Boycott Elmwood Place?

[unusualfire]

Proposal? They were ordered by a judge to pay it back.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by unusualfire

Proposal? They were ordered by a judge to pay it back.

Then that judge should be put out of office, as he is overstepping his jurisdiction. They collected the fines on a valid condition. For a judge to now declare they have to return the fines, he is trying to legislate law, not make decisions on it. One of the big problems of our courts, they now envision themselves as legislatures, which they are not. And this extends from the US Supreme Court down to the smallest municipal court.

[Señor Slick]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

Then that judge should be put out of office, as he is overstepping his jurisdiction. They collected the fines on a valid condition. For a judge to now declare they have to return the fines, he is trying to legislate law, not make decisions on it. One of the big problems of our courts, they now envision themselves as legislatures, which they are not. And this extends from the US Supreme Court down to the smallest municipal court.

kj....I think you maybe missed the fact that plaintiffs filed class action lawsuits and the judge agreed that "the village's camera system violated Ohio's constitution and rules on judicial process and public notice." Meanwhile the village is appealing that ruling. But if the judge's ruling isn't overturned on appeal then I would say that Elmwood Place would have to refund the fines. I don't really see the judge as "legislating" anything in this case. He just agreed with the plaintiffs, not Elmwood Place.

[WILWRadio]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

Then that judge should be put out of office, as he is overstepping his jurisdiction. They collected the fines on a valid condition. For a judge to now declare they have to return the fines, he is trying to legislate law, not make decisions on it. One of the big problems of our courts, they now envision themselves as legislatures, which they are not. And this extends from the US Supreme Court down to the smallest municipal court.

Not true. The manner in which these fines were collected was determined to be illegal. For it to be legal, they have to use manned cameras with a police officer monitoring the infraction and recording it simultaneously. Simply installing an unmanned camera, catching film of an alleged infraction and then usint it in court without any due process for the alleged perp is illegal.

[WILWRadio]

Some links.

Ohio judge favors camera speeding ticket refunds | MonroeNews.com

Judge hints Elmwood Place speed cameras unconstitutional | Cincinnati.com | cincinnati.com

The Judge is correct in saying this is a scam. It is. And the government does not have the legal authority to impose these fines when they are collected illegal. The police are not omnipotent nor the Gestapo of NAZI Germany…Yet. Until that time comes the Judge has made the correct ruling. Illegal cameras and collection of fines.

[unusualfire]

This will force that city into bankruptcy. I'm quite sure they spent most of it. I just hope it didn't line someone pockets like in Lockland.

[Sarah Perry]

Originally Posted by unusualfire

This will force that city into bankruptcy. I'm quite sure they spent most of it. I just hope it didn't line someone pockets like in Lockland.

Was that recent thing in Lockland or Arlington Heights? Or both?

I agree on the bankruptcy and the bite is that the money collected is probably long gone and if they declare bankruptcy, the people who were illegally ticketed won't see a dime. Elmwood Place needs to be made part of another jurisdiction, but I doubt if any of their neighbors will have them. Nothing but problems.

[Señor Slick]

According to what I read, "the village had put aside the money it received from speed camera tickets." Unfortunately for Elmwood Place the money they "put aside" is only about 60% of the fines. The balance of the money was paid to the company that put the camera scheme in place for the village. I would guess that money is gone for good unless Elmwood Place had something in writing that spelled out giving the money back if the set up was found to be illegal. If Elmwood Place has to pay back the fines in total then I'd say they are in trouble.

[kjbrill]

^^^ And Elmwood Place should be able to sue the company they paid to supply the equipment if in fact it was illegal. Of course a jurisdiction is responsible for what they negotiate. But public officials are not all educated in law. If they enter into an agreement which is later declared illegal, they should be capable of going back against the person or persons who supplied them the illegal operation. Of course, I am sure in this case the supplier will be found to be insolvent.