The runway on Nauru is 5200 feet long, the Pacific Ocean at both ends leaving no room for greaser landings. The airport terminal is barely 100 yards from the runway, and it seems that half the population of Nauru came to watch the arrival of the daily flights. I soon found out why this was such an attraction.
Through the window of the crew bus, I saw the Boeing 737 curve around the back of the island on close base leg and then suddenly there it was on short final with full flap and smoke streaming from both tailpipes. At 130 knots, it smacked down right on the 1000-foot marker with a flash of blue smoke from skidding tyres, while at the same time the top surfaces of the wings came alive with ground and flight spoilers. Simultaneously, the reversers opened wide with a shattering roar of increasing power. Now that was a man’s aeroplane.
A few months later, I had a command on the 737 and by the time I moved on ten years later, I had flown over 7000 hours on type. There were many exciting times flying the 737 – too many to mention here – except perhaps one that often repeated itself.
Nauru was a tiny phosphate-rich island with lots of money. There was no shortage of new cars, powerful motor bikes and beer, and inevitably each weekend would see the death of young men wiping themselves out in vehicle accidents caused by speed and alcohol. A favourite sport would be to race a departing 737, either in a car or on a motor bike. The main road around the island paralleled the runway by 50 yards and this gave a mile of straight but narrow road before it curved away from the surrounding ocean reef.
These obese young bloods (Editor’s note: According to the World Health Organization, Nauru is the world’s fattest country, with an average BMI of 34 to 35) had 1500cc Honda Goldwings and other equally massive motor bikes. They would cruise around the island playing loud rock and roll music from loud-speakers mounted on the bikes or on Land Rovers.
Occasionally, when the police were looking the other way, one would see a Nauruan sitting astride his Goldwing abeam the threshold of runway 12, revving the engine while waiting for the departing 737 to take off. Crash helmets were unheard of, and a T-shirt, shorts and sandals the only protection from a 100mph crash.
Backtracking the departure runway you knew that the race was about to begin. Turning to line up, you would see a Nauruan on his big bike casually waiting by the side of the runway. Passengers would wave from their windows and as the brakes were released, the Nauruan on his Goldwing would open up to full throttle to race us down the runway. At full thrust of 2.18 EPR, the ground trembled and spectators covered their ears to protect themselves from the incredible crackling roar which was the wonderful characteristic of the JT8D engines. A combined 31,000 pounds of thrust makes an awful lot of noise on a small island. With houses a few paces from the runway, noise abatement was for wimps.
It was quite a sight to see the Goldwing at full chat, with its rider head down, and burning rubber a few yards off our wing tip. At the 80 knot call, the Goldwing would be ahead of us by a nose but the game was well and truly over by rotate speed of 130 knots. It was good fun and few got hurt, although I often wondered how many of these riders nearly ended up in the Pacific Ocean as they negotiated the 45 degree bend in the road just a few yards from the end of the runway.
Following my retirement from airline flying at age 60, I have returned to visit Nauru on several occasions. The grunty Boeing 737-200 has been replaced by the quieter and bigger 737-400, but the motor bikes are still the big Goldwings and Yamahas – and now a little rusty from the salt spray of the Pacific rollers.
The headstones of their riders gradually fill the cemetery grounds.
Watching the DVR tonight, spotted a new car ad filmed at Nashville Superspeedway under the lights...same as my TV show and blog post, First Track Day, from July. The Kia Electric Turbo Hybrid ad is new in November. The Kia ad even copied The Dragonater's Adobe After Effects...excellent taste and marketing skilz.
Too bad US aautomakers are too busy exporting factories to Communist China to patronize dying racetracks in USA. Govt-owned NSS is now officially closed for business.
Sucking dick can get you out of an arrest in TN...ask Barbie Cummings, George W Bush and his lover Victor Ashe
Didn't the TeeVee Noos tell about the current Prohibition on alcohol in Tennessee and USSA? Do YOU know what to say or not during a traffic stop?
"Strictly speaking, a driver can register a BAC of 0.00% and still be convicted of a DUI. The level of BAC does not clear a driver when it is below the 'presumed level of intoxication.'"
—Tennessee Driver Handbook and Driver License Study Guide, 1990 to 2012
"One of the major defects in many methods of blood-alcohol analysis is the failure to identify ethanol to the exclusion of all other chemical compounds. Thus a client with other compounds in his blood or breath may have a high 'blood-alcohol' reading with little or no ethanol in his body. If you look at the warranties - it is sort of interesting - none of the breath machine manufacturers warrant these things to actually test blood alcohol."
—Lawrence Taylor, attorney at law, DUICENTER.COM, Drunk Driving Defense, 5th Edition (2000)
"Nearly 400 people were convicted of driving while intoxicated in the District since fall 2008 based on inaccurate results from breath test machines, and half of them went to jail, city officials said Wednesday. D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles said the machines were improperly adjusted by city police. The jailed defendants generally served at least five days, he said. Nickles's office has begun notifying the drivers, a move that immediately triggered at least one lawsuit against the District and could lead to requests for expungements, new trials and even deeper skepticism about the integrity of testing. The District's badly calibrated equipment would show a driver's blood-alcohol content to be about 20 percent higher than it actually was, Nickles said. All 10 of the breath test machines used by District police were wrong, he said. The problem occurred when the officer in charge of maintaining the machines improperly set the baseline alcohol concentration levels, Nickles said."
—Mary Pat Flaherty, Washington Post, 400 drunken-driving convictions in D.C. based on flawed test, official says, June 10, 2010
"Nancy Benoit also had a blood alcohol reading of .184, although Sperry said the blood alcohol and drug levels could be affected by the decomposition of her body. 'These (blood alcohol) results are not reliable for interpretation because the amount of alcohol in her system could have all come from the decomposition.'"
—Cindy Morley, Fayette Daily News, GBI: Chris Benoit's son was full of Xanax, July 18, 2007
The Tennessee DUI current law provides that a police officer who has probable cause to believe an individual is driving under the influence, they may request the person submit to a blood alcohol concentration test. If the person elects not to submit to the blood alcohol test they will be charged with a violation of the Tennessee implied consent law and will lose their driver's license for one year.
On May 20, 2011, the Tennessee legislature changed the DUI law starting in 2012. The new DUI law in Tennessee will require that anyone who has a prior DUI conviction, vehicular homicide due to intoxication conviction or aggravated vehicular homicide conviction or any person with a child under the age of 16 in the vehicle at the time, MUST submit to either a blood or breath test if they are believed to be driving under the influence. The new DUI law (HB 715 and SB 1270) states, in part:
“The test shall be performed in accordance with the procedure set forth in this section and shall be performed regardless of whether the driver does or does not consent to the test.”
The new DUI law in Tennessee raises constitutionality questions with regards to whether the forced blood alcohol tests would be admissible at trial. The 2012 DUI law has been submitted to the Governor and will go into effect on January 1, 2012.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39; Title 40 and Title 55, relative to driving under the influence.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 55-10-406(f), is amended by adding
the word "or" after subdivision (f)(1), by designating existing subdivision (f)(2) as (f)(4), and by adding the following new subdivisions (f)(2) and (f)(3):
(2) If a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that the driver of a
motor vehicle has committed a violation of § 55-10-401, § 39-13-213(a)(2) or § 39-13-218, and has been previously convicted of § 55-10-401, § 39-13-213(a)(2) or § 39-13-218, the officer shall cause the driver to be tested for the purpose of determining the alcohol or drug content of the driver's blood. The test shall be performed in accordance with the procedure set forth in this section and shall be performed regardless of whether the driver does or does not consent to the test.
(3) If a law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that the driver of a motor vehicle has committed a violation of § 55-10-401, § 39-13-213(a)(2) or § 39-13-218 and a passenger in the motor vehicle is a child under the age of sixteen (16), the officer shall cause the driver to be tested for the purpose of determining the alcohol or drug content of the driver's blood. The test shall be performed in accordance with the procedure set forth in this section and shall be performed regardless of whether the driver does or does not consent to the test.
SECTION 2. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 55-10-406(f)(2), is amended by
deleting from subdivision (f)(4) the language “(f)(1)” and substituting instead the language “(f)(1), (f)(2) and (f)(3).”
SECTION 3. This act shall take effect January 1, 2012, the public welfare requiring it.
"Let me start with law enforcement contacts with respect to traffic stops, for suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The Fifth amendment of the Bill of Rights states that we are not to be forced to incrimnate ourselves. The actual wording is, you cannot be compelled to be a witness against yourself. If you are stopped for suspicion of DUI, these are your rights regardless of the laws of your state. First of all, you are to deny having consumed any alcoholic beverages whatsoever. You are never to admit to having one or two drinks. If you admit to consuming even one drop of alcohol, you open the door to 'probable cause', allowing the police officer to search your car for open containers. Next, you are never to submit to a Field Sobriety Test. You are to refuse to do so. They cannot make you walk the line, they cannot make you balance or anything else. Now when you are arrested, you are to refuse to allow a blood-alcohol test, regardless of what state law 'requires', such as revocation of driving priveleges for a period of time. That's an attempt to compel you to be a witness against yourself. Supreme Court decisions in this area are very specific with regards to your rights as folows: Lefkowitz vs Turley, and the Fifth Amendment, provides that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, and permits him to refuse to any any other qustions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings."
—George Gordon Law Hour, The Policeman is not your friend - He is your adversary, October 30, 2007
"I saw two officers as before, who rode up to me, with their pistols in their hands, said God damn you stop, if go an Inch further, you are a dead Man, and swore if we did not turn in to that pasture, they would blow our brains out. Major Mitchel of the 5th Regt clapd his Pistol to my head, and said he was going to ask me some questions, if I did not tell the truth, he would blow my brains out. I told him I esteemed myself a man of truth, that he had stopped me on the highway, & made me a prisoner, I knew not by what right; I would tell him the truth; I was not afraid."
—Paul Revere, owner of RevereWare¨, sworn affidavit: "Memorandum on Events of April 18, 1775" (declassified Top Secret), while under arrest (and subsequent escape) from Redcoat martial-law traffic police at Minute Man National Historic Park, Paul Revere Capture Site, on the eve of the American Revolutionary War and kicking off the Battle of Lexington and Concord, against the army, navy and courts of King George III, heriditary dictator of England who attempted "gun control" by an Assault Weapons Ban of defensive 50-caliber muskets and cannon, Paul Revere's Ride, by David Hackett Fischer
"Mr. Speaker, my subject today is whether America is a police state. If we are, what are we going to do about it? Most police states, surprisingly, come about through the democratic process with majority support. The masses are easily led to believe that security and liberty are mutually exclusive, and demand for security far exceeds that for liberty. Our government already keeps close tabs on just about everything we do and requires official permission for nearly all of our activities. One might take a look at our Capitol for any evidence of a police state. We see: barricades, metal detectors, police, military soldiers at times, dogs, ID badges required for every move, vehicles checked at airports and throughout the Capitol. The people are totally disarmed, except for the police and the criminals. But worse yet, surveillance cameras in Washington are everywhere to ensure our safety. Like gun control, people control hurts law-abiding citizens much more than the law-breakers. Centralized control and regulations are required in a police state. Not only do we need a license to drive, but we also need special belts, bags, buzzers, seats and environmentally dictated speed limits. Or a policeman will be pulling us over to levy a fine, and he will be toting a gun for sure. Let's reject the police state."
—Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, MD (R-TX, 1988 Libertarian Party candidate for President, Landslide GOP candidate for president in 2008 and 2012), speech in House of Representatives, United States Congress, "Are We Doomed To Be a Police State?" June 27, 2002
Pigs love poo... The fallout from an incident involving a trooper pursuing, pulling over and detaining a speeding Miami police officer at gunpoint has escalated in a war of words on Internet sites, and has continued to bubble over with the defacing of a trooper’s car with gallons of human feces.
Maybe this is the proper police procedure to handle cops on the Dragon?
By David Ovalle and Diana Moskovitz
The Miami Herald
November 10, 2011
Miami Police officer Thomas Vokaty may have picked the wrong state trooper to pull over in an apparent retaliatory move in tensions between the two departments.
The trooper, identified as Cpl. Victor Luquis, has a brother Ronald Luquis, a sergeant in Miami Police's internal affairs division.
Luquis made a quick phone call. And pretty quickly, supervisors from both departments were involved. Sources close to the investigation said Luquis notified dispatch and called his brother.
The traffic stop — the trooper was not ticketed or arrested — was one of the latest actions in a back-and-forth feud between the Florida Highway Patrol and Miami police that started last month when Florida Highway Patrol trooper Donna Jane Watts drew her gun, handcuffed, then charged Miami Officer Fausto Lopez with reckless driving on Florida's Turnpike in Broward.
In her report, Watts wrote that Lopez was traveling at speeds in excess of 120 mph.
The incident, captured on video, has sparked furor among citizens, many upset at Lopez's alleged speed. It also brought anger from law enforcement officers who say Watts acted recklessly in drawing her weapon, yelling and handcuffing a fellow police officer.
In online law enforcement blog posts, Watts has been ridiculed and threatened. In recent days, somebody dumped feces on the patrol car of trooper Joe Sanchez, a former Miami commissioner. The car was parked in front of Sanchez's Miami home.
FHP adopts new motto
On Thursday, Miami interim Police Chief Manuel Orosa broke his silence on the events that have been roiling the department in recent weeks, and took a firm stand. He issued a formal warning to Vokaty, and tightened the department's policy for pulling over fellow law enforcement officers, mandating no traffic stops without approval from a supervisor and only if the targeted officer was involved in a felony.
Orosa's measures came two days after Vokaty, a 27-year-veteran, pulled over Luquis, in uniform and driving an FHP squad car, on Florida's Turnpike at Okeechobee Road despite "not having jurisdictional authority," according to a discipline report released Thursday.
Appearing at a routine morning roll call at Miami police headquarters, he tried to quell talk of tension between the agencies, stressing unity and a continued partnership.
In a later news release, Orosa said: "The recent traffic stop of an FHP trooper by one of our officers was an isolated incident, and his actions should not reflect negatively on the Miami Police Department or the professional men and women who work for us."
He added: "Additionally, I have attended roll calls and am pleased to say that all officers I've met with feel that the MPD and FHP are, and will always be, part of the greater law enforcement family in spite of the recent incidents."
FHP spokesman Sgt. Mark Wysocky agreed with Orosa, saying the recent incidents were isolated.
The initial traffic stop by Watts is being reviewed by FHP administration, Wysocky said, although Watts herself has not been suspended and is not under investigation. Watts was told several times by superiors the morning of Oct. 11 to back off after it was determined that she was following a speeding marked Miami police unit on Florida's Turnpike in Hollywood.
Watts did take some personal off, Wysocky said.
As for dumping human waste on Sanchez's squad car, Wysocky said "we're not accusing them."
The agency would not be investigating the incident further, he said earlier.
It was not clear whether Sanchez's home had security cameras mounted outside. "We were told there was no evidence,'' he said.
Vokaty will not be suspended, but he received a "record of formal counseling" for violating department policy.
Orosa said he has been in contact with FHP leaders since the initial incident "to keep the lines of communication open and ensure my commitment'' to the two agencies continuing to work together.
Miami Police and FHP conduct training, road blocks and other joint initiatives, he said.
"I look forward to our continued partnership for years to come," Orosa said in his statement.
Miami Herald staff writer Charles Rabin contributed to this report.
UPDATE: I highly recommend you take a look at the attitude of Florida cops with respect to this trooper and her enforcement of traffic laws on other LEO’s. This is an extremely instructive forum thread, and you should see it before they hide it from the public:
Back on October 30th, a Florida State Trooper actually pulled over a Miami Police Department officer in a marked squad car for traveling in excess of 120 miles per hour on the freeway, weaving in and out of traffic, and doing so without lights and sirens, ultimately executing a felony stop, which includes a drawn weapon and loud voice commands requiring the driver to exit the vehicle to and submit to handcuffing at gunpoint. It turns out, the MPD officer was on his way not to an urgent call, but an off-duty event at a school, with some “very important people” present. He was cited for misdemeanor reckless driving, and released, after a lengthy bitching out by the FHP trooper. You can bet your ass that if an average citizen were going 120 on the freeway and weaving in and out of traffic and failing to stop for 7 solid minutes of hot pursuit, he’d get a lot worse than a stint in cuffs and a stern talking to. He’d have his head caved in while the Fox news chopper circled overhead.
It appears that this incident is the culmination of a long-standing situation wherein MPD officers drive at crazy speeds on highways patrolled by the FHP, expecting what is known as “professional courtesy” from the troopers, meaning essentially that speeding laws simply don’t apply to Miami police officers like they do the rest of us. Apparently, Miami PD have worn out their welcome on the freeways of southern Florida and exhausted any “professional courtesy” the FHP was willing to extend.
The fallout from the event has become an even more interesting story than the unusual traffic stop itself. Police officers across the country, and especially the Miami Police Union, have severely criticized the Florida Highway Patrol officer’s actions, but beyond their stern official press release, and internet comments filled with righteous indignation and liberally seasoned with misogyny, they have resorted to some very juvenile retaliation in an effort to express their disgust for this violation of the “code.” In one instance, a load of human feces was spread all over an FHP trooper’s patrol car, and in another, a Miami PD officer pulled over and harassed (but did not cite) an FHP trooper as he was driving in Miami, although, that didn’t work out too well, when it turned out the trooper’s brother is a detective in the Internal Affairs division of the Miami PD. The feud is getting out of hand, and as incidents like this escalate, accompanied by heated rhetoric all over the police-focused blogosphere and social media sites, the Chief of Miami’s PD, Manuel Orosa told reporters at a recent press conference, “whatever issues may be out there have to stop, and stop now,” according to the Miami Herald.
For readers of CopBlock.org, this kind of reaction shouldn’t be surprising. After all, we have whole categories full of stories for this kind of double-standard, where the cops assume they are above the law, and get royally pissed whenever they are held to any sort of account, much less the same standards of behavior and compliance with the law they enforce on the rest of us. But this story is unique in the near universal consensus on the part of police officers across the country that the Florida trooper was in the wrong. Sometimes, when the police have to enforce the law against one of their own, there is substantial division in the LEO community, or at least an acknowledgment that the arrestee did something wrong, whether or not they agree with the collar. There seems to be almost no willingness to admit that the Miami cop was endangering the lives of everyone on that road, just because he was late for an *OFF DUTY* event. I’ve been pulled over for speeding before when I was late for work. I got a ticket and no sympathy whatsoever from the cop, and I sure as hell wasn’t going 120 mph.
The brazenness with which the LEO’s on PoliceOne, YouTube, and Big City Cops, for instance, assert that they ought to be entirely immune from any kind of restraint on their driving, regardless of where they are going or why is almost shocking, until you remember, these are the police. They typically recognize no authority but their own. However, that attitude is particularly ironic in light of recent events in Tucson, Arizona. Just a couple of days ago, a suspect managed to steal a police car and lead the cops and sheriff’s deputies on an 80+ mile high speed chase, on the freeway, at speeds in excess of 120 mph. Hmm. And last year, I wrote about this guy, who stole a cop car and drove recklessly around the city until he crashed into a bus and died as a result. Since that Miami PD officer did not at any point communicate with the FHP trooper via radio, she really had no reason not to assume a crime was in progress (and she was right).
Ultimately, what galls me most is the sense of entitlement to this double standard that pervades the law enforcement community, and the culture of back-scratching, covering up and outright dishonesty that goes along with it. Police can literally get away with murder, and their coworkers are loathe to do anything about it. Honest cops who do stand up and enforce the law against misbehaving fellow officers have their careers destroyed, or at the very least can expect to get no assistance or back-up if their lives are ever actually in danger. They’ll make no bones about it either, they’re happy to declare, out in the open for all to see, that their “brotherhood,” and loyalty to each other is far more important than actually obeying the laws they themselves are charged with enforcing on the rest of us. It absolutely creates corruption, fosters abuse of authority, and guarantees that the worst of the worst ascend to ever-higher positions within the force, while the good guys get run out of their jobs altogether.
Just look at the fiasco in New York City, where several officers are up on charges of corruption, including rampant ticket fixing and even covering up an aggravated assault by an officer. Far from being embarrassed by these cops “tarnishing the badge,” their fellow officers have been out in large numbers at the courthouse nearly every day to support these accused criminals, intimidating the press, and the prosecutor, and telling anyone who will listen that what they supposedly did was “no big deal,” a “courtesy,” and bizarrely, employing the Nuremberg defense, saying they were “just following orders.” Under the circumstances, how can anyone have any respect for the badge, or the men and women who wear it? I know I don’t.
I suspect City of Knoxville Muni Corp is conspiring with Commie Chinese Lasercraft/ATS to lose this case on purpose, as an end run around the state law banning 100% of redlight scamera tickets. Notice how KNS always censors the actual facts and law from its adverts, er, so-called news?
"Lasercraft is a member of the Public Safety Equipment PSE group of companies. Public Safety Equipment (Intl) Ltd, Registered Office, Yeadon, Leeds, England. Beijing Mag Science & Technology Development Corp, Beijing, China."
http://www.lasercraftinc.com
http://www.pse-intl.com
http://www.maggroup.org
"Redflex Group is based in South Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Redflex Holdings Limited was listed on the Australian Stock Exchange in January 1997. Redflex Traffic Systems Inc has contracts with more then 130 USA cities, and is the largest provider of digital red light and speed enforcement services in North America."
—Redflex.com
COP.
2. to steal; filch. 3. to buy (narcotics). 4. cop out, a. to avoid one's responsibility, the fulfillment of a promise, etc.; renege; back out. 5. cop a plea, a. to plead guilty or confess in return for receiving a lighter sentence. b. to plead guilty to a lesser charge; plea-bargain.
—Random House Unabridged Dictionary
"It is extremely easy to beat this type of ticket in court. Your easiest defense is to simply throw the ticket away. If it does not come with a return receipt that requires a signature, there is no proof that you actually got the ticket."
-Norman G. Fernandez, attorney, BikerLawBlog.com, free ebook How to Beat a Speeding Ticket - Photo RADAR
"You've got all these speed cameras here. In L.A. people would say, 'Why don't you just shoot them out?'"
-Jay Leno, BBC Top Gear (crowd cheers wildly)
Red light camera company sues a city because it is losing money without right on red citations.
Automated ticketing vendor American Traffic Solutions (ATS) filed suit Tuesday against Knoxville, Tennessee for its failure to issue tickets for turning right on a red light -- and that is costing the company a lot of money. A state law took effect in July banning the controversial turning tickets, but the Arizona-based firm contends the law should not apply to their legal agreement with the city, which anticipated the bulk of the money to come from this type of tickets.
Municipalities were disappointed in August when Attorney General Robert J. Cooper Jr shot down the argument that this statute somehow did not apply to existing contracts, writing that "the parties have no vested right in a particular level of revenue" (view opinion). ATS disagrees.
"Because of the uncertainty caused by the attorney general's opinion, Knoxville has been compelled to cease issuing citations to the owners of vehicles detected making illegal 'right turns on red' by traffic cameras based on the attorney general's opinion," ATS attorney C. Crews Townsend wrote. "In 2010, right-turn-on-red violations accounted for substantial fines collected by Knoxville pursuant to their respective ordinances. A portion of these fines were remitted to ATS pursuant to the agreement. This was a critical component of the agreement's consideration supporting the parties' contractual rights and obligations."
ATS bases its argument on the "legislative history" of the new law. Many friendly state lawmakers assured the company that a grandfather clause would be slipped into the bill. The final, adopted version contained no such language exempting existing photo enforcement programs from the law's provisions. ATS insists the lack of this provision is hurting the company's bottom line.
"Without a court order clarifying that Public Act 425 does not impact the agreement, the injury to ATS will remain significant, immediate and continuing," Townsend wrote. "If, as the attorney general has opined, Public Act 425 applies to existing contracts, including the agreement, then Public Act 425 has substantially impaired the agreement. Indeed, Knoxville has ceased prosecuting certain violations as required under the otherwise existing, valid, and enforceable agreement, and is causing ATS to lose substantial revenue."
ATS asked the Chancery Court for Knox County to declare the right turn law unconstitutional because it discriminates against traffic camera companies.
The vendor providing equipment for Knoxville's red-light camera enforcement program is suing the city because it no longer issues citations for improper right turns on red.
American Traffic Solutions Inc., based in Scottsdale, Ariz., filed the lawsuit Tuesday in Knox County Chancery Court. ATS has a five-year contract with Knoxville that was signed in 2009.
Tennessee lawmakers enacted Public Acts 425 this year, which since July 1 has banned issuing citations for an improper right turn on red if the only evidence is traffic camera video. While there were discussions among legislators about exempting existing contracts from the prohibition, that amendment did not make it into the final law.
Without that amendment, all cities across the state that had a contract with a red-light camera vendor had to cease issuing right-turn-on-red violations. The state attorney general in August issued an opinion stating the new law was constitutional and did not unlawfully impact existing contracts.
"Knoxville's decision has not been made in bad faith but is the result of the difficult position in which Knoxville has been placed in order to comply with Public Act 425," states the lawsuit.
"The statute inhibits Knoxville's ability to comply with the Agreement, a valid and enforceable contract and has caused ATS harm."
ATS's lawsuit basically asks the court to either declare Public Acts 425 to be unconstitutional because it impacts existing legal contracts with cities or to clarify that the law does not apply to existing agreements.
The legal filing also argues that the new law "irrationally disallows the use of photographic evidence to prosecute drivers who run red lights when turning right while allowing the use of photographic evidence to prosecute drivers who run red lights and continue straight through the intersection."
For Knoxville, the restriction on red-light violations for right turns on red has resulted in a nearly 90 percent drop in citations at the 14 intersections recording violations.
In Farragut, the new law has resulted in a nearly 50 percent reduction in citations, according to Ben Harkins, traffic enforcement manager for the town. Harkins said red-light camera citations have dropped from 2,812 issued in July, August, September and October of 2010 to 1,399 citations in the same time period this year,
Farragut has red-light cameras at four intersections. Those devices are supplied by RedFlex Traffic Systems.
Knoxville Police Department Capt. Gordon Catlett, who oversees the red-light camera enforcement program for the city, said red-light camera citations from August, September and October of 2010 totaled 30,078. For the same period this year, KPD has issued 3,224 citations based on the video evidence of a red-light camera.
"The big winners are the people who don't want to obey the law," Catlett said. "The big loser is the city of Knoxville, which loses its 50 percent margin."
The ATS contract with Knoxville does not specify a quota of monthly tickets, but includes a formula for sharing revenue from paid citations. Each violation carries a $50 fine. ATS gets 80 percent of all revenues up to $4,500 per camera per month. After revenues exceed $4,500, the money is split 50-50.
Knoxville has seen a significant reduction in revenues since passage of the law, according to Jim York, Knoxville finance director.
York said revenue for July, August and September from the red-light cameras has declined from $486,000 during that period in 2010 to $138,000 for the same months this year.
Catlett said that from Jan. 1, 2010, through Sept. 30, 2010, the city collected $1,417,020 in red-light camera revenues, but has seen collections drop to $740,689 for the same period this year. ATS' portion of red-light camera revenue for the same period has dropped from $2.085 million in 2010 to about $1.380 million this year.
Comments
Mr. Jacobs, You may want to recheck your facts. In the contract, with LaserCraft, (LaserCraft was purchased by A.T.S. last year), that was executed by then Mayor Haslam on February 3, 2009, in Exhibit “C” Titled “Maintenance”, In item # 12, it states; “At minimum, LaserCraft warrants and represents that seventy-five (75%) of all Potential Violations must be made available for prosecution.” Mr. Jacobs, that kind of looks like a quota requirement to me, what do you think? It does not say it’s a quota, but effectively it is a quota. It says that 75% of all violations that the system records, “must be made available for prosecution”, as in, a minimum of 75% of events recorded must receive citations according to the Contract.
Agreed, I talked with "Officer" Catlett and he is hands down one of the most ignorant and condescending people I've had the displeasure of dealing with. The man is nothing but a paid stooge for ATS. I don't mind paying a fine if I do something wrong but in my case ATS was mailing to the wrong address (One I've never even lived at!) and then charged me a $100 fine on top of the ticket and would refuse to drop it because of their mistake. Catlett and ATS are out for nothing but money and this lawsuit proves it. Personally, I got more choice words for Catlett but I'd rather not have my post removed.
I think the "must come to a complete stop" on a red turn actually makes things more danagerous. For example, you slow and are able to clearly see that you can safely go, but the gap is closing. Legally you have to stop completely while the gap continues to close, and when you are able go again, your gap in traffic is now much less. I know, you can come to a complete stop and wait for another gap, but the way people are, they will usually just try to go in the existing gap anyway, and thus the fact that they had to come to a complete stop (which they really have to do if it is a red light camera in which they ticket you if you don't) really makes it more dangerous because they are more likely to be hit by oncomming traffic. Of course, if someone doesn't bother to slow and make sure the coast is clear and just pulls out, that would be very dangerous. It seems to me that turning right on red should be a yield situation, not a complete stop situation.
To allow a FOR profit company to police a supposedly Free society goes against every fiber in my body. Supporters of this financial rape of citizens wrap their agenda up in a nice little box and cram it down our throats in the name of safety. I call BS
In most of these contracts around the country, municipalities have the right to “Terminate for Cause”, if the State of Federal Law changes, affecting the execution of the contracts. In the LaserCraft (ATS), contract with the City, from Article 4., titled “Termination”, section 4.1 “Termination for Cause”, it states; “Either party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement immediately by written notice to the other if (i) federal or state statues are amended to prohibit or substantially change the operation of photo red light enforcement systems;......” With this provision being part of the contract, why is ATS suing the City?
Mr. Jacobs, Exhibit "C", page 29 of the contract is titled 'Maintenance", but it does not say anything about "Vehicle Owner information" or anything like it. What it does say, is: “11. LaserCraft warrants and represents that fewer than ten present (10%) of all Potential Violations will be rejected due to LaserCraft’s Photo Red Light Enforcement Program’s inability to identify the registered owner of the vehicle, the state the vehicle is from, or the tag number on the license plate.” “12. At minimum, LaserCraft warrants and represents that seventy-five (75%) of all Potential Violations must be made available for prosecution.” This is the only reference to a Vehicle owner’s information on the entire page. If you couple this contract information with LaserCraft’s “Prosecutable Image Rates” claim in their proposals, a different meaning starts to become clear. “LaserCraft is aware that a few proposals submitted to the City will suggest that some Red Light Camera systems issue a low percentage of citations vs. actual violations. LaserCraft designed our system to capture the highest number of violations and issue the highest number of citations. As demonstrated by the table below, our issuance rate is better that 95% with the system we propose to Knoxville.” So LaserCraft claims that they have better than a 95% issuance rate for citations, and in the City of Knoxville they guarantee that at a minimum, 75% of all recorded violations will result in a prosecution, or issuance of a Violation. Call it what you want, the people of Knoxville know what it actually is.
The language in the LaserCraft contract, and its proposals, fits the very definition of Quota. Maybe you should read the definition of quota:
QUOTA
1: a proportional part or share; especially : the share or proportion assigned to each in a division or to each member of a body
2: the number or amount constituting a proportional share
3: a fixed number or percentage of minority group members or women needed to meet the requirements of affirmative action"
-Websters Dictionary
QUOTA
1.the share or proportional part of a total that is required from, or is due or belongs to, a particular district, state, person, group, etc.
2.a proportional part or share of a fixed total amount or quantity.
3.the number or percentage of persons of a specified kind permitted to enroll in a college, join a club, immigrate to a country, etc.
-Dictionary.com
I figured you for a mindless pig, and whaddya know? I was right. No one mentioned anything about school zones and no one is believing your fairy tale about 10-15 tix a day with little kids being bounced all over Knoxville with you being there to save them from certain disaster. By the way, the difference between turning right, merging into traffic and blasting straight through multiple lanes is obvious to anyone who doesn't have his over inflated head up his own self-serving rear end. I'll let you get back to saving the world now, Clark Kent.
"Boy I'm sure ats is upset at loosing a potential $2,679,900.00 year.
It breaks down ats gets $40 local gov. get $10 out of the $50 ticket with ats up to $4500 then it splits the $50 50/50 $25 each.
Now the numbers "I rounded a little".
30,000+ tickets for three months.
Ats $4500/$40= 113 tickets"rounded up"
Local gov 113 tickets X$10 = $1,300
That takes care of the first part of the money contract per month.
Now the 10,000tickets-113tickets=9887tickets.
9887ticketsX$25=$247,175.00 each per month.
Take ats $4500+$247,175.00=$251,675.00
3monthsX$251,675.00=$755,025.00
for the year $3,020,100.00
----
local
same 113 tickets X $10=$1,300.00
9887tickets X$25=247,175.00
$1,300X$247,175.00=$248,475.00
3 months X $248,475.00=$745,425.00
for the year $2,981,700.00
---
Grand total fleeced from the driver
$6,001,800.00 Just for the right on red.
NOT counting the red light scamers
or the speed trap scamers
JUST RIGHT ON RED.
Tell me the scamera's are not a money maker."
"It is extremely easy to beat this type of ticket in court. Your easiest defense is to simply throw the ticket away. If it does not come with a return receipt that requires a signature, there is no proof that you actually got the ticket."
-Norman G. Fernandez, attorney, BikerLawBlog.com, free ebook How to Beat a Speeding Ticket - Photo RADAR
http://bikerlawblog.com
Only the DUMB pay Photo Radar Tickets
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8b0K6YIGFc
"Your photo radar defense: Ignoring The Letter. When you receive a general post letter advising you of your photo radar citation, you have the option of just ignoring it. All states have guidelines on how the citation must be served. In effect, your payment or appearance at the courthouse is your acceptance of service. By not responding to the letter, you are refusing acceptance of service. In addition, none of the departments are making personal service to anyone that lists a PO Box as their mailing address on their vehicle registrations."
-Lt "Radar" Roy Reyer, Maricopa County Sheriff Office, Phoenix, Arizona, RadarBusters.com, Your Photo Radar Defense
85% of TX Drivers Refuse to Pay Photo Traffic Tickets
http://naturaltreasure.net/scameras/?p=224
"Starting tomorrow, photo-enforcement-violation notices must finally state the truth about what's going on -- namely, that you don't need to respond or identify the driver in the picture. Cities and, for a while, the state of Arizona, have for years employed something of a ruse to help get speeders and red-light runners caught by the machines to pay up. They sent an initial notice of violation that has no legal teeth, yet contained a passive threat that blowing off the notice might not be in the motorists' best interest. A few years ago, we caught the city of Scottsdale lying blatantly in its notices, which it falsely called a "summons." The notice stated that those who didn't respond would be subject to fines, fees and driver's license suspension. An Arizona Department of Public Safety notice of violation that we published two years ago shows the more-typical trick. Appearing below DPS insignia, the notice states simply that the motorist should fill out the form and sent it back by the "respond-by date." While the DPS freeway cameras were online, (that program ended last summer), thousands of people likely responded like sheep to those notices -- even though they didn't have to. As numerous articles in New Times and elsewhere have pointed out, ignoring those notices only meant the possibility of a ticket being served at the offender's home by a process server. True, having a server come out meant an additional $25 added to the fine. But if the server never comes, or the motorist doesn't appear to be home when the server comes -- always a distinct possibility -- then the photo enforcement ticket becomes invalid. Now, thanks to a bill that Governor Jan Brewer signed, notices of violation must confess that: (a) the notice is not a court issued document; (b) the recipient is under no obligation to identify the person or respond to the notice; and (c) failure to respond to the notice may result in official service that may result in an additionally levied fee. The new law also mandates that $13 of every ticket goes to the "GITEM" task force, which has a mission of "strict enforcement" of immigration and gang laws."
-Phoenix News Times, Arizona Photo-Enforcement Notices Must Now State the Truth: Motorists Have No Duty to Respond or Identify Driver, Jul. 19 2011
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/07/arizona_photo_enforcement_noti.php
Knoxville Code, Section 8-1, Issuance of process.
The city judge shall issue process on the complaint of any person when it appears to the city judge that any provision of this Code or other ordinance of the city has been violated. He shall try no case until process has been regularly sued out, served and returned.
http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientid=11098
TN Rules of Civil Procedure
RULE 4. PROCESS
Rule 4.01: Summons; Issuance; By Whom Served; Sanction for Delay.
(1) Upon the filing of the complaint the clerk of the court wherein the complaint is filed shall forthwith issue the required summons and cause it, with necessary copies of the complaint and summons, to be delivered for service to any person authorized to serve process. This person shall serve the summons, and the return endorsed thereon shall be proof of the time and manner of service. A summons may be issued for service in any county against any defendant, and separate or additional summonses may be issued against any defendant upon request of plaintiff. Nothing in this rule shall affect existing laws with respect to venue.
(2) A summons and complaint may be served by any person who is not a party and is not less than 18 years of age. The process server must be identified by name and address on the return.
(3) If a plaintiff or counsel for plaintiff (including third-party plaintiffs) intentionally causes delay of prompt issuance of a summons or prompt service of a summons, filing of the complaint (or third-party complaint) is ineffective.
[Amended by order filed December 10, 2003; effective July 1, 2004.]
Rule 4.03: Summons; Return.
(1) The person serving the summons shall promptly make proof of service to the court and shall identify the person served and shall describe the manner of service. If a summons is not served within 90 days after its issuance, it shall be returned stating the reasons for failure to serve. The plaintiff may obtain new summonses from time to time, as provided in Rule 3, if any prior summons has been returned unserved or if any prior summons has not been served within 90 days of issuance.
(2) When process is served by mail, the original summons, endorsed as below; an affidavit of the person making service setting forth the person's compliance with the requirements of this rule; and, the return receipt shall be sent to and filed by the clerk. The person making service shall endorse over his or her signature on the original summons the date of mailing a certified copy of the summons and a copy of the complaint to the defendant and the date of receipt of return receipt from the defendant. If the return receipt is signed by the defendant, or by person designated by Rule 4.04 or by statute, service on the defendant shall be complete. If not, service by mail may be attempted again or other methods authorized by these rules or by statute may be used.
http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/courts/rules
I know of no Medicine fit to diminish the violent natural Inclinations you mention; and if I did, I think I should not communicate it to you. Marriage is the proper Remedy. It is the most natural State of Man, and therefore the State in which you are most likely to find solid Happiness. Your Reasons against entring into it at present, appear to me not well-founded. The circumstantial Advantages you have in View by postponing it, are not only uncertain, but they are small in comparison with that of the Thing itself, the being married and settled. It is the Man and Woman united that make the compleat human Being. Separate, she wants his Force of Body and Strength of Reason; he, her Softness, Sensibility and acute Discernment. Together they are more likely to succeed in the World. A single Man has not nearly the Value he would have in that State of Union. He is an incomplete Animal. He resembles the odd Half of a Pair of Scissars. If you get a prudent healthy Wife, your Industry in your Profession, with her good Œconomy, will be a Fortune sufficient.
But if you will not take this Counsel, and persist in thinking a Commerce with the Sex inevitable, then I repeat my former Advice, that in all your Amours you should prefer old Women to young ones. You call this a Paradox, and demand my Reasons. They are these:
1. Because as they have more Knowledge of the World and their Minds are better stor’d with Observations, their Conversation is more improving and more lastingly agreable.
2. Because when Women cease to be handsome, they study to be good. To maintain their Influence over Men, they supply the Diminution of Beauty by an Augmentation of Utility. They learn to do a 1000 Services small and great, and are the most tender and useful of all Friends when you are sick. Thus they continue amiable. And hence there is hardly such a thing to be found as an old Woman who is not a good Woman.
3. Because there is no hazard of Children, which irregularly produc’d may be attended with much Inconvenience.
4. Because thro’ more Experience, they are more prudent and discreet in conducting an Intrigue to prevent Suspicion. The Commerce with them is therefore safer with regard to your Reputation. And with regard to theirs, if the Affair should happen to be known, considerate People might be rather inclin’d to excuse an old Woman who would kindly take care of a young Man, form his Manners by her good Counsels, and prevent his ruining his Health and Fortune among mercenary Prostitutes.
5. Because in every Animal that walks upright, the Deficiency of the Fluids that fill the Muscles appears first in the highest Part: The Face first grows lank and wrinkled; then the Neck; then the Breast and Arms; the lower Parts continuing to the last as plump as ever: So that covering all above with a Basket, and regarding only what is below the Girdle, it is impossible of two Women to know an old from a young one. And as in the dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal, and frequently superior, every Knack being by Practice capable of Improvement.
6. Because the Sin is less. The debauching a Virgin may be her Ruin, and make her for Life unhappy.
7. Because the Compunction is less. The having made a young Girl miserable may give you frequent bitter Reflections; none of which can attend the making an old Woman happy.
8thly and Lastly They are so grateful!!
signed Benjamin Franklin
June 25, 1745
My email was suspended for emailing this story to a friend.
The email host is infowars.net by Alex Jones based in the UK, black heart of the Rothchild's Jew World Odor, formerly known as the British Empire.
Old Ben's Satanic Hellfire Club was in England.
But I still think Old Ben was a cool cat....er, tom cat.
Dallas Ray Skinner, a 50-year-old Vonore man, was found not guilty in the vehicular homicide case the state made against him for his role in the crash that ended the life of a longtime Maryville resident.
When the 12-person jury handed down its verdict Thursday, Ryan Desmond and Clinton Frazier, assistant district attorneys for Blount County who presented the case, had proven unsuccessful in their attempt to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Skinner was criminally responsible for the death of 49-year-old Randall Bowers.
Bowers was killed Aug. 10, 2008, when Skinner’s car and Bowers’ motorcycle collided on Six Mile Road just south of Chota Road and the motorcycle was knocked off the pavement.
Keith Lieberman, Skinner’s defense attorney, presented three main points to defend his client and sway the jury in his favor.
First, the trooper who first responded to the scene, James Dalton of the Tennessee Highway Patrol, cited Skinner for improper passing and a couple minor violations and released him from the scene instead of arresting him on more serious charges.
The trooper talked to witnesses at the scene and collected evidence, Lieberman argued, but it wasn’t until eight months after the wreck that a full investigation of the scene was completed and Skinner was charged with vehicular homicide.
Second, the crash reconstructionist the state called as an expert witness, Trooper Charles Massengill of the Tennessee Highway Patrol, testified under oath to the jury that he could not be 100 percent certain of his findings.
He was confident there was sufficient evidence on the road and the vehicles to prove Skinner caused the crash, Massengill said, but there was an off chance he was wrong.
Last, Bowers had hydrocodone in his system at the time of his death. Even though he was well within the therapeutic range, according to Shawn Hilsenbeck, the medical examiner, Lieberman suggested the painkiller he used intermittently after a couple knee surgeries could potentially have influenced his decision making and riding ability that day.
“There are no winners in a case like this,” Lieberman said. “A good man is gone, and two families are forever impacted. Nobody is out celebrating.
“We really appreciate the jury reaching the right decision. The easy thing to do would have been to get caught up in emotion, but they didn’t do that.”
MARYVILLE, TENN. -- The state of Tennessee rested its vehicular homicide case against 50-year-old Dallas Ray Skinner on Wednesday, and a Blount County jury has started its deliberation process.
A verdict is expected to be reached today, according to court observers, though the jurors will have time to sort through the facts in an attempt to reach a unanimous decision.
Skinner is charged with vehicular homicide for his alleged role in the Aug. 10, 2008, crash involving his Ford Taurus and a Victory Vegas Polaris motorcycle operated by 49-year-old Maryville resident Randall Darrell Bowers.
According to testimony and reports from Tennessee Highway Patrol, the collision — which took place on Six Mile Road about the length of three football fields south of Chota Road — sent Bowers flying from his motorcycle. He died from blunt force trauma and internal hemorrhage before he made it to the hospital.
Blount County Assistant District Attorney Ryan Desmond argued that Skinner passed a truck near Chota Road and recklessly continued in the left-hand side of the two-lane road in an attempt to pass Bowers. Skinner then crossed the solid yellow lines into the right lane of traffic, Desmond said, and made contact with Bowers’ bike twice.
He said the car’s rear quarter panel tapped the bike, causing Bowers to lose control and slam into the front of Skinner’s car. The motorcycle then flipped on its side and rolled several times which sent Bowers into the air, until he landed more than a hundred feet away in a driveway in front of Kagley’s Chapel Baptist Church.
Desmond turned to crash reconstructionist and THP Trooper Charles Massengill to try to convince the jury that Skinner was to blame for Bowers’ death.
“(I can tell) the car was positioned going toward the right lane because of reflective gear from the left side fork of the bike (that was) implanted in the front right bumper of the Taurus,” Massengill said. “There’s (also) no evidence to suggest the motorcycle being in the left lane.”
Skinner’s lawyer, Keith Lieberman, however, questioned Massengill’s methods. “(Massengill) said himself that he can’t be 100 percent certain,” Lieberman said. “He also wasn’t there to collect evidence the night of the accident ... and it took him more than eight months to conduct an investigation.”
There was a dramatic moment when Skinner waived his right established by the Fifth Amendment and opted to testify on his own behalf.
“(Bowers) would not leave me alone, he just wouldn’t,” Skinner told the jury. “I thought he kicked the back quarter panel, like some bikers will do ... but I never crossed the center line and I never touched that motorcycle.”
During cross examination by Desmond, where Skinner acknowledged that he sped up and was traveling in excess of the 45 mph speed zone. He also told the court he had stopped at a service station moments before, but was speeding in part because he had to use the restroom.
“Why didn’t you brake?” Desmond asked.
“I don’t know,” Skinner said. “I wanted to get back over. I didn’t know what was coming around that corner.”
He also said he felt just “one large impact,” which contradicted Massengill’s testimony.
Another point of contention came from the testimony of Stanley Sellers and Anita Duplantier, both friends of Skinner who were driving behind when the collision took place. Other witnesses claim Bowers slowed enough to wave at people in the parking lot and talk to Jimmy Rex Gredig, a friend of Bowers who owned the cabinet shop where churchgoers were talking at the time of the wreck, but Sellers and Duplantier said that Bowers blew threw the stop sign.
“He did not stop at the stop sign,” Sellers said. “His throttle was wide open.”
If the jury finds Skinner not guilty of vehicular homicide — a charge that could land him in prison for as many as 10 years — they will then be asked to consider lesser charges ranging from reckless aggravated assault, criminally negligent homicide and reckless homicide. All of those charges also are felonies.
