light company employee showed me his evidence, a picture of my truck apparently going through a
intersection on a red light. The picture was from the rear, at least 50' away. You couldn't tell from the picture where the front of my truck was in
relation to the stop line, but it looked close. I explained to the administrator that the front of my truck was 1" in front of the stop line when the
light turned red, so I had a legal right to clear the intersection. I was taught in driving school that the intersection started at the stop line. The
camera red light administrator explained to me that the intersection didn't start at the stop line but instead started at a line parallel to the curbs
of the intersecting street. I ask the administrator if he would mind showing me the statute that applies to what he was telling me. He said it was in
this big book on his desk and it would take a long time to find it. I explained to him I had taken the time from my busy day to meet with him and to
take as long as he need to find it. He opened the book to the exact page on the first try. He then read me the statute. It was as follows,
The start of a intersection is considered to be at a line parallel to the curbs of the intersecting street, in absence of a stop line.
I then pointed out to him that in the picture he was using as evedince against me, clearly showed a stop line. He told me well that didn't matter
because his guide line say the intersection starts at a line parallel to the curbs of the intersecting street and he has to follow his guide line. He
then informed me if I didn't agree with his decision I had a right to appeal his decision in municipal court, (his office was in the same building).
He then informed me if I would just pay the $75 he would wave the extra fee for this hearing. I ask him where do I go to arrange an appeal. He said go
to window #6.
Before leaving his office I ask him if anyone had ever challenged a red light ticket before. He said one person.
The appeal required me to return to the court 3 more times. Finally when my trial came up the camera red light ticket administrator didn't show up.
The judge was pissed and ask the prosecutor where's the man. The prosecutor told the judge he's not here your honor. The judge ordered the prosecutor
to go down there and get him. After about a 10 minute delay the prosecutor returned to the court room and said, your honor, the state moves to
I was told to go to the administrator's office, where he promptly handed me my original check of $175 which covered the fine, additional hearing fee,
and fee for the appeal. When I walked outside of the court house I had arranged for channel 4 TV reporter to show on TV my returned check and got the
chance to tell the world that Garland Texas was not following the law and was stealing millions of dollars from citizens. It was great.
My point is that the courts really are messed up, and the only reason they ever get a conviction is probably because a lot of lawyers are even
stupider than they are. They can kiss my yellow hairy ass.
edit on 9-3-2011 by mrnotobc because: (no reason given)