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?