- The Washington Times - Friday, April 11, 2014

A Texas man with a camera-issued speeding ticket in one hand and a copy of the Constitution in the other took on the court system with an appeal that cited the 6th Amendment, the 5th Amendment and long-standing law.

The Daily Mail reported the unidentified man crafted a letter in response to his receipt of a speeding ticket that was generated by a camera mounted on a traffic light and issued by Plano authorities.

He first referred to the fact that Plano requires appeals to traffic violations be heard in court, and then suggested that his fine be dropped “out of respect for taxpayers, and my desire that their hard earned money not be wasted in such proceedings,” the Mail reported.

From there, he wrote that all charges should be dropped because the 6th Amendment guarantees him the right to face his accuser, and in this case, his accuser is a camera. He also argued that the government has no way to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and he’s neither bound by law to name someone else as the guilty party nor required — under the 5th Amendment — to implicate himself, the Mail reported.

The man further requested any “evidence the prosecution may have of my involvement in the ‘offense,’” including camera maintenance logs and similar records for the traffic light at the intersection with the pertinent camera.

He also argued that he had seen a video that shows the yellow light at the pertinent intersection only blares for three seconds before changing to red — 50 percent less than the safe time required for yellow lights that are mounted in speed zones of 40 miles per hour, as recommended by the Institute for Transportation Engineers.

Included in his letter was a mathematical formula that the ITE uses to evaluate safe yellow light flash times at various intersections and speed limits. The traffic light with the camera that captured his vehicle has a seemingly shorter time for the yellow light than recommended, the ticketed man maintained.

The result of the man’s appeal was unknown, the Mail reported.