Iowa Supreme Court: Speed Cameras Did Not Violate Due Process Amendment

 
--
ɐ‾nsǝɹ Just one click away from the end of the Internet

Another article

quite a difference in reports

Could one of these be more biased than the other? Reminds of the way the old Pravda under Stalin would have reported a race between the Russian Ambassador and the American Ambassador. They would have stated the Russian came in second while the American finished next-to-last.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Appearances

What appears to be biased is the court....

More laws needed

And another law will probably be passed stating "if driver of said vehicle cannot be identified, all fines will be the responsibility of the legal owner of said vehicle", or some such legal doublespeak.

--
I never get lost, but I do explore new territory every now and then.

No,

tomturtle wrote:

Appearances: What appears to be biased is the court....

The comment was regarding the published reports of the same set of facts:

Fact: A case was brought before the court stating the cameras violated the Due Process amendment.

Fact: The court ruled the cameras did not violate the Amendment.
Observation: The Newspaper report does not align with the facts in that the complainant did not win his case and sided with the money-grubbing cities that used cameras to fleece unsuspecting motorists that failed to stop before encroaching intersections.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

laws already exist

KenSny wrote:

And another law will probably be passed stating "if driver of said vehicle cannot be identified, all fines will be the responsibility of the legal owner of said vehicle", or some such legal doublespeak.

In some states with red light cameras, the law states that the driver, not the vehicle’s owner, is liable for the ticket. But some like New York treat red light camera violations like parking citations, thus making registered owners responsible without regard to who was driving. In states where the driver — and not necessarily the owner — is responsible, if the owner was not driving at the time of the violation, he/she can fill out an affidavit, swearing that he/she was not driving when the violation occurred.

Look at
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/laws/automated_enforcement/e...