[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Kamala Harris, reparations, and guaranteed income Did Mudboy Slim finally kill this place? "Why Young Americans Are Not Taught about Evil" "New Rules For Radicals — How To Reinvent Kamala Harris" "Harris’ problem: She’s a complete phony" Hurricane Beryl strikes Bay City (TX) Who Is ‘Destroying Democracy In Darkness?’ ‘Kamalanomics’ is just ‘Bidenomics’ but dumber Even The Washington Post Says Kamala's 'Price Control' Plan is 'Communist' Arthur Ray Hines, "Sneakypete", has passed away. No righT ... for me To hear --- whaT you say ! "Walz’s Fellow Guardsmen Set the Record Straight on Veep Candidate’s Military Career: ‘He Bailed Out’ " "Kamala Harris Selects Progressive Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as Running Mate" "The Teleprompter Campaign" Good Riddance to Ismail Haniyeh "Pagans in Paris" "Liberal groupthink makes American life creepy and could cost Democrats the election". "Enter Harris, Stage Lef"t Official describes the moment a Butler officer confronted the Trump shooter Jesse Watters: Don’t buy this excuse from the Secret Service Video shows Trump shooter crawling into position while folks point him out to law enforcement Eyewitness believes there was a 'noticeable' difference in security at Trump's rally Trump Assassination Attempt We screamed for 3 minutes at police and Secret Service. They couldn’t see him, so they did nothing. EYEWITNESS SPEAKS OUT — I SAW THE ASSASSIN CRAWLING ACROSS THE ROOF. Video showing the Trump Rally shooter dead on the rooftop Court Just Nailed Hillary in $6 Million FEC Violation Case, 45x Bigger Than Trump's $130k So-Called Violation 2024 Republican Platform Drops Gun-Rights Promises Why will Kamala Harris resign from her occupancy of the Office of Vice President of the USA? Scroll down for records/details Secret Negotiations! Jill Biden’s Demands for $2B Library, Legal Immunity, and $100M Book Deal to Protect Biden Family Before Joe’s Exit AI is exhausting the power grid. Tech firms are seeking a miracle solution. Rare Van Halen Leicestershire, Donnington Park August 18, 1984 Valerie Bertinelli Cameo If you need a Good Opening for black, use this. "Arrogant Hunter Biden has never been held accountable — until now" How Republicans in Key Senate Races Are Flip-Flopping on Abortion Idaho bar sparks fury for declaring June 'Heterosexual Awesomeness Month' and giving free beers and 15% discounts to straight men Son of Buc-ee’s co-owner indicted for filming guests in the shower and having sex. He says the law makes it OK. South Africa warns US could be liable for ICC prosecution for supporting Israel Today I turned 50! San Diego Police officer resigns after getting locked in the backseat with female detainee Gazan Refugee Warns the World about Hamas Iranian stabbed for sharing his faith, miraculously made it across the border without a passport! Protest and Clashes outside Trump's Bronx Rally in Crotona Park Netanyahu Issues Warning To US Leaders Over ICC Arrest Warrants: 'You're Next' Will it ever end? Did Pope Francis Just Call Jesus a Liar? Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) Updated 4K version There can never be peace on Earth for as long as Islamic Sharia exists The Victims of Benny Hinn: 30 Years of Spiritual Deception. Trump Is Planning to Send Kill Teams to Mexico to Take Out Cartel Leaders The Great Falling Away in the Church is Here | Tim Dilena Status: Not Logged In; Sign In Corrupt Government See other Corrupt Government Articles Title: CORRUPT CITY GOVERNMENT: LT Carol Johnson, Dayton Ohio Police Officer Helps To Enforce Fines Without Trials Source: [None] URL Source: [None] Published: Jan 8, 2014 Author: A K A Stone Post Date: 2014-01-08 14:15:52 by A K A Stone Keywords: None Views: 29382 Comments: 32 I received a letter in the mail claiming that I was speeding. One of those speed cameras. They want me to send them $110.00 to them. They say I have to do that in order to go to receive a trial. I called this Lieutenant Carol Johnson. She said she would waive part of the money and that I needed to pay them $85.00 to receive a court hearing. She called this bond. This isn't right you all know that. Her phone number at Dayton Police headquarters is 937-333-1084. How do you fine folks suggest fighting this. Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread   Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2. #2. To: nolu chan (#0) he Mansfield News Journal reports that seven attorneys with clients challenging $100 speeding citations have combined their cases into a single lawsuit. The more than 60 plaintiffs include nearby residents, out-of-state drivers and three businesses. The lawsuit charges that camera speeding ticket enforcement is unconstitutional because of lack of due process; that the village didn't follow state public notice requirements, and that rules governing Ohio mayor's courts weren't followed. Some drivers claim they were ticketed when they weren't even speeding since the cameras went into operation in March. "There is no indication as to how these cameras are kept up or how they are calibrated," said attorney Cassandra Mayer, who added that the system makes it difficult to appeal the citations. The village has denied any wrongdoing and said those suing don't have legal standing. Mayer said the Lucas lawsuit is similar to one against the Cincinnati-area village of Elmwood Place that led to a judge's order against camera use there this year. Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman ruled in March that Elmwood Place's camera ordinance was unconstitutional and unenforceable, and blasted speeding camera enforcement as "a scam" that was stacked against the motorists. A similar lawsuit was filed against the village of New Miami near Hamilton in southwest Ohio. Other Ohio courts, including the state Supreme Court, have upheld use of the cameras. Supporters of traffic cameras say they are tools for stretching law enforcement resources to make communities safer. Read more: http://www.wlwt.com/news/local-news/drivers-sue-second-ohio-village-over-speed-camera-tickets/-/9837878/22448602/-/14ols5bz/-/index.html#ixzz2ppvkS5nl Do you have any idea where to get a copy of these lawsuits. So I can cut and paste.? A K A Stone  posted on  2014-01-08   14:24:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   Replies to Comment # 2. #3. To: A K A Stone (#2) Link Judge orders Elmwood Place speed cameras confiscated Village, camera maker found in contempt By Andrew Setters WLWT News UPDATED 11:43 AM EDT Jun 28, 2013 Drivers in Elmwood Place can say goodbye to the speed cameras. Not only have they been shut down for good by Judge Robert Ruehlman, but he’s ordered them to be hauled off the street and impounded. Both sides in the contentious legal battle over the speed cameras were back before Ruehlman for a contempt hearing Thursday, where the judge ruled that Elmwood Place and the speed camera contractor Optotraffic were in contempt of court. Back in March, Ruehlman found the speed cameras unconstitutional. He essentially ordered the cameras shut down, the speed camera ticketing program shut down, and ordered that the outstanding tickets did not have to be paid. On Thursday, Ruehlman found that his order was violated in several ways. First, the cameras were turned back on, although Elmwood Place Police Chief Bill Peskin testified that they were only used to collect speed and traffic data -- not to collect license plate information or issue new tickets. Peskin also testified that he told people that they did not have to pay their tickets when they came to the police station. “Many people did show up, trying to pay their citation to us,” Peskin said, “and we told them that the program was to be suspended and they didn’t have to pay the citation.” But tickets were never meant to be paid to the village. The traffic camera company collected the citations, and apparently continued to collect money sent in after the judge’s March order. There was testimony in court that some $48,000 was collected, with a percentage of that money passed on to the village per the speed camera contract. Optotraffic did not have a representative in court Thursday. Attorney Mike Allen, who is part of the team fighting the speed cameras, called the cameras a “money grab.” “This offends me as a citizen, it offends me as a lawyer, it offends me on behalf of my clients,” said Allen. To make sure his order was not violated further, Ruehlman ordered the Hamilton County Sheriff to seize the traffic cameras and all equipment that is part of the program and store it at the village’s expense. The equipment will be released when the $48,000 in improperly collected ticket money is returned. Another victory in court for the lawyers fighting the cameras came when the topic moved to a class action lawsuit. The judge allowed the lawyers to move forward with a class action suit that Mike Allen says would involve anyone who was given a ticket by the speed cameras back to the first day of operations in Elmwood Place. “We’re going to do everything in our power to get some money back in those people’s pockets because it’s just not right,” Allen said. The class action suit could take quite a bit of time to move through the courts. Hearings were scheduled out several months from now during today’s hearing. But with the Ohio House approving a ban on speed cameras earlier this week, Allen says, “I think the days of speed cameras in the village of Elmwood and in the state of Ohio are numbered. http://www.toledoblade.com/State/2013/11/13/Supporters-rally-behind-traffic-cameras-Ohio-considering-ban.html Published: Wednesday, 11/13/2013 Supporters rally behind traffic cameras; Ohio considering ban DAYTON DAILY NEWS COLUMBUS — Red light and speed camera supporters today urged state lawmakers against passing a bill that would ban the cameras in Ohio, and Sen. Kevin Bacon, R-Columbus, said he plans to introduce legislation to regulate camera use. House Bill 69, which would ban traffic cameras except in school zones with an officer present, passed the Ohio House in June in a bipartisan vote, 61-32. It’s been held up in the Senate State Government Oversight and Reform Committee, of which Bacon is a member. Bill sponsor Rep. Ron Maag, R-Lebanon, said the ban was inspired by cameras in Elmwood Place, north of Cincinnati, that a judge deemed “a scam motorists can’t win.” Bacon said his bill would set statewide standards for traffic cameras where there are none, loosely based on the city of Columbus’ method. Bacon said communities would have to conduct safety studies before installing cameras, inform the public of the cameras’ locations and purpose and provide safety data for intersections with cameras. Law enforcement officials and the Traffic Safety Coalition, an advocacy group funded in part by traffic camera companies, insist the cameras primary goal is safety and released an online video calling for reforms instead of a ban. Opponents say the cameras, which issue civil citations to the owner of the offending vehicle, infringe on Ohioans’ right to due process and presume guilt instead of innocence. Bacon said his bill will require local law enforcement to review citations and allow Ohioans to appeal them. Currently, cities contract with out-of-state camera companies to issue citations by mail. Dayton officials say cameras have reduced the number of crashes, citywide, 50 percent since 2003. Red light and speed cameras generated $3.7 million in revenue for the city in 2012. Springfield issued 6,638 citations in 2012 and generated $287,784 from paid tickets. Springfield Police Sgt. Brett Bauer said Tuesday the cameras improve safety and removing them would result in more crashes. “Hundreds die on Ohio roadways every year,” Bauer said. “There’s technology that allows us to reduce those crashes — technology that’s working. There’s no reason to ban them in our state.” http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=130_HB_69 As Passed by the House 130th General Assembly Regular Session 2013-2014 Am. H. B. No. 69 Representatives Maag, Mallory Cosponsors: Representatives Adams, J., Becker, Blessing, Buchy, Dovilla, Hood, Huffman, Milkovich, Ramos, Burkley, Conditt, Johnson, Lynch, Reece, Retherford, Roegner, Terhar, Thompson, Young Speaker Batchelder A BILL To enact section 4511.095 and to repeal sections 4511.092 and 4511.094 of the Revised Code to prohibit the use of traffic law photo-monitoring devices by municipal corporations, counties, townships, and the State Highway Patrol to detect traffic signal light and speed limit violations, except in certain circumstances. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF OHIO: Section 1. That section 4511.095 of the Revised Code be enacted to read as follows: Sec. 4511.095. (A) Section 34 of Article II, Ohio Constitution, provides that laws may be passed providing for the comfort, health, safety and general welfare of all employees. The general assembly finds these ends will be served by enacting legislation that prohibits the use of traffic law photo-monitoring devices. Therefore, in furtherance of the ends provided in Section 34 of Article II, Ohio Constitution, the general assembly hereby enacts this section of the Revised Code. (B) As used in this section: (1) "Local authority" means a municipal corporation, county, or township. (2) "Traffic law photo-monitoring device" means an electronic system consisting of a photographic, video, or electronic camera and a means of sensing the presence of a motor vehicle that automatically produces photographs, videotape, or digital images of the vehicle or its license plate. (C) (1) Except as provided in division (C)(2) of this section, no local authority or the state highway patrol, utilizing either its own employees, those of another public entity, or those of a private entity, shall use a traffic law photo-monitoring device to determine compliance with, or to detect a violation of, section 4511.13 or 4511.21 of the Revised Code or a substantially equivalent municipal ordinance or county or township resolution. (2) A local authority may use a traffic law photo-monitoring device to determine compliance with, or to detect a violation of, section 4511.21 of the Revised Code or a substantially equivalent municipal ordinance or county or township resolution within a school zone during school recess and while children are going to or leaving school during opening or closing hours only if a law enforcement officer employed by the local authority is present at the location of the traffic law photo-monitoring device. Section 2. That sections 4511.092 and 4511.094 of the Revised Code are hereby repealed. http://www.the-daily-record.com/local%20news/2013/10/09/ohio-senate-deliberating-over-red-light-camera-ban Ohio Senate deliberating over red light camera ban By MARC KOVAC Dix Capital Bureau Published: October 9, 2013 4:00AM COLUMBUS -- The Ohio Senate began its deliberations Tuesday on legislation that would ban the use of most monitoring cameras to catch drivers running red lights or speeding. House Bill 69 would allow cameras in school zones when an officer is present but would block cities, counties, townships and the state highway patrol from installing them to issue tickets to other unsuspecting motorists. Reps. Ron Maag (R-Lebanon) and Dale Mallory (D-Cincinnati), the primary sponsors of the legislation, said local governments are taking advantage of residents, using the cameras as a means to fill their coffers while providing inadequate legal recourse for appeals. "Localities have created a scheme that circumvents the criminal justice system and causes serious due process concerns in order to generate revenue quickly," Maag said. HB 69 passed the Ohio House on a bipartisan vote of 64-32 shortly before lawmakers left town for their summer recess. The Senate's State Government Oversight and Reform Committee had its first hearing on the bill Tuesday morning. Law enforcement and other groups are opposing the legislation, saying red light cameras have cut down on traffic accidents. They say local communities should have discretion in determining whether to use the monitoring systems. "The basic tenants of home rule provide cities the right to use them to enforce traffic safety laws if they choose," the Ohio Municipal League, the Fraternal Order of Police of Ohio and other groups said in a released statement after the House's vote on the bill. "We are committed to defeating this bill and hope senators and the governor will join us." Senators on Tuesday asked whether HB 69 would block law enforcement from using cameras as part of other criminal investigations, whether the sponsors would be open to more regulation of the cameras rather than an outright ban and whether the cameras should be allowed at intersections with high accident rates. But Maag and Mallory said the existing system is too flawed to salvage. "No amount of regulation can change the fact that localities have manipulated the system to generate revenue," Maag said. "The camera program in this state is an egregious violation of due process and has far overreached its intended purpose." Marc Kovac is the Dix Capital Bureau Chief. Email him at mkovac@dixcom.com or on Twitter at OhioCapitalBlog. link PDF GARY PRUIETT, et al., Plaintiffs v. VILLAGE OF ELMWOOD, et al. Defendants COURT OF COMMON PLEAS HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO Case Number: A1209235 Judge Robert P. Ruehlman DECISION 7 pages [Excerpt at pp. 5-7] [5] DECISION The Court finds that the ordinance fails 10 provide due process guarantees to any person receiving a Notice of Liability, from The Village of Elmwood Place. Revised Code 4511.094 requires that traffic law photo-monitoring devices to enforce traffic laws cannot be used in a village, unless a sign is erected within that village, warning motorists that such a monitoring device is operating. The Chief of the Elmwood Place Police Department testified that it was possible for a motorist to enter the village and go through a speed enforcement area without ever passing a warning sign. Furthermore, when a speed monitoring device records a violation, a motorist is mailed a Notice of Liability. The violation is based on a report and a photograph from the speed monitoring unit. The report contains the speed of the vehicle indicating that the vehicle was traveling faster than the speed limit. The photograph shows the car and its license plate number. The owner of the vehicle is then sent a Notice of Liability and is told to pay a civil penalty of $105.00. If the owner of the vehicle wants to contest the liability, he or she must pay $25.00 to the Village of Elmwood and request a hearing before a hearing officer and there is no assurance that the fee will be returned if the appeal is successful. However, the hearing is nothing more than a sham! The so called witness for Elmwood Place testifies from a report produced by the company that owns the speed monitoring unit. This witness has no personal knowledge of the speeding violation and therefore, their testimony is based solely on hearsay. The accused motorist has no ability to cross-examine the witness because the witness was not present when - - - [6] the violation occurred. There is no opportunity to obtain any discovery about the device or to subpoena any witnesses that may have knowledge of the device. In fact, the device is calibrated once a year; even though it may have been subjected to 12 months of varying amounts of rain, snow, sun, storms, ice, wind and lightning. Moreover, the device was not calibrated by a certified Police Officer, but rather it was calibrated by Optotraffic, the corporation that owns the device. Remember, Optotraffic has a financial stake in this game. I used the term "game" because Elmwood Place is engaged in nothing more than a high-tech game of 3 CARD MONTY. It is a scam that the motorists can't win. The entire case against the motorist is stacked because the speed monitoring device is calibrated and controlled by Optotraffic. Remember, Optotraffic had already received approximately $500,000.00 at the time of the January 9tll, 2013 hearing, before this court. To compound this total disregard for due process, Elmwood Place has another scheme up its sleeve. If a motorist tries to convince a hearing officer that he or she was not the driver of the offending vehicle, the ordinance requires that the owner making such a claim provide the name and address of the driver of the vehicle. If the driver was the owner's spouse, the ordinance requires the owner to testify against his or her spouse, in violation of the spousal immunity statute Revised Code 2917.02 (D). The Court renders Judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs and finds that the ordinance is invalid and unenforceable. A pennanent injunction is granted to the Plaintiffs prohibiting further enforcement of the ordinance, by the Defendants. Court costs, other reasonable expenses and attorney fees are to be assessed against the Defendants. - - - [7] BOND Civil Rule 65 ( C ) provides that an injunction is not operative until the Plaintiffs post a bond to cover any potential damages that may be sustained by the Defendants, if it is finally decided that the injunction should not have been granted. Since the Defendants have stated that the goal of the ordinance was not to raise revenue, but rather to increase compliance with speed limits, the generation of revenue is not an issue for the Defendants. Therefore, the surety is set in the nominal amount 0[$1.00. JUDGE ROBERT P. RUEHLMAN COURT OF COMMON PLEAS HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO nolu chan  posted on  2014-01-08 17:55:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   #4. To: A K A Stone (#2) I would try calling the office of attorney Michael K. Allen. His office has litigated the specific issue and won. I have no knowledge of Michael K. Allen other than what I have read in looking at this speed camera issue. You appear to describe the same process (or lack of due process) which has been held unlawful. FWIW, my opinion is that Judge Ruehlman has it correctly decided. Michael K. Allen & Associates Michael K. Allen & Associates 810 Sycamore Street Floor 5 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Phone: 513-334-0209 Toll Free: 800-590-6537 Fax: 513-338-1828 Cincinnati Law Office Map Suburban North Office: 5181 Natorp Blvd, Suite 210 Mason, OH 45040 Phone: 513-445-9600 Map and Directions Columbus Office: 222 East Town Street, 2nd Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215 Map and Directions Visit our blog for updated information on the speeding tickets for Elmwood Place. If you have paid a citation and wish to receive additional information about the Elmwood Place Speed Camera Litigation, you can contact us at 513-549-0320 or at elmwood@mkallenlaw.com. Please be provide your name, address, phone number, email address, and citation number. If you need immediate assistance, please contact our regular office numbers. (Please note: the use of this number or email address does not create an attorney-client relationship, and confidential or time sensitive information should not be sent through this phone number or email address.) News: Michaal K. Allen & Associates has opened a new office in Mason to better serve clients in Warren County and Butler County. Associate attorneys Thomas Longano, Kip Guinan, and Philip Heimlich in our Main Office each served as Assistant Hamilton County Prosecutors before joining our firm. Associate attorney Bryan R. Perkins served as a police officer and Hamilton County Public Defender before joining our firm. In the Suburban North Office, J. Adam Engel, Of Counsel, is a former Felony Prosecutor who established the appellate division in the Warren County Prosecuting Attorney's Office. Together, we offer our clients more than 100 years of combined experience in the practice of criminal law. We have defended thousands of clients against criminal charges, and we handle each case with the same professionalism and determined resolve. We believe that every person who is accused of a crime has a right to a zealous defense, and that is exactly what we provide for each client we serve. For a strong defense, contact one of our law offices in Cincinnati, Ohio or in Mason, Ohio. http://www.mkallenlaw.com/Criminal-Defense/Traffic-Violations/ Traffic Violations Providing A Strong Defense Against Traffic Violations Under Ohio law, each traffic violation is assigned a certain point value depending on the severity of the offense. The accumulation of too many points on your driving record can ultimately lead to the suspension of your driver's license. The loss of your right to drive can have a serious impact on your personal life, your job and your parental responsibilities. If you have received a citation, don't think that your only option is to pay the fine and take the points. At the Cincinnati based law firm of Michael K. Allen & Associates, we have helped clients throughout Southwest Ohio to successfully challenge a wide variety of traffic violations from running a red light to vehicular felonies. [...] Speak to a Lawyer 24/7 If you are concerned about a traffic charge, or multiple traffic violations, contact our office today. You can speak to an attorney at any time, day or night, for sound advice about your legal issue. For assistance in Hamilton County, call the Cincinnati Office at 513-334-0209 or contact us toll free at 800-590-6537. You may also contact us by e-mail. For assistance in Warren County, Butler County, Clermont County, or elsewhere in Ohio, call the Mason office at 513-445-9600. You may also contact the office by email. http://www.mkallenlaw.com/Disclaimer.shtml Disclaimer The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. nolu chan  posted on  2014-01-08 17:57:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply   End Trace Mode for Comment # 2. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register]  Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com