Summary Justice is No Justice at All

Summary Justice is No Justice at All

by Mark Luedtke

Who needs that pesky evidence stuff for a conviction anymore? It used to be that police had to shoot radar guns or time drivers past landmarks to prove they were speeding. As easy as it was to abuse these techniques - radar guns intentionally don't snap pictures so they can't be used as evidence  - the system at least acknowledged that due process was necessary for a conviction. The police had to do some work, and defense attorneys could challenge them. But not anymore.

Two years ago officer Christopher Santimarino ticketed Mark Jenney for going 79 miles per hour (mph) in a 60mph zone. Jenney took the case to trial, claiming Santimarino must have clocked a tractor-trailer that was passing him at the time because he had not been speeding. On the stand Santimarino claimed he had estimated Jenney was traveling at 73mph, but testified his radar reported 82mph on direct examination then 83mph on cross-examination. According to Santimarino's own testimony, his estimate was 9 or 10 mph off. Close enough for government work. Santimarino wrote the ticket for 79 miles an hour "to give him a break." I doubt Jenney appreciated it.

Santimarino was unable to produce a certification to operate the radar gun so the court tossed the radar evidence, but instead of throwing out the case, the judge arbitrarily modified the ticket to 70mph - a number he pulled out of his seat - undercutting Santimarino's visual estimate. The judge wouldn't take Santimarino's word he could use a radar gun but did accept his inaccurate speed estimate. An appeals court upheld the conviction, so Jenney appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court. It concluded, "Given Santimarino’s training, OPOTA certification, and experience in visually estimating vehicle speed, his estimation that Jenney was traveling at 70 miles per hour was sufficient to support a conviction for driving over the posted speed limit of 60 miles per hour in violation of R.C. 4511.21(D)." But Santimarino didn't estimate 70mph; a judge invented that number.

Clearly justice was not the goal in this case, and it's pretty easy to figure out what was. Money. The police, the prosecutors, and judges up to and including Supreme Court justices all get paid by the same people: taxpayers. They're all on the same team confiscating money from us. We've long known that traffic tickets were about raising revenue, never about safety, and right now, there's no money for government. Ohio state government projects a $436 million shortfall for 2011 and a $3 billion shortfall for 2010, 2011, and 2012. Judges need to eat like everybody else. This decision is about raising revenue by arbitrary confiscation.

Think about it. It costs money to train police officers on radar. It costs money to buy the equipment. It costs money to have multiple officers patrol a speed zone with one operating radar and others picking up speeders. All those costs are gone now. Police departments say they're going to continue using radar - what else would you expect them to say? - but that's a cover. Beat cops can and will sit in donut shops and pick out passing cars to ticket. The accomplice press will dutifully cover it up. No matter how lawfully you were driving, if a cop gives you a ticket, you're guilty. Case closed. Due process is history. Summary judgment rules. Ticket quotas will rise. Yes, Virginia, there are ticket quotas. I don't envy anybody dating a cop's ex-girlfriend.

But this problem is far bigger than cops using this law to carry out personal vendettas and write more tickets because power corrupts, and this ruling gives cops arbitrary power. Police used to troll for vehicles they thought might have drugs or alcohol in them. Working in a local defense attorney's office, I saw this over and over. The police see an old, beat-up car with young black men in it, and they ride its bumper, trying to intimidate the driver into making a mistake like speeding or failing to signal. When the driver makes a mistake, they pull the car over then get the driver out of the car and search him, pretending it's for their own safety. It's called a Terry stop, but instead of a pat-down with the back of the hand for weapons as required by law, it's typically an unconstitutional search for drugs. Some officers go further and search the car even though they have no permission or probable cause. Unfortunately we only know about the victims who possessed drugs because they end up in the court system, and nobody cares about evil drug users. The victims who didn't possess drugs are invisible.

Because police cars have cameras and the cops can't disable them all the time without being obviously corrupt, lawful driving could protect a citizen from this abuse of power. Not any more. Though the system is rigged in favor of the police, defense attorneys could challenge the pretext for the stop and the other abuses. The judge almost always defers to his police teammates, sanctioning the abuse no matter how obvious (if you don't believe me, look up the records yourself), but a victim of the fraudulent Terry stop occasionally won in court. Not any more. Thanks to this ruling, police don't have to bother with the charade. A police officer can pull over any car he wants and start the abuse by claiming it was speeding whether it was or not. Good driving no longer offers protection against police lying in wait outside bars either.

This ruling is a tremendous step backwards for individual rights. Fortunately enough people are outraged that state representatives claim to want to fix it. But they're on the same team, paid by confiscation, so don't count on it.