Speed Monitoring Violation

C

CarvinAbuser

New Member
I received a speed monitoring citation in the mail from the township of Forest Heights. It didn't come from county or state police. I'm trying to figure out if it's legit (pay the $40 fine) or if I should ignore it. Anyone have any experience with this? Thanks
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Sure is. Lots of smaller govt entities, especially ones like Forest Heights with a huge amount of commuter pass-through traffic, have discovered the joys of automated enforcement.

http://www.mddriversalliance.org/2011/01/forest-heights-speed-camera.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/18/AR2011011805971.html

Now, the one above is interesting. We know that MD state law regarding school zones says specifically shall not be set up just for cameras. But look at this quote, from an SHA official.

" Tom Hicks, director of the Maryland State Highway Administration's traffic and safety office, said Forest Heights met all setup requirements before installing the cameras, including establishing a half-mile school zone in the area."

Which says that they didnt feel the need to have any school zones on 210 til they could make money from it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/07/AR2010070702974.html

"McHale and some other business owners and residents say they are frustrated that the town ignored recommendations -- although not mandates -- by the Maryland State Highway Administration not to install the cameras on a hill or near traffic signals, highway ramps or speed-transition zones, as the two cameras are.

But town officials said they followed all SHA-required guidelines when installing the cameras this spring, including creating a school zone on both sides of the highway and spending $10,000 on a feasibility study that determined the location as adequate because of high traffic volume."

Gotta love it when they can even brag about blowing off state law, and nobody calls them on it.
 
dave1959

dave1959

Active Member
CarvinAbuser said:
I received a speed monitoring citation in the mail from the township of Forest Heights. It didn't come from county or state police. I'm trying to figure out if it's legit (pay the $40 fine) or if I should ignore it. Anyone have any experience with this? Thanks
Click to expand...


Don't pay it, let us all know how that works for you...
 
RPMDAD

RPMDAD

Well-Known Member
Not sure if they still do but at one point in time Forest Heights had it's own PD.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Oh, by all means pay. Unless you can prove you were not the driver, of course. But doing that means at least a half day in court, which for most folks will cost more than $40.
 
RPMDAD

RPMDAD

Well-Known Member
Requesting Trial: Speed Monitoring System Citations
To request a trial for a Forest Heights Police Department Speed Monitoring System Citations you must return the notice, unpaid, to:

Town of Forest Heights
PO Box 824157
Philadelphia, PA 19182-4157

The bottom of the violation notice must be completed in its entirety, to include your signature and you must check the box next to the statement indicating that you are contesting the citation and requesting a court hearing. A notice of trial date and location will be mailed to you. If you do not receive a notice for trial or receive a second warning you may contact the Speed Monitoring System Call Center at (301) 552-6045. Only the staff at the Call Center is authorized to discuss Speed Monitoring System matters. The Police Department's Administrative Offices will not be able to give you information about your citation.

If you fail to request a trial date or pay your citation your vehicle may be flagged and registration renewal may be prohibited. You cannot dispute these citations by telephone or in person. You must follow the instructions on the back of the citation.

http://www.forestheightsmd.gov/faq.aspx?TID=38
 
H

Hodr

Guest
RPMDAD said:
You cannot dispute these citations by telephone or in person. You must follow the instructions on the back of the citation.
Click to expand...

That's a hell of a thing to add, is it even legal? Can they just add any stipulation they want, like you have to mail the dispute in a purple envelope and any court fees they assess have to paid in trident layers gum?

This isn't a contract, or an agreement between parties, it's a mandate from someone who has presumed authority over you. If they are forcing you to do something, it better be supported in law.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Hodr said:
That's a hell of a thing to add, is it even legal? Can they just add any stipulation they want, like you have to mail the dispute in a purple envelope and any court fees they assess have to paid in trident layers gum?

This isn't a contract, or an agreement between parties, it's a mandate from someone who has presumed authority over you. If they are forcing you to do something, it better be supported in law.
Click to expand...

Localities must pass or have passed in Annapolis, an ordinance dictating how the local program will run.

http://www.thebaynet.com/articles/0315/board-gives-cops-green-light-on-speed-cams.html


"A Maryland law governs the criteria for “photographic speed enforcement in school zones.” Passage of a local ordinance is required. While utilization of the cameras may begin on county roads upon passage of the ordinance, a six-month study would be required to implement the use on state roads."
 
B

BernieP

Resident PIA
Hodr said:
That's a hell of a thing to add, is it even legal? Can they just add any stipulation they want, like you have to mail the dispute in a purple envelope and any court fees they assess have to paid in trident layers gum?

This isn't a contract, or an agreement between parties, it's a mandate from someone who has presumed authority over you. If they are forcing you to do something, it better be supported in law.
Click to expand...

Notice the address is in Philadelphia. It's a private enterprise acting as the collection agent for the government. If that's the way the town wants their system to work, that's the way they had the ordinance and contracts worded.
Like any good industry, they have lobbyists and a sales force that can dazzle politicians with the best of them.
Don't worry, they are doing this (a) "for the children" and/or (b) "for your safety".

Please enclose check or money order payable to "We the People" in the amount of $40, plus fees and self addressed stamped postage.
 
LightRoasted

LightRoasted

If I may ...
If I may ...
glhs837 said:
Oh, by all means pay. Unless you can prove you were not the driver, of course.
Click to expand...
You do not need to prove you were not the driver, just need to sign an affidavit saying you weren't the driver. Notice, also, in the law, there is nothing compelling anyone to name the person who was the actual driver. This is a "he said, she said" legal thing. The burden is on the municipality to prove you are the driver. They just sent a picture of a car allegedly going too fast in a "special" zone to the owner of that car. So, send them a letter saying that it wasn't you. They can't prove it, so, ticket dismissed.

http://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/2010/transportation/title-21/subtitle-8/21-809

(1) The District Court may consider in defense of a violation:
(i) Subject to paragraph (2) of this subsection, that the motor vehicle or the registration plates of the motor vehicle were stolen before the violation occurred and were not under the control or possession of the owner at the time of the violation;
(ii) Subject to paragraph (3) of this subsection, evidence that the person named in the citation was not operating the vehicle at the time of the violation; and
(iii) Any other issues and evidence that the District Court deems pertinent.
......
(3) To satisfy the evidentiary burden under paragraph (1)(ii) of this subsection, the person named in the citation shall provide to the District Court a letter, sworn to or affirmed by the person and mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, that:
(i) States that the person named in the citation was not operating the vehicle at the time of the violation; and
(ii) Includes any other corroborating evidence.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
And if you can't back that up with proof, you get nailed for perjury in addition to the speeding citation. and perjury in MD can (although I admit this is unlikely in a speeding ticket case) get you a 10 year prison sentence. So, unless you can back up that affidavit with some facts I would advise against it. And if you think that they wont require you to back that up with proof, I think you are being unrealistic. Go get an automated citation, I'll be glad to find the nearest speed camera for you, and try your theory. What do you have to lose?
 
B

BernieP

Resident PIA
If I may....
LightRoasted said:
(The District Court may consider in defense of a violation:evidence that the person named in the citation was not operating the vehicle at the time of the violation; and
( Any other issues and evidence that the District Court deems pertinent.
Click to expand...

In other words, you can try, but from what I've seen of court systems and traffic tickets, good f_ing luck getting it thrown out.
If you look at the news, these systems have been thrown out in some areas because of serious issues and yet other jurisdictions have no problems.
Where people have tried to attack the accuracy, judges have denied access to "private" data.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
That assumes going the speed limit will ensure you don't get a citation from these machines. Not really a thing you can state for sure. You can't always get the self test logs, nor will they allow you to question the person who's job it is to sign off on those. And since the vendors have removed the extra decimals from the timestamped photos, there is no way to check the accuracy yourself.
 
3

3CATSAILOR

Well-Known Member
Yeah, there's a little town just north of the Redskin's stadium ( I am not sure the name of it) which has NO school zones any where around. The "speed" camera is "hidden behind a bush." But, yet they are getting away with it because the little town has Code Home Rule, whereas they created their own laws. This happens to be the same thing that St. Mary's is trying to do.
 
3

3CATSAILOR

Well-Known Member
A LEO told me one time that if you were not driving, you can sign an affidavit stipulating that you were not the driver. But, someone else said if you do that, you still have to "rat out" who the driver is. I am not sure how true either of these are. By the way, what ever happen to the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments? How about the one that says you are innocent before proven guilty? The cameras assume you are automatically guilty. And then, if you want to challenge it, you have the potential of court costs. What if the judge you are against is brainwashed in to thinking the cameras are "all about it..... you know .......( safety )? If the judge thinks it all a safety issue, how much do you think the judge will listen to your case? How about if the judge has stock in the camera companies? Should a sitting judge hear cases when he has stock in the companies that produce revenue from automated enforcement?
 
Goldenhawk

Goldenhawk

Well-Known Member
CarvinAbuser said:
Thanks for the responses.

It seems that LightRoasted is correct, except I would have to defend myself in court according to this.
http://www.mddriversalliance.org/2014/08/district-court-grudgingly-accepts.html
Click to expand...

According to this link posted yesterday, you do NOT have to "rat out" the driver, no matter what the outdated paperwork on the form stipulates. But it will probably take a visit to see the judge to convince him of this, because they don't like to let anyone out of that valuable fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top