The Chicago Tribune is reporting that the City of Chicago has finally come to terms with the legal flaws in their school speed zone camera plan. Illinois, thanks to a nearly 40 year legal opinion authored by the then-Illinois Attorney General will only cite a driver from exceeding a posted school speed zone if there are children present. This is a necessary element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt to enforce the ticket.
The precedent exists unbroken to this day and requires the arresting officer to testify about the presence of children during a hearing. This is why signs throughout Illinois in school zones have smaller lettering saying "When children are present." In other words, the school zone speed only exists when children are present and otherwise it is the default speed for that road (prior posted speed limit).
The precedent exists unbroken to this day and requires the arresting officer to testify about the presence of children during a hearing. This is why signs throughout Illinois in school zones have smaller lettering saying "When children are present." In other words, the school zone speed only exists when children are present and otherwise it is the default speed for that road (prior posted speed limit).
Mayor Emmanuel's latest power play to install cameras to automatically ticket drivers who exceed the school zone speed limit was initially billed as constitutional, owing to the fact that, apart from privacy concerns, cameras can be used to regulate traffic.
The Mayor's legal research however failed to acknowledge those pesky letters below the 25 mph limit and now they are putting the onus for detecting children in these photos on the companies bidding to install the latest network of cameras. Ostensibly to generate more revenue, the Mayor hailed the cameras as an important tool to protect pedestrians, especially children, from reckless drivers.
When these cameras are eventually installed, drivers will be scrutinizing the photos for the presence of children. Drivers should contact an attorney if they feel that their ticket can be challenged. The City's attorneys will have trouble convincing administrative law judges that the ticket should be enforced if there isn't a clear image of a child. The City has the burden to prove the presence of a child and adult pedestrians do not trigger the lower school speed limit. It will be a mighty burden to meet and a canny defense attorney can really make their task frustrating, if not impossible. However, cited drivers cannot challenge the ticket if they were exceeding the prior posted speed limit.
The Mayor's legal research however failed to acknowledge those pesky letters below the 25 mph limit and now they are putting the onus for detecting children in these photos on the companies bidding to install the latest network of cameras. Ostensibly to generate more revenue, the Mayor hailed the cameras as an important tool to protect pedestrians, especially children, from reckless drivers.
When these cameras are eventually installed, drivers will be scrutinizing the photos for the presence of children. Drivers should contact an attorney if they feel that their ticket can be challenged. The City's attorneys will have trouble convincing administrative law judges that the ticket should be enforced if there isn't a clear image of a child. The City has the burden to prove the presence of a child and adult pedestrians do not trigger the lower school speed limit. It will be a mighty burden to meet and a canny defense attorney can really make their task frustrating, if not impossible. However, cited drivers cannot challenge the ticket if they were exceeding the prior posted speed limit.
RSS Feed
