J.A.I.L. News Journal
Los Angeles, California June 19, 2007
Lines are Drawn:
J.A.I.L. versus The Foreign Power
A Power Foreign to Our
By Ron Branson - National J.A.I.L. CIC
Finally, the courts are catching up with what most
everyone already suspected, that is, that those red light cameras placed
at intersections are unconstitutional. The problem is, it is such a
money-maker for cities that, like drugs, it is hard to get off their
addiction. Some years ago a judge in San Diego County California declared
the cameras a violation of the Constitution, yet such violation seemed to
continue unabated in California.
Throughout this country, local governments have
reaped untold hundreds of millions of dollars for years from the people,
but there appears to be no mass voluntary offer to pay it all back to
everyone from whom they took it. The message conveyed is that it is
alright to steal if you can get away with it, and if you get
caught, you have only to restore the booty taken from the
victim - provided he has the money to hire an attorney and go to
court and sue for the return of his stolen
the three below articles will be a delight to the ears and eyes of
millions who have been victimized, the problem is much more immense than
described. Back in 1968 the California legislature decided that
California could make a lot more money if they totally eliminated jury
trials in all traffic cases, and so, effective January 1, 1969, they
"eradicated" the U.S. Constitutional provision of Article III, Section 2,
Clause 3 that specifically provides, "The trial of all crimes, except in
cases of impeachment, shall be by jury." Since California was able to
pull off this heist and reap hundreds of millions of dollars, the
enticement was too great for other states to resist. They, like bank
robbers, likewise decided to participate in the heist, and enjoy the
booty of stolen money without consideration that they were in direct
violation of their sworn Oaths of Office and the Constitution. Indeed,
"Stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant."
author of J.A.I.L. I have afore-considered how ironic it will be
if the downfall of evil and corrupt government is found in
parking tickets, cameras and traffic citations. By no stretch of anyone's
imagination can red light cameras fit the constitutional jury trial
exception of "except in cases of impeachment." I have been castigated in
the media for my position saying, "If Mr. Branson has his way, there will
be a jury trial for not having a dog license." My response has been,
"I did not write the Constitution, I am only interested in seeing it is
adhered to by those who have sworn to obey it." Do we not constantly hear
the mantra, "You will obey the law!"? I can think of no greater
poetic justice than obedience to the standards established for
those who love to impose standards on us. "For they bind
heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders;
but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers."
Matthew 23:4. "For
with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged." Matthew 7:2. With
the passage of J.A.I.L. in this country, the Frankenstein they have
created will come home to roost.
Minnesota Supreme Court Strikes Down Red Light
The Minnesota Supreme Court delivers a unanimous decision
striking down the legality of red light cameras.
The Minnesota Supreme Court today delivered
the highest-level court rebuke to photo enforcement to date with a
unanimous decision against the Minneapolis red light camera program. The
high court upheld last September's Court of Appeals decision that found
the city's program had violated state law (read opinion).
The supreme court found that Minneapolis had disregarded a state law
imposing uniformity of traffic laws across the state. The city's photo
ticket program offered the accused fewer due process protections than
available to motorists prosecuted for the same offense in the
conventional way after having been pulled over by a policeman. The court
argued that Minneapolis had, in effect, created a new type of crime:
"owner liability for red-light violations where the owner neither
required nor knowingly permitted the violation."
"We emphasized in Duffy that a driver must be able to travel
throughout the state without the risk of violating an ordinance with
which he is not familiar," the court wrote. "The same concerns apply to
owners. But taking the state's argument to its logical conclusion, a city
could extend liability to owners for any number of traffic offenses as to
which the Act places liability only on drivers. Allowing each
municipality to impose different liabilities would render the Act's
uniformity requirement meaningless. Such a result demonstrates that [the
Minneapolis ordinance] conflicts with state law."
The court also struck down the "rebutable presumption" doctrine that lies
at the heart of every civil photo enforcement ordinance across the
"The problem with the presumption that the owner was the driver is that
it eliminates the presumption of innocence and shifts the burden of proof
from that required by the rules of criminal procedure," the court
concluded. "Therefore the ordinance provides less procedural protection
to a person charged with an ordinance violation than is provided to a
person charged with a violation of the Act. Accordingly, the ordinance
conflicts with the Act and is invalid."
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN SUPREME COURT
Filed: April 5, 2007
State of Minnesota, Appellant,
Daniel Alan Kuhlman, Respondent.
Red Light Cameras
on Trial in South Dakota, New Mexico
Class action lawsuits against photo
enforcement systems in Sioux Falls, South Dakota and Albuquerque, New
Mexico moved forward this week.
lawsuits against photo enforcement systems in Sioux Falls, South Dakota
and Albuquerque, New Mexico moved forward this week. Motorist I.L.
Wiedermann and his attorney, Aaron Eiesland, argued yesterday before
Circuit Judge Kathleen Caldwell that Sioux Falls must refund $1.7 million
worth of red light camera tickets it has issued since May 2004. The city
and its red light camera vendor countered that anyone who paid $86 is not
entitled to his money back.
Wiedermann's attorney cited the recent Minnesota Supreme Court decision
striking down red light cameras as illegal (read opinion) as well as a Minnehaha Circuit Court ruling that
found it unconstitutional for a city to provide no appeal from its
rulings on the facts of a case. There is no appeal allowed from a city
hearing officer decision in a red light camera case.
Albuquerque likewise may be forced to refund the $9.3 million worth of
tickets it has issued if it loses the class action lawsuit that District
Court Judge Valerie Huling recently certified. Plaintiffs argued that the
city's camera program created an unfair, city-controlled process to
appeal citations using a "nuisance" ordinance to bypass traditional due
"They've essentially set up a parallel court that has no legal standing,"
plaintiffs' attorney Rick Sandoval explained to the
Australian red light camera vendor Redflex (ASX:RDF) is in charge of both ticketing programs.
City seeks limits on red-light
lawsuit (Sioux Falls Argus Leader (SD),
City seeks limits on red-light lawsuit
Vehicle owners who paid $86 ticket shouldn't be included, lawyer argues
Published: June 13, 2007
A judge heard arguments Tuesday in a class-action lawsuit
against the city of Sioux Falls and Redflex Traffic Systems, the
company contracted to photograph vehicles passing through red
lights in downtown Sioux Falls.
I.L. Wiedermann of Sioux Falls is fighting the camera enforcement
on behalf of himself and 20,000 vehicle owners who also have
received $86 tickets since May 2004.
Circuit Judge Kathleen Caldwell listened to lawyers for the city
and Redflex who, respectively, wanted the case significantly
limited or thrown out altogether. She said she would rule on the
motions within two weeks.
Bill Garry, representing the city, said that when the
thousands who paid their fines did so, they waived their right to
contest their tickets. Only Wiedermann and one other man who took
his appeal to an administrative hearing officer and then to circuit
court should be permitted to fight their tickets, he said.
Richard Casey, a Redflex lawyer, said Wiedermann's claims involve
the city, not Redflex, so the company should be removed as a
Wiedermann and Rapid City lawyer Aaron Eiesland have
accused the the city and Redflex of:
- Failing to enact an ordinance prohibiting a right turn on
- Altering the timing of stoplights;
- Illegally imposing civil penalties;
- Denying due process.
Eiesland said in court Tuesday that the case is all about
money. With what Sioux Falls pays Redflex, the city could man the
10th Street and Minnesota Avenue intersection with police officers
24 hours a day.
In that case, however, Eiesland said the fine money would
be funneled through the state and be shared with the public
schools. The camera system allows the city an easy and sizeable
Part of Wiedermann's claim is that the city has no authority to
regulate traffic in a way not outlined by state law. That argument
won over the Minnesota Supreme Court, which in March struck down
photo cops along Minneapolis streets.
When Wiedermann filed his lawsuit last year, he argued that his due
process rights were stripped by a system that punishes a vehicle's
owner, not necessarily the driver.
An unrelated Minnehaha Circuit Court ruling since then
boosted the due process argument. Judge Bill Srstka in January
ruled in favor of Daniels Construction, which complained that the
city's appeal system is unconstitutional and gives them no
opportunity to argue the facts of their case on appeal.
Garry said Tuesday that because the $86 penalty is so small, the
city's hearing officer provides sufficient due
The 10th and Minnesota location was selected for cameras
because it has a large number of offenses and because a pedestrian
was killed at the intersection.
Edie Adams, 58, an Argus Leader employee, was killed in April 2003
when she was struck by a car.
Reach Josh Verges at 605-331-2335.
(Judicial Accountability Initiative Law) www.jail4judges.org
To be automatically
added to future mailings, place the word Subscribe
in the subject line
and email to VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
We are a ministry in great need of your
financial support. Please donate to
work at "J.A.I.L." P.O.
Box 207, North Hollywood, CA 91603
J.A.I.L. is a unique
addition to our Constitution heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful!
JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
E-Group sign on
Visit our active
flash - http://www.jail4judges.org/Flash.htm
He has combined
with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to
and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to
their acts of
pretended legislation. - Declaration of
"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
minority keen to set
brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who
striking at the
-- Henry David
Return To JNJ 2007
Return To JNJ Library Index for All Years