Monday, April 7, 2008

If You Love Freedom, Thank a Librarian.

I got a ticket from Harlingen in the mail today for $75.00 for running a stop light on March 26, 2008. Of course, I promptly paid it, as I always do during those occasional periods when I have enough cash to pay them. Otherwise I become self-righteous, innocent and decide to demand my Texas Constitition-guaranteed jury trial.

The technology was really pretty cool. It had a picture of my no-longer-new Hyundai with a nice view of dents on in the rear. (It did not, however, catch the dents on the two sides). A tattered red bumper sticker quoting a former pope was stuck to the rear window. The license plate was mine. And you could almost make out the silhouette of the driver.

I say almost, because you see, I was not in Harlingen March 26th. In fact, I struggle not to go north of 802. I've never known anything good to happen that far north. I know Freddy Fender was from San Benito and that pretty well redeems the city, but Harlingen--I just can't think of anything.

I will go to the airport in Harlingen if I am facing really bad news that will make me actually fly somewhere, but I would rather drive a range of about ten hours than get on an airplane, so I do not exactly rack up the frequent flyer miles. In fact, I don't think I've gotten a free airplane ticket in ten years. I'll also go up to Raymondville for jail visits, but I hardly ever leave the main thoroughfares.

Mere work will not force me to go further than Raymondville. We are talking about death, marriage or birth (not mine for any of the three) and not much else.

So you can imagine my surprise to find I had been ticketed in Harlingen. And this on a perfectly good day when I most likely would not have left the house or driven, much less to some frightening northern city.

As you might guess, it wasn't me. Though I have not yet conducted the cross-examination, that week was Spring Break, Kathy was not teaching, her car was in the shop and believe I have some evidence she went to Harlingen to a stained glass shop in my car. She must have also busted a stop light, but since I was not there, it will be hard to argue against this allegation.

OK. Maybe a small thing. My car commits an offense, maybe, when I'm not there and I am responsible for paying the fine. (Anyone who thinks there is a chance that I might suggest Kathy pay the fine has clearly not been married as long as I have).

But where is my culpable mental state? I mean if I commit a criminal act don't all the various theories of law require I know I've committed a crime?

Unfortunately, committing a crime without knowing it is increasingly common. I represented a high school student who got in his Dad's car and drove it to school. The Dad had been repairing the upholstery in the back seat and left an unopened beer on the floor board. Sniffer dogs, parking lot patrols or other devices somehow turned it up while the student was in school. Zero Tolerance!! So the student, though not a great student, but nevertheless college bound, finds himself sentenced to 30 days in an alternative school penitentiary. We sued and then compromised.

Another case involved the dogs alerting to a girl's trunk at school. It turned out she had a sack of dog food in the trunk.

In theory, a Mexican National could be kidnapped and carried in a trunk into the United States and he might be guilt of illegal entry, because the crime may not require a culpable mental state.

I had a client accused of exporting legal cars, but not following the (brand new) regulations governing the paperwork. Knowledge of the law is not required for the crime and some laws are so obscure, no one knows them.

Maybe it's just that I am a relic of past days that make me think we should have some intent to commit a crime before we become criminals. Thirty five years ago, knowing you were committing a crime before you were prosecuted was a clearly defined right. But that's not the way it is now.

When we let rights slip away, they don't come back without a fight. And we just seem to get used to it. I had a friend once who argued that hell was really impossible because the idea of eternal suffering didn't make sense: after a while, you would get used to it.

I remember being shocked when I first got searched before I got on an airplane. Then I was shocked when I first got searched going into a courthouse. These things don't shock me anymore. But then, going on an airplane or in a courthouse was more or less voluntary for me.

What about all those jurors who are required to go by law, but can only go if they are searched? How are they "secure in their persons?"

We now expect to have our phone records given to the government, videotaping anytime we are outside of home, fingerprint taken to cash a check and blood taken if we drive. I know there is a good argument for each of these, doesn't anybody else feel just a little bit violated? Almost anyone in uniform can walk up and demand to see your ID. School lockers and car trunks at school and your car as far north as Sarita can be searched. And that's for the citizens.

Employers demand polygraphs to get or keep your job. Getting a loan, health insurance, a government job can be even worse. "Mr. Jones, ever committed adultery?" "Ms. Smith, ever had an STD?"

I was at a seminar a couple of weeks back and one of the speakers made this point: who can we think of in the last thirty years who has stood firm rather than give up civil liberties? Only the librarians. God bless them.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Mr. Stapleton,

Brilliant arguments!

Would you care to join me in the fight against red-light cameras in Brownsville?

V

StapletonAndStapleton said...

You bet!

Anonymous said...

These red light tickets are civil matters. So, unfortunately, you wasted your $75.:)

B.

The Merovingian said...

"Ms. Smith, ever had an STD?"

Human life is a sexually transmitted disease. Just in case anyone was wondering.

M.

Anonymous said...

Human life is a sexually transmitted disease.

Mr. M,

If it is, can we have a concert? How about a charity?

V

Anonymous said...

Mr. B,

They may be civil matters, but it can affect your credit report and score according to the State.

The private company can report you to a delinquency or collection agency, which in turn punishes you for not paying your bill. Whether they track down all necessary information to hurt your credit report is another story. For the sake of argument, let's say they can screw with your credit.

For us poor in the valley, any small downturn in our credit rating could hurt our ability to buy a car or house. For this reason, I am follower of Dave Ramsey who says credit is for suckers not buying a house. We should live with in our means except in buying a house.

V

Anonymous said...

Mr. V.

We shouldn't live within our means when buying a house? I know, you didn't mean it that way. Obviously, too many people have done that in the past few years.

You have a good point that the red light cameras may affect one's credit. However, now that cities must send half of red light revenue to the state after paying costs to the maintenance company, I have doubts that many serious collection efforts will occur. It probably just won't make financial sense. More cities will probably be taking them down soon.

Anonymous said...

11:06 Anon,

No, no of course I did not mean it that way. Thank you for noticing. I meant that one should attempt not to use credit or credit cards to buy anything in life. The only exception to this Ramsey Rule should be when buying a house which is an understandable form of debt.

Larger cities will not care about the debt because they are not involved in the collection. It is free money to these politicians. That is exactly how city governments spin the idea of using private companies to oversee those cameras and their installation.

Ultimately, the violation is a civil offense between the violator and the private company. It will not be a crime for this very reason. Municipalities are involved in receiving the fine before it goes to collection by the private company.

V

Anonymous said...

Mr. V.

I don't think the maintenance companies are involved in the collection of delinquent fines, only the initial payment. My guess is that anything delinquent would have to be referred to collection agencies or attorneys, and especially given that cities just lost half of the fine revenue to the state, I do not think most cities would bother to make that referral.

I can tell you from personal experience that cities will give up pursuing MUCH larger amounts than the $40 or so they might make off a single red light citation because of the costs of collection.

It is clearly a revenue generating scheme. It will only continue as long as a sufficient number of people continue to pay them without protest.

Sorry for the long, boring comment. By the way, you can appeal red light citations to a hearing officer, and then to municipal court. REVOLUTION EVERYONE!!:)

B.

Unknown said...

Mr. Stapleton,
I thought you were supposed to be a brilliant defense lawyer. How could you possibly be so ignorant of the law regarding Traffic Light Cameras and the fact that the only negative consequence of not paying would be damage to your credit? “Credit” is just another tool of the already extremely oppressive Capitalist society of which you have so eloquently bashed in past posts, so why would you care? Why would you blindly follow the unjustifiable civil dictates of the establishment and further empower the very evil corporations that are now scamming to steal not just your $75, but ultimately everything?
Shame on you Mr. Stapleton for rolling over and taking the easy way out. A true revolutionary and defender of the faith would never give in to such cruel totalitarian tactics.
A true defender of liberty would have stood on the highest steps of the Stop Light Camera Company’s main office, shouting in your loudest high-pitched voice “F--- EM AND FEED EM FISH HEADS!

Anonymous said...

Mr. B.,

Do not apologize because this post will be huge!

In a quick survey of recent red-light cameras in Texas, I found that both of us are right and both of us are wrong.

Since the new state legislation went into effect on September 1, 2007, new contracts with private companies can not affect one's credit report. Cities with contracts prior to last September are supposedly grand-fathered in as in the case of the City of Dallas, but that may not be the case after all (case in point, Harlingen, Texas where they were not grandfathered in with regard to another section of the new law).

However, this says nothing of a lawsuit by the private company to retrieve its owed money. It may not affect your credit report right away, but it may hurt your pocket book in small claims court. (You are a lawyer, Mr. Stapleton, could you notify us if these cases in small claims court could then be used against you in a credit report? If so, that may be a loophole in the new legislation.)

Private companies will go after you, but not necessarily the city. Houston reports 70% payment of red-light cameras.

In Lufkin, there are issues of freedom of information acts since the private companies want to keep their information on a tight leash. “The private company holds the keys to all recorded red light information for the city of Lufkin, handles all mailing and fee collection.”

Some city’s like Lubbock have scraped their red-light camera operations because they increased the number of accidents by 52%. The City of Dallas is cutting back their number of operational red-light cameras because they are eating into their revenue (again it is about money not safety). It is not eating into their revenue because of the low cost of tickets and people not paying them. It is because people know where the cameras are located and make sure not to run the light. Additionally, each camera costs them over $3,799 monthly just to operate them. Talk about expensive.

V

StapletonAndStapleton said...

Dear Idm,

My voice is not high pitched, but your suggestion is well-taken.

Yours inadequately,

Ed