Retired trooper sues Springfield over stoplight cams

He got the ticket because it was his car that was filmed by the cameras, but he argues that nobody has proved that it was him behind the wheel.

Comments

How ironic!

[Truth Teller]

Hey RETIRED trooper.
Sucks to be a "civilian" now, huh?

[Kansas City]

Just wait till 2009. We got ya.

[The Golfer]

Yeah, when the shoe is on the other foot, then it is not fair.

WHINER!!

Pay the ticket.

[Drew]

Where is the proof that he was the one driving? That's what he's arguing, and rightfully so. Until and unless the state (city) can prove it was HIM driving, there should be no conviction. The ticket is merely an invitation to show up in court, but the trial should prove that HE committed the infraction; however, it appears the city cannot prove that, which is the inherent flaw with that method of enforcement.

[Kevin]

I wonder if I can use that same argument if I get a parking ticket? How can they prove I parked the car at an expired meter? I won't hold my breathe in KCMO court.

[Drew]

Well, Kevin, presumably if you come back to find a ticket on your car, there is not much doubt that you parked the car in that spot. Otherwise, you would likely be reporting a stolen car.
Your alternative is to wait for the ticket you find to go unpaid and then cry foul when you're arrested on an outstanding warrant for unpaid parking tickets.
Then you can claim it wasn't you that parked the car. Then again, the same argument could be made for this guy's phantom driver.

[Jonathan]

LOL! Ironic because the Highway Patrol uses Stoplight Cameras on our highways? The irony is that the people who think the least, post the most.

[Obama is the man]

I hope he wins...Stoplight cameras are like "DUI Checkpoints" and radar traps, just a revenue scam.

[Truth Teller]

The irony is that the people who think the least, post the most.

Posted by: Jonathan | Wednesday, December 03, 2008 at 12:04 AM

See you on here quite a abit!