New Study: Arizona Ticket Cameras Cost 28 Lives!

A new report by Greg Mauz of the National Motorists Association focuses on the fraudulent camera scheme in Arizona. The result? Cameras are NOT saving lives in Arizona. They are responsible for over 28 extra fatalities! Download the report.

In his report, Mauz does an effective job of debunking the myths and propaganda reported by officials, such as:

“Exceeded lawful speed” caused ONLY 3.28% (58 of 1767) of fatal “driver errors” in Arizona Crash Facts Summary (2006, page 30). There occur less than 9 true speeding caused fatalities annually on ALL Arizona freeways.

“Slower traffic (by STC enforcement) improves safety.” False. Interrupting the faster, uniform
flow of traffic causes serious crashes.

The ONLY WAY ticket cameras can usurp enough money for all cohorts to profit is through
engineering malpractice – the deliberate, illegal under posting of speed limits (and yellow times at traffic
signals) to entrap motorists for financial gains. It’s called FRAUD – a crime! Then, these law breaking
hypocrites violate people’s rights to due process, face their accusers and obtain a fair trial (5th, 6th and
14th Amendments). Then, there’s the burden of proof reversal (illegal) to coerce the 30% plus innocent
vehicle owners into paying an unjust fine. Then, there’s the invisible violations, camera companies
committing other crimes, civilian foreigners (Redflex) illegally enforcing U.S. laws for profit, using STCs
for unauthorized spying, etc.

More than 25 studies (even several camera promoters ones!) reveal that cameras cause more
fatalities. In fact, a 10 year analysis of U.S. signal‐related fatal crashes shows 600 more dead after ticket
cameras proliferated (2001‐2006). “Camera Enforcement – A Picture of Fraud” proves from 7 different
analyses that cameras cause more crashes, injuries and fatalities.

Now, Arizona maintains hundreds of red light cameras in at least 11 cities. The “life saving”
results? From 1995‐2000 Arizona incurred 199 fatal disobeyed signal driver errors. After installing
numerous RLTCs, 2001‐2006 recorded 227, for a +14% increase in red light violation deaths (+28). For
comparison, Florida, despite gaining 3 million more drivers, recorded a ‐20% drop in disobeyed signal
fatal factors from 2001‐2005 (‐125). Florida’s results were best in the nation and accomplished without
ticket cameras (page 38, Mauz Report).

Speed cameras also Kill. Great Britain’s Department for Transport Report admits on page 43
that STCs caused a +31% increase in personal injury accidents along major highways. In construction
zones with STCs, the increase was +55%.

Most studies contain years of data with control sites. The DPS [conflict of interest $$$] study
covers a very inadequate 80 days, without control sites and they failed to document causation factors.
Remember, only 3.28% “exceeded lawful speed.”

Red light violation crashes comprise a mere 1.5% of all crashes and a mere 2% of fatalities (U.S. AZ, FL, etc.).

Thousands of speed measurements from Phoenix area freeways confirm serious
engineering malpractice. When almost all average speeds exceed the speed limit, the limits are
unethical at best or illegal at worst.

This is just a small sampling from the report. The report makes many observations and references this publication by ADOT: Establishing Speed Limits – A Case of “Majority Rule”. A very interesting portion of the ADOT web page says:

Public acceptance of these concepts [of establishing speed zones] is normally instinctive. However, the same public, when emotionally aroused in a specific instance, will often reject these fundamentals and rely instead on more comfortable and widely held misconceptions, such as:

1. Speed limit signs will slow the speed of traffic.
2. Speed limit signs will decrease the accident rate and increase safety.
3. Raising a posted speed limit will cause an increase in the speed of traffic.
4. Any posted speed limit must be safer than an unposted speed limit, regardless of the traffic and roadway conditions prevailing.

Wow, if people only understood how they were being manipulated and sold into this fraud, there would be riots in the streets. ADOT and DPS are perfectly aware of the widely held misconceptions used to exploit the public for blind trust and support of the photo enforcement programs. ADOT also clearly understands that the speed limits are set artificially low in areas where cameras are installed because the photo program wouldn’t generate as much money if limits where properly set at the 85th percentile speed. This appears to be engineering malpractice at its finest.

Advertisements

One Comment

  1. stephen kandik
    Posted July 12, 2009 at 2:13 am | Permalink

    i just filled an appeal in tucson and feel that it contains solid legal grounds for overturning this racketeering ring, but i what feed back from people of insight like yourself, please consider reading, posting and responding to this complete memorandum of appeal. thanks, s. kandik (520)245-0527

    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” Thomas Jefferson

    I THE DEFENDANT STEPHEN KANDIK, HEREBY PETITIONS THE ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT TO HEAR MY

    APPEAL; AS WELL AS TO, ORDER FULL COMPLIANCE AND COMPLETE DISCLOSURE WITH REGARD TO THE

    SUBPOENAS I ORIGINALLY PETITIONED THE TRAFFIC COURT TO ISSUE CONCERNING THE CASE ASSOCIATED

    WITH CITATION # P0049738 AND DOCKET #TR9038798. FURTHERMORE; I ASK THE COURT TO ORDER AN INJUNCTION

    AGAINST ANY TAMPERING, ALTERING OR DAMAGING OF THE DOCUMENTS I SEEK.

    (A) THE GROUNDS FOR THIS REQUEST ARE MULTIFACETED AND REPLETE WITH EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES,

    WHICH SHOULD HAVE PROMPTED THE TRAFFIC COURT TO ISSUE MY SUBPOENAS. IN SHORT, 14 OTHER US STATES

    HAVE BANNED PHOTO SURVEILLANCE/ ENFORCEMENT. 6 OTHER U.S. STATE COURTS HAVE DEEMED THIS PRACTICE

    TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, LOGIC DEMANDS THAT THEY AND ARIZONA CAN’T BOTH BE RIGHT SIMULTANEOUSLY.

    A SITTING ARIZONA JUDGE, DUELY ELECTED SHERIFF AND AN OFFICIAL IN THE STATE TREASURES

    OFFICE OF ARIZONA, HAVE DECLARED THIS ACTIVITY BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR DISCONTINUED IT, AND HAVE

    THEREBY CREATED SAFE HAVENS OR LIBERTY ZONES WITHIN THE STATE, WHERE THIS HYPOTHETICAL LAW WILL

    NOT BE FRAUDULENTLY IMPOSED ON CITIZENS. THIS IS IN AND OF ITSELF SOLID FOUNDATION FOR A SOUND

    JUDICIAL CHALLENGE TO THE LEGITIMACY OF TUCSONS EXTORTION AND RACKETEERING RING.

    (B) THE EVIDENCE WHICH I HAVE SUBPOENAED (IF TENDERED IN ERNEST) WILL CONCLUSIVELY PROVE THAT THERE

    ARE SELECTED CLASSES OF CITIZEN AND EVEN NON CITIZENS, WHICH HAVE BEEN SELECTED TO BE OVERLOOKED

    AND EXEMPTED FROM PROSECUTION (I.E. GOVERNMENT VEHICLES, MOTORCYCLE RIDERS, COMPANY FLEETS

    AS WELL AS MANY OTHERS. THIS HAS ALMOST CERTAINLY BEEN DONE IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE PROFITS, AND

    MINIMIZE FINANCIAL DRAINS/CHALLENGES, AND NOT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THOSE LEAST CAPABLE OF

    CHALLENGING THIS SHAKE DOWN WHERE TARGETED INITIALLY, UNTIL THE PUBLIC COULD BE TRAINED AND

    ULTIMATELY CONDITIONED TO ACCEPT HIGHWAY ROBBERY AS A LEGITIMIZED FUNCTION OF THE STATE.

    DESPITE THE FACT THAT APPLICATION OF SUCH A LAW IS IN DIRECT CONTRAVENTION TO SECTION 13 OF THE

    ARIZONA CONSTITUTION.

    (C) WHICH STATES THAT ” NO LAW SHALL BE ENACTED GRANTING TO ANY CITIZEN, CLASS OF CITIZEN OR

    CORPORATION OTHER THEN MUNICIPAL, PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES WHICH UPON THE SAME TERMS, SHALL NOT

    EQUALLY BELONG TO ALL CITIZENS OR CORPORATIONS”. EVEN IF THESE EXEMPTIONS OR PRIVILAGES WERE NOT

    CODIFIED INTO THE THE LAW ITSELF, AS PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE, THEY WERE, NEVERTHELESS; AND BY

    DESIGN TRANSFERRED AND GRANTED TO CORPORATE THIRD PARTIES. THIS IS ILLEGAL, YOU CAN NOT PASS LAWS

    WHICH SUPERSEDES OUR CONSTITUTION. THE SECTION IN QUESTION WOULD NEED TO BE REPEALED OR OVER

    TURNED BY A HIGH COURT, AND UNTIL THAT TIME THE PARALLEL LAW HOLDS NO TRUE FORCE, NONE, WHAT SO EVER.

    THIS LAW WAS DRAFTED NOT ONLY TO GUARD AGAINST THE CREATION OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS, BUT MORE

    IMPORTANTLY THE CREATION OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL OUTCOMES AS WELL.

    (D)THEREFORE; FOR THE STATE TO WINK AND CLOSE IT’S EYES AND THEN BLATANTLY AND WILLFULLY LOOK THE

    OTHER WAY WHILE IT’S SURROGATES (AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS INC. AND REDFLEX CORP.) FLAGRANTLY AND

    CONTEMPTFULLY ACT IN A MANNER WHICH IS IN DIRECT OPPOSITION TO THIS ARTICLE UNDER THE COLOR OF LAW

    IS AS LAUGHIBLE AS IT IS CONTEMPTIBLE AND PROSECUTABLE.

    (E) FURTHERMORE: ARTICLE 2 SEC 9, DELINEATES THAT” NO LAW GRANTING IRREVOCABLY ANY PRIVILEGE, FRANCHISE,

    OR IMMUNITY SHALL BE ENACTED”. THE DRAFTERS OF THIS ARTICLE DID NOT ENVISIONED A LEGISLATURE

    WHICH WOULD TRY TO PASS OFF A LAWS, THAT WOULD IN ESSENCE INCORPORATE IMMUNITY FOR ILLEGAL

    ALIENS OR MEXICAN NATIONALS. IF EQUAL EFFORT AND EXPENSE HAS NOT BEEN APPLIED TO COLLECTION OF THEIR

    FINES, ONE CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN OSTENSIBLY ENDOWED WITH SPECIAL PRIVILEGES OR STATUS.

    AND NO AMOUNT OF DOUBLE TALK OR LEGAL SPEAK WILL REMEDY THIS IN THE EYES OF THE PUBLIC. AS CURRENTLY

    APPLIED, THIS LAW IS NOTHING MORE THEN A LAST DITCH STOP GAP EFFORT OF A HORRIFICALLY CORRUPT AND

    INCOMPETENT BAND OF BUREAUCRATS, WITH A WOEFUL DISREGARD FOR THE LAWS OF THIS LAND, WHO CLEARLY

    WERE NEVER FIT TO GOVERN OR GUARD OUR LIBERTY AND WHO ARE CHIEFLY FOCUSED ON SERVING MAMMON.

    (F) SECTION 33, OF OUR CONSTITUTION LAYS OUT THE CATCH ALL ELSE EQUIVALENT, TO THE FEDERAL 9TH

    AMENDMENT IN THIS FASHION “THE ENUMERATION IN THIS CONSTITUTION OF CERTAIN RIGHTS SHALL NOT BE

    CONSTRUED TO DENY OTHERS RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE”. AS A SOVEREIGN INDIVIDUAL, I FREELY AND WILLINGLY

    HAVE CHOSEN TO ENGAGE IN AND HONOR THE RULES AND LAWS OF AMERICAN SOCIETY, YET ONLY IN SO MUCH AS

    THEY, COMPLY WITH THOSE LAID OUT BY OUR FOREFATHERS. AND ONCEMORE; THE DEMANDS OR REQUIREMENTS

    PLACED ON ME MUST LIE WITH IN THE REALM OF ACHIEVABILITY. TO HOLD PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THINGS

    BEYOND HUMAN CONTROL IS LUDICROUS ( ENTERING AN INTERSECTION CAN NOT BE REDUCED TO GAME OF CHANCE).

    CITIZEN HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO TRUST THAT PUBLIC SERVANTS CHARGED WITH PUBLIC SAFETY ARE ACTING

    WITH COMPLETE IMPUNITY MAKING SAFETY THEIR HIGHEST PRIORITY. TO BE FORCED TO ENDURE SO CALLED LEGAL

    EXTORTION SANCTIONED BY DISHONORABLE LOCAL OFFICIALS, IS A COMPLETE BETRAYAL OF REASON, HONESTY, AND

    JUSTICE AND OSTENSIBLY EVERYTHING THIS COUNTRY ONCE STOOD FOR. I CLAIM THESE RIGHTS FOR MYSELF, AS WELL

    AS ALL FOR AMERICANS. AT BEST THE PEOPLE BEHIND THIS LAW LIKE MS. NEPALITANO SHOULD BE DUBBED QUASI-AMERICANS,

    BECAUSE NO TRUE BELIEVER COULD CONSTRUE THIS PRACTICE AS CONSISTENT WITH OUR OVERRIDING GUIDING PRINCIPLES.

    (G) YES , APPARENTLY YOU CAN FOOL ALLOT A ARIZONANS ALLOT OF THE TIME, BUT I WASN’T FOOLED EVEN FOR A

    FLEETING INSTANT. LIKE THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE WHO CHARACTERIZED PORN AS SOMETHING “I KNOW (IT)

    WHEN I SEE IT”. WELL I KNOW MY 9TH AMENDMENT( SEC 33 RIGHTS), HAVE BEEN VIOLATED WHEN IT’S HAPPENED.

    AND WHEN A HICK TOWN KANGAROO COURT TELLS ME, I DON’T HAVE A RIGHT TO SUBPOENA EVIDENCE, (WHICH

    WOULD CLEARLY HAVE FLESHED OUT THE TRUTH OF THIS MATTER AND EXONERATE NOT JUST MYSELF, BUT THE

    WHOLE OF OUR POPULOUS AND HAVE PROVEN A WIDE SPREAD FRAUD HAS BEEN PERPETRATED AGAINST US ALL).

    WHEN I HEAR SUCH A THING, I KNOW ANARCHY HAS BEGUN TO TAKE HOLD. AND WHEN I RESPOND BY TELLING THE

    JUDGE THAT I WISH TO EXERCISE MY RIGHT TO HAVE MY CASE HEARD BY AN ELECTED JUDGE AND AM INSTRUCTED BY

    HER THAT, THAT IS NOT AN OPTION AVAILABLE TO ME. AT THAT POINT, I KNOW WE HAVE TRANSCENDED EGREGIOUS

    AND SHOT STRAIGHT INTO AN INSIDIOUS BETRAYAL OF THE PRINCIPLES OF THE AMERICAN JUSTICE SYSTEM,

    DOWN HERE IN THE OLD PUEBLO.

    (H) LET ME BE CLEAR, I WAS FULLY, THOUGH REGRETTABLY, AWARE OF THE FACT, THAT THE LEVERAGE OR STAKES IN THIS

    EXTORTION RACKET WERE MY DRIVING “PRIVILEGES”. WHICH THE SO CALLED LOCAL AUTHORITIES WERE WIELDING

    LIKE A CLUB TO FORCE SUBMISSION AND WHICH THEY WOULD NOT HESITATE TO USE TO DESTROY AN INNOCENT PERSONS

    MEANS OF SUPPORT AND ULTIMATELY CRUSH THEIR LIVELIHOOD FOR FAILURE TO SUBJUGATE OR PROSTRATE ONESELF.

    AND THIS WOULD PROVE TO BE EXTREMELY DELETERIOUS IN MY CASE, BECAUSE ALL MY INCOME FOR YEARS HAS BEEN

    GENERATED OUTSIDE OF THE STATE, SO PULLING MY TICKET COULD LIKELY MEAN ALMOST CERTAIN RUIN…

    (I) WHAT EXACTLY IS MY CRIME, I WAS CAUGHT IN THE SNARE OF A BAND OF CRIMINALS HIDING BEHIND BADGES,

    WHO HAVE ABUSED THEIR POSITION, IN ORDER TO GENERATE CAPITOL BY CHEATING HONEST PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR

    MONEY. THIS GANG HAS TAMPERED WITH 4 TRAFFIC DEVISES AND ALTERED THEIR FUNDAMENTAL FUNCTIONS, SO

    COMPLETELY THAT THEY NO LONGER COMPLY WITH THEIR ORIGINAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS OR THOSE

    LAID OUT IN THE” MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR STREETS AND HIGHWAYS (2003 EDITION)” OR

    IT’S COMPANION PUBLICATION “TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING MANUAL” ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

    AND FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, (THE BODY GOVERNING ALL SUCH MATTERS NATIONALLY.) CROSS

    EXAMINATION OF THE WITNESSES I INTEND TO CALL WILL ALLOW THESE FACTS TO ENTER INTO THE RECORD. AND

    MOREOVER; THE DOCUMENTS WHICH I SUBPOENAED FROM STATE, COUNTY AND CITY AUTHORITIES WOULD HAVE

    SUPPORTED MY ASSERTION, THAT TUCSON OFFICIAL ARE NOT ONLY GUILTY OF WILLFUL NEGLECT OF THE PUBLIC’S SAFETY

    (WHICH THEY ARE CHARGE WITH), BUT THAT THEY ARE ALSO CULPABLE REGARDING INTENTIONAL ACTS OF RECKLESS

    PUBLIC ENDANGERMENT, AND I SUPPOSE THIS WILL EVENTUALLY OPENED THE DOOR TO MULTIPLE LARGE CIVIL

    ACTIONS. ONCEMORE; I NOW BELIEVE THEY ARE USING THIS CURRENT DELAY AS A STALL TACTIC TO COVER THEIR TRACKS

    AND DESTROYING CRITICAL EVIDENCE.

    (J) AT SOME POINT IN THIS PROCESS, I REALIZED THAT NONE OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS COULD HAVE TOLERATED

    SUCH FLAGRANT TYRANNY AND IN GOOD CONSCIENCE AND DEFERENCE TO THEM, NEITHER WILL I…SO WHAT IS MY

    PUNISHMENT IF THIS GANG OF BULLIES, THUGS AND CHEATS GET THEIR WAY? I LOOSE MY ABILITY TO DRIVE

    (I.E. SUPPORT MYSELF OR EVEN TRY.) NOT ONLY HERE WERE IT IS CONTESTABLY ILLEGAL, BUT IN THE OTHER 49 U.S.

    STATES WHERE MY ACTIONS ARE CONSIDERED PERFECTLY LEGAL AND ACCEPTABLE. ONCE AGAIN THE CONSTITUTION

    HAS LIKELY BEEN BREACHED AND EVEN TRAVISTSIZED, BECAUSE THE PUNISHMENT DOESN’T FIT THE CRIME, NO NOT EVEN

    CLOSE. THERE WAS NO LOSS OF LIFE OR INJURY. THERE WAS NO PROPERTY DAMAGE OR VICTIMS EITHER. AND THUS A

    COMMONLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE ENGAGED IN MILLIONS OF TIMES EVERY DAY NATIONALLY, HAS BECOME AN INFRACTION

    IN “PARTS”OF ARIZONA, WHICH MERIT THE ABSOLUTE ECONOMIC INNIALATION OF AN OTHERWISE HONEST LAW

    ABIDING CITIZEN…THIS IS BOTH CRUEL AND UNUSUAL AND THEREBY SHOULD CERTAINLY BE CONSTRUED AS

    UNCONSTITUTIONAL. FURTHER MORE; THIS IS A BLATANT EXTREME ABUSE OF POWER WITH A PENALTY SO EXTREME,

    SO SEVERE THAT I SHOULD BE ENTITLED TO HAVE MY CASE DECIDED BY A JURY OF MY PEERS.

    (L) IN COURT I BROUGHT OUT THE FACT THAT THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES…(2003 ED.) U.S. DOT/FHA

    GOVERNED THE DEPLOYMENT OF LIGHTS AT INTERSECTIONS AND THAT IT LAID OUT GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS WHICH ALL

    LOCAL AGENCIES WERE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH… HERE ARE SOME OF THEM WHICH HAVE BEEN INTENTIONALLY BREACHED BY

    THE TUCSON D.T. . SEC 1A.01 “THE PURPOSE OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES,… IS TO PROMOTE HIGHWAY SAFETY AND EFFICIENCY BY

    PROVIDING FOR ORDERLY MOVEMENT OF ALL ROAD USERS…AND PROVIDE WARNING AND GUIDANCE NEEDED FOR THE REASONABLY

    SAFE, UNIFORM, AND EFFICIENT OPERATION OF ALL ELEMENTS OF THE TRAFFIC STREAM.”

    (M) ALL THESE DEVICES FOR DECADES HAVE BEEN UNIFORMLY ENGINEERED TO BE PLACED AT OR BEFORE THE POINT AT WHICH THE

    MOTORIST IS INTENDED TO STOP. THE SIGNALS AT ORACLE AND RIVER WHERE OF THIS STANDARD DESIGN AND WERE EMPLOYED

    IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS APPROACH TO TRAFFIC CONTROL FOR MANY YEARS PRIOR TO STATE BUDGET MISMANAGEMENT AND THE

    CORRUPTING INFLUENCE OR REDFLEX AND A.T.S..

    (N) SEC,1A.02- PRINCIPLES OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, GOS ON TO SAY “TO BE EFFECTIVE, A TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE SHOULD

    MEET FIVE BASIC REQUIREMENTS : A. FULFILL A NEED
    B. COMMAND ATTENTION
    C. CONVEY A CLEAR, SIMPLE MEANING;
    D. COMMAND RESPECT FROM ROAD USERS AND
    E. GIVE ADEQUATE TIME FOR PROPER RESPONSE.

    DESIGN, PLACEMENT, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND UNIFORMITY ARE ASPECTS THAT SHOULD BE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED …

    VEHICLE SPEED SHOULD BE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED…THE PROPER USE OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHOULD PROVIDE THE

    REASONABLE AND PRUDENT ROAD USER WITH THE INFORMATION NECESSARY TO REASONABLY SAFELY AND LAWFULLY USE THE

    STREET…UNIFORMITY OF THE MEANING OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES IS VITAL TO THEIR EFFECTIVENESS …”

    (O)AFTER TAMPERING WITH THIS LIGHT BY CREATING A SECONDARY STOPPING POINT, SOME 30 FEET BEYOND THE WELL ESTABLISHED

    NATIONAL AND UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED STOP LINE, AT A POINT PERPENDICULAR TO THE BASE OF THE LIGHT. (IN ORDER TO

    INSTITUTE CAMERA ENTRAPMENT). THIS SIGNAL NO LONGER FULFILLS MOST THE NECESSARY REQUIREMENTS THE D.O.T. AND F.H.A.

    DEEM AS ESSENTIAL. WHILE IT STILL FULFILLS A NEED(A), A LIGHT BEHIND MY BUMPER CAN NO LONGER COMMAND MY ATTENTION(B),

    THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE, ACCEPT IN A SOCIETY OF PSYCHICS. THOUGH SOME WILL CLAIM WE SHOULD THEN TURN OUR ATTENTION TO AN

    ALTERNATIVE SIGNALS, THIS IS AN UNREASONABLE ADDED BURDEN BECAUSE, #1 UNIFORMLY AT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF

    INTERSECTIONS ACROSS THE U.S. AND CANADA,THIS IS NOT NECESSARY. AND HAS ONLY BECOME AN ADDED DRIVING CONDITION,

    AT MAYBE A FEW DOZEN SEMI ISOLATED INTERSECTIONS, IN (APPARENTLY) CASH POOR ARIZONA MUNICIPALITIES.

    #2 UNIVERSALLY ONCE YOU’VE PASSED A SIGNAL YOU HAVE COMMITTED TO THAT TURN, AND AT THIS INTERSECTION HAVE ONLY 3

    SECONDS TO ADVANCE TO AN AREA WHERE YOU’RE CONSIDERED CLEAR AND LEGAL. OR CONVERSELY, AFTER PASSING THE LIGHT AT

    23 MILES AN HOUR, YOU WOULD NEED TO MONITOR THE NEGOTIATION OF A SAFE TURN, SHIFT YOUR ATTENTION TO A SECONDARY

    LIGHT, CHECK YOUR REAR VIEW MIRROR FOR TRAILING VEHICLES AND COME TO A COMPLETE AND SAFE HALT ALL IN THE SPACE OF

    ABOUT 30 FOOT. EVEN THE OFFICER AT MY SHAM TRIAL BEGRUDGINGLY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT A REASONABLE OR PRUDENT DRIVER

    COULD NOT ACCOMPLISH THIS TASK. MOREOVER; THIS IS WHY THE DESIGN ENGINEERS FOR THIS SIGNAL SET 6+ SECONDS AS THE

    APPROPRIATE LENGTH OF TIME TO SET THIS AMBER FOR.

    (P) CONVEY A CLEAR, SIMPLE MEANING (C)…STOP HERE AND NOW = CLEAR AND SIMPLE -VS- STOP SOMEWHERE BETWEEN HERE AND

    THAT LINE ABOUT 30 FT UP THE ROAD, IF YOU CAN’T ADVANCE BEYOND THAT LINE 30FT UP THERE, BEFORE I CHANGE TO RED, EVEN

    THOUGH I WILL NO LONGER BE VISIBLE TO YOU, BECAUSE WE DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY HERE, AT A SMALL NUMBER, BUT NOT ALL OF

    OUR INTERSECTIONS IN ARIZONA, CAUSE WE LIKE TO FORCE PEOPLE TO GAMBLE WITH THEIR SAFETY AND MONEY, IT’S A REAL HOOT,

    GOOD LUCK, ESPECIALLY YOU CARS 5 AND 6 IN THE QUE. OH YEAH IF INSTEAD YOU CHOOSE TO COWER AND STOP ON YELLOW AND END

    UP GETTING REAR ENDED BY AN UNINSURED MOTORIST OR AN 18 WHEELER NEW TO OUR SCAM, THAT’S TOUGH AND WE WILL HOLD YOU

    ACCOUNTABLE CAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS RED MEANS STOP… = TOO COMPLICATED WITH LOTS OF COMPLEX VARIABLES AN PIT FALLS.

    (Q) WHEN YOU TOY WITH YOUR CITIZENS SAFETY AND FINANCES YOU BREED CONTEMPT IN THEM, FOR THE LIGHT, LAW ENFORCEMENT

    AND THE COURTS AND FAIL TO COMMAND THE RESPECT OF ROAD USERS(D). LASTLY THERE ARE NO TRAFFIC ENGINEERS ANYWHERE

    WHO WILL CLAIM HONESTLY (WHILE ON A LIE DETECTOR) THAT THIS LIGHT ALLOWS ADEQUATE TIME FOR A PROPER RESPONSE(E).

    ONCE THE CIVIL CLAIMS START COMING IN FOR WHIPLASH, PARALYSIS AND GOD FORBID WRONGFUL DEATHS, AS A RESULT OF THIS

    FIEFDOM RUN AMOK. JURIES WILL BE UNDOUBTEDLY SIDING WITH THE HONEST ENGINEERS, WHICH WILL OUT NUMBER THE PAID

    OFF ENGINEERS AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS TRODS INTO COURT 100 TO 1. AND ULTIMATELY ALL THE LOOT THE STATE THINKS

    IT’S RACKING IN WON’T BE NEARLY ENOUGH TO COVER THE AWARDS THAT THEY WILL BE PAYING OUT.

    (R)ADDITIONAL EDICTS OF THE MUTCD OF IMPORT ARE: “… ASPECTS OF A DEVICE DESIGN SHOULD BE MODIFIED ONLY IF THERE IS A

    DEMONSTRATED NEED…” ,1A.04 PLACEMENT OF A TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE SHOULD BE WITHIN THE ROAD USER’S VIEW SO THAT

    ADEQUATE VISIBILITY IS PROVIDED. TO AID IN CONVEYING THE PROPER MEANING, THE TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE SHOULD BE

    APPROPRIATELY POSITIONED WITH RESPECT TO THE LOCATION, OBJECT, OR SITUATION TO WHICH IT APPLIES. THE LOCATION AND

    LEGIBILITY OF THE TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICE SHOULD BE SUCH THAT A ROAD USER HAS ADEQUATE TIME TO MAKE THE PROPER

    RESPONSE…TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHOULD BE PLACED AND OPERATED IN A UNIFORM AND CONSISTENT MANNER…SEC,1A.06

    UNIFORMITY OF DEVICES SIMPLIFIES THE TASK OF THE ROAD USER, BECAUSE IT AIDS IN RECOGNITION AND UNDERSTANDING,

    THEREBY REDUCING PERCEPTION/REACTION TIME…UNIFORMITY MEANS TREATING SIMILAR SITUATIONS IN A SIMILAR WAY. THE

    USE OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES DOES NOT IN ITSELF CONSTITUTE UNIFORMITY. A STANDARD DEVICE USED WHERE

    IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE IS AS OBJECTIONABLE AS A NON STANDARD DEVICE; INFACT IT MIGHT BE WORSE. BECAUSE SUCH MISUSE

    MIGHT RESULT IN DISRESPECT AT THOSE LOCATIONS WHERE THE DEVICE IS NEEDED AND APPROPRIATE…SEC 1A.09 THE

    DECISION TO USE A PARTICULAR DEVICE AT A PARTICULAR LOCATION SHOULD BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF EITHER AN

    ENGINEERING STUDY OR THE APPLICATION OF ENGINEERING JUDGMENT…”

    (S) #1 ADDRESSING THESE POINTS IN REVERSE ONE MUST CONCLUDE THAT EITHER THE JUDGMENT OF THE ORIGINAL ENGINEERS

    WAS FAULTY AND THAT THESE TWO RADICAL CHANGES (CUTTING THE YIELD TIME IN HALF AND MOVING THE STOP LINE TO A POINT

    TEN YARDS BEYOND THE POINT WHERE THE INDICATOR IS VISIBLE TO THE MOTORIST) WAS AN ATTEMPT TO REMEDY THIS ERROR

    OR IT WAS BASED ON GREED AND CONTEMPT FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND THE PRINCIPLES OF ENGINEERING. #2 THIS DEVICE HAS BEEN

    ADAPTED TO A USAGE CONTRARY TO THAT DEFINED BY THE MANUFACTURERS MANUAL OR FOR THAT MATTER ONE COMMON SENSE

    WOULD DICTATE. #3 THESE ALTERATIONS HAVE MADE ORACLE AND RIVER, AMONG IF NOT THE LEAST, UNIFORM INTERSECTION

    IN NORTH AMERICA. YES MANY LOCALITIES HAVE CAMERA SURVAILED LIGHTS, BUT ONLY THOSE IN ARIZONA, COUPLE THEM WITH

    STATE ENFORCED 30 FT BLIND SPOTS, WHICH CAN NOT BE TRACED BACK TO ANY KNOWN ENGINEERING PRINCIPLE. I CAN NOT STRESS

    THIS ENOUGH ON AN F.H.A./ D.O.T. BELL CURVE THIS LIGHT WOULD BE LOCATED AT THE MOST EXTREME UNFAVORABLE POSITION

    BASICALLY INDICATING AN UTTER DISREGARD FOR CONVENTION, ORDER AND SAFETY.

    (T) HAVING SIMILAR 10 LANE INTERSECTIONS UP AND DOWN THE ROAD, AS WELL AS, THROUGHOUT THE STATE AND NATION WIDE

    WITH DRASTICALLY DIFFERING YIELD TIMES IS THE ANTITHESIS OF UNIFORMITY, VIRTUALLY ALL OF THESE OTHER INTERSECTIONS

    COMPLY WITH THE MUTCD COMPANION PUBLICATION “TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING MANUAL” SEC,5.3.2 GRAPH. THIS CHART DELINEATES

    THAT THE EQUATION FOR COMPUTING YIELD TIMES HAS 2 COMPONENTS AND THAT 110 FOOT WIDE INTERSECTION WITH A 45MPH

    APPROACH SPEED WOULD NEED 6 SECONDS OR MORE TIME AS THE ORIGINAL ENGINEERING GUIDELINES LAID OUT. THE 3 SECOND TIME

    ADOPTED FOR THIS CROSS ROAD WAS ACTUALLY THE MINIMUM DEFINED TIME ALLOTTED FOR A 2 LANE ROAD WITH A 25MPH APPROACH

    SPEED. #4 ONCE AGAIN, THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE PLACEMENT OF THIS DEVICE, NOW THAT INCLUDES THE EXPANDED STOP ZONE

    LACKING VISIBILITY AND REQUIRING TANDEM LIGHT REFERENCING, IS UNQUESTIONABLY UNACCEPTABLE. TO BE TRULY REASONABLE

    A COUNTDOWN TIMER SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE LIGHT TO ELIMINATE GUESSING OR BOOM HUNG LIGHT REACHING OUT TO THE

    ACTUAL FINAL STOP POINT, WOULD ENABLE DRIVERS TO ONCE AGAIN RELY ON THE INFORMATION DISSEMINATED BY THESE SIGNALS.

    AS IT STANDS NOW THIS UNIT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL STANDARDS AND EVEN ARS 28-644B

    ” ANY PROVISION OF THIS CHAPTER THAT REQUIRES SIGNS SHALL NOT BE ENFORCED AGAINST AN ALLEGED VIOLATOR IF AT THE

    TIME AND PLACE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION AN OFFICIAL SIGN IS NOT IN PROPER POSITION AND SUFFICIENTLY LEGIBLE TO BE

    SEEN BY AN ORDINARILY OBSERVANT PERSON…”

    (U) #5 WHEN THE MUTCD STATES THAT A DEVICE SHOULD BE MODIFIED ONLY WHEN THERE IS A DEMONSTRATED NEED, THEY WHERE

    NOT REFERRING TO MONEY, BUT RATHER TO A NEED, WHICH WOULD ADVANCE THE INTERESTS OF PUBLIC SAFETY. TO DIMINISH OR

    INTENTIONALLY ALTER OR OBSCURE A TRAFFIC SIGNALS AREA OF VISIBILITY, IS CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC GOOD, LOGIC AND

    AS I’VE SHOW HERE MULTITUDE OF LAWS. HOW DARE ANYBODY IN TUCSONS MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, CALL ME A CRIMINAL

    AND HIDE BEHIND THE COLOR OF AUTHORITY TO RUN A RACKETEERING RING, THIS IS EVEN WORSE THEN MADOFF, CAUSE ONCE

    HE GOT CALLED OUT ON HIS HUSTLE, HE DIDN’T FAIN LIKE HE STILL HELD THE MORAL HIGH GROUND HE FAINED SHAME, WHERES

    TUCSONS.

    (V)THE POLICE WITNESS TESTIMONY OFFERED TO THE COURT AGAINST ME SUGGESTED THAT THE LIGHT, I WAS PHOTOGRAPHED

    AT, WAS NOT TO BE RELIED UPON EXCLUSIVELY TO TRANSIT THE INTERSECTION, ONCE PASS IT, A DRIVER HAD AN ADDITIONAL

    DUTY TO LOCATE A SECONDARY LIGHT TO DRAW GUIDANCE FROM (THIS ONUS IS ONLY A LOCAL AND NEWLY CONTRIVED BURDEN

    THAT WON’T CUT THE MUSTARD IN HIGHER COURTS AND CIVIL ACTIONS). WHICH ALSO SUGGESTS THAT THIS DEVICE IS ONLY A

    PORTIONAL DEVICE, CURRENTLY ONLY FULFILLING A PERCENTAGE OF THE ROLE IT WAS DESIGN TO PERFORM. HOWEVER; THIS SAME

    PARTY ALSO TRIED TO CLAIM THAT THIS INSTRUMENT WAS 100 PERCENT EFFECTIVE FOR TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES. THIS

    DOESN’T ADD UP, IF THIS IS NOT A TRUE STAND ALONE FULLY OPERATIONAL AND COMPLETELY FUNCTIONAL SIGNAL, IF IT IS FOUND

    IN ANY WAY TO BE LACKING OR FLAWED, HOW CAN ANYONE CLAIM THAT IT PERFORMS A SECONDARY FUNCTION IN AN EXEMPLARILY.

    THAT’S LIKE SAYING ” WE ACKNOWLEDGE ITS A BROKEN WRENCH, BUT IT’S STILL A WONDERFUL HAMMER”. THE PUBLIC PAID FOR A

    SIGNAL, LET US HAVE OUR SIGNAL BACK.

    (W) DURING THE TRAIL, WHICH WAS NOTHING MORE THE A BUSHWHACKING, BECAUSE I WAS TOLD I WOULD BE GOING BEFORE AN

    ENTIRELY DIFFERENT JUDGE, WHO WOULD BE DECIDING ON MY SUBPOENAS. AND SO, I FULLY EXPECTED AT THAT TIME TO BE

    GRANTED AN EXTENSION OF TIME IN ORDER TO ISSUE, RECEIVE AND EVALUATE MY EVIDENCE. INSTEAD I WAS FORCED TO DEFEND

    MYSELF WITHOUT ANY OF MY WITNESSES AND DOCUMENTS, IN ESSENCE THIS “ACTING” JUDGE, HOBBLED ME AND WORSE STILL

    TOOK ON AN ADVERSARIAL ROLE WORKING FERVENTLY AGAINST ME, REPEATEDLY INTERRUPTING MY CHAIN OF THOUGHT TRYING TO

    CONFUSE ME AND CONFOUND MY FORMULATION OF INSIGHTFUL POIGNANT AND TELLING QUESTIONS. THE JUDGE SHOWED A CLEAR

    BIAS TOWARD PRESERVING THIS EXTORTION RING, WHICH SHE AND HER HUSBAND BOTH (I’M TOLD) BENEFIT FROM. SINCE I

    BELIEVE SHE SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY RECUSED HERSELF IF THIS CASE, IF YOUR DECISION IS TO KICK IT BACK DOWN FOR RETRIAL, I

    ASK THAT YOU TO REASSIGN IT TO A NEUTRAL VENUE, WHERE THE JURISTS HAVE NO FINANCIAL STAKE IN THE OUTCOME. JUST AS

    WHEN THIS CASE MAKES IT’S WAY TO THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT, I FULLY EXPECT THAT THEY, AS WELL, WILL RECUSE

    THEMSELVES, BECAUSE OF THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS CHANNELED TO THEM FROM THE PROCEEDS OF THIS AS YET UNCHALLENGED

    LAW.

    (X)MY LAST MAJOR ISSUE IS CHAIN OFF CUSTODY… I REJECTED THE VIDEO EVIDENCE THAT THE PROSECUTION OFFERED BECAUSE

    IT LACKS VERACITY. IN MY SUBPOENAS REQUESTING DOCUMENTS FROM TPD THE AZ D.P.S. AND A.T.S., I SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR

    ANY AND ALL EVIDENCE SHOWING OR EVEN SUGGESTING THAT A THIRD PARTY (BE THAT ENTITY GOVERNMENTAL OR PRIVATE,

    FOREIGN OR DOMESTIC, AN INDIVIDUAL OR AN AGENCY) MAY HAVE HAD ANY ACCESS BEFORE DURING OR AFTER MY ALLEGED

    INFRACTIONS TO THE RECORDING DEVICES, CAMERAS, STORAGE BANKS…THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT IS WIDELY BELIEVED

    THAT THIS SURVEILLANCE GRID, IS BEING PUT IN PLACE FOR THE USE OR BENEFIT OF THE N.S.A., NORTH COM, D.H.S. AND OR FEMA.

    IF SO, THIS WOULD OBVIOUSLY SERVE TO FURTHER ENCROACH ON OUR FORTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND COULD BE THE IDEAL

    TOOL FOR STRIKING OUT AT THEIR PERCEIVED ENIMIES (THEIR NO FLY LIST IS CURRENTLY ESTIMATED TO CONTAIN 1.5 MIL

    DOMESTIC AL QEDA OPERATIVES). IF ANYONE HAS ACCESS, EVEN UNDER THE GUISE OF NATIONAL SECURITY, THEY COULD BE

    TAMPERING WITH THIS EVIDENCE OR OVERRIDING THE MASTER SOFTWARE TO SELECTIVELY GO AFTER PERCEIVED THREATS,

    LIKE THE PEOPLE WHO WANT AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE THERMITE EXPLOSIVES FOUND AT WTC BLDG. 7. I HAVE THE RIGHT

    AND RESPONSIBILITY TO QUESTION THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY.

    (Y) LASTLY I INTRODUCED TWO AZ TRAFFIC YIELD TIME SAFETY STUDIES AT THE TRAIL, ONE OF WHICH SHOULD HAVE DIRECTED

    THE PEOPLE WHO ESTABLISHED THE YIELD TIMES FOR THIS SIGNAL TO APPLY A LONGER SAFER TIME, WHICH WAS REFERRED TO

    IN THE DOCUMENT FROM THE MAJORITY LEADER OF THE HOUSE (2001), BUT WHICH WAS IGNORED, OR OVER LOOKED BECAUSE

    OF DERELICTION OR PAY OFFS… IT’S TIME TO HOLD THE INCOMPETENT OR CORRUPT ACCOUNTABLE.


Post a Comment

Required fields are marked *
*
*

%d bloggers like this: