|
WELCOME to
the
Georgia
$peedingTICKETKILLER
Fraud in the Kourts EXPOSED!
page
In the simplest
terms, fraud occurs when someone knowingly lies to obtain benefit,
or an advantage. When Georgia Kourts deliberately practice deception
upon citizens with a view to gain an unlawful or unfair advantage,
by which the right or interest of another is injured, then the
Kourts are guilty of defrauding said citizens.
Kenneth
Waters
8/15/2005
During the course of
this article, we will concentrate on the practices of the local
kourts, and explain how they are defrauding
Georgia citizens
through a process of deception and outright lies.
When you receive an
automated red
light
camera enforcement ticket in
the mail from the
Marietta, Decatur or
other city municipal or county recorders kourts, you'll see a grainy
color photo of the back of the vehicle at the time of the alleged
violation.
You will also see a
close up black and white picture of the tag ONLY! Unlike all other
states, in
Georgia there is NO picture made of the face of the driver.
What none of these
bought-off whore
politicians who have inflicted our government with this disease
know, for a fact, is who was driving the vehicle. All
they know, for a fact, is who the registered owner of
the vehicle was on the day the photograph was taken. They send a
citation to the registered owner assuming the owner
was the driver.
If you were not
driving the car at the time of the photograph, these crooked
fascists try to
trick
you into identifying the close friend or family member who was
driving your car at the time of the citation.
Are you going to turn
traitor on your wife, dad, girl friend, co-worker over a violation
they may have not committed? Will you turn on your own kin to stoke
the treasuries of these crooked political prostitutes?
You are under no moral
obligation to do so. In any case, how can you say for sure whether
the driver ran a red light or not if you were not actually there?
THINK ABOUT IT! That is
how you morally and legally justify not turning someone in. If you
were NOT there, how can you know for sure?
Your inability to
identify the driver is quite understandable and common. When
considering all the family members, mechanics, and others to whom I
routinely hand over my truck keys, it would be a small miracle if I
could remember who was driving my truck on a specific day when, ten
days later, the photograph arrives in the mail.
When the kourts send
out these tickets, the tickets themselves outlines the allowable
defenses one may use to dispute the charge. In this case we shall
concentrate on the
Marietta
municipal kourt citation used in this articles explanation.
Click Here
From an actual Marietta Automated Enforcement Citation (Front page)
Such an
inference may be rebutted under City of Marietta Ordinance
10-4-170 if the owner of the vehicle: 1. Files a sworn notarized
statement with the Clerk of the Municipal Court prior to the due
date on the citation identifying the name
and address of the operator
of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation;
Note the kourt
references Marietta Ordinance 10-4-170.
Click Here
to read a copy of this ordinance.
Nowhere in this
ordinance does it say you have to do ANYTHING of the kind in regards
to identifying the name and address of the driver UNLESS the vehicle
was commercially licensed. Nowhere in Marietta Ordinance 10-4-170
does it state that the owner of a private vehicle has to do
anything more than just file a sworn notarized affidavit that you
were not the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged
violation.
These crooks at the
Marietta municipal Kourt however are referencing a local law, and
further inferring that the local ordinance requires you to identify
the name and address of the driver. That is deception, and an
outright lie.
Based on the kourts
telling you in an officially capacity that a local law mandates you
to take certain action that the local law actually does not, is out
right FRAUD.
Furthermore, the State
Law from which this local ordinance has been adopted from by
reference states as follows;
Click Here
OCGA 40-6-20 (Diii)
(D) (iii)
Submits to the court prior to the return date established on the
citation a sworn notarized statement identifying the name of
the operator of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation.
State law only
requires that you identify the name of the driver, and NOT
the address. The city and county kourts perpetrating this fraud
upon Georgia citizens have no legal authority whatsoever to amend or
change the allowable defenses under this state statute OCGA 40-6-20
(Diii)
(6) Except as
otherwise provided in this subsection, the provisions of law
governing jurisdiction, procedure,
defenses,
adjudication, appeal, and payment and distribution of penalties
otherwise applicable to violations of subsection (a) of this Code
section shall apply to enforcement under this subsection;
OCGA 40-6-20 (6)
states
that application of this automated enforcement, and specifically
defenses, must adhere to this code section. This code section
40-6-20 (D,iii)
is clear in that
only the NAME and NOT the address of the operator must be
provided.
The ONLY place in
Marietta code
that stipulates you must identify both name
and
address
of the driver
is in section [9] and section 9 deals with
commercially licensed vehicles, not
privately owned.
Furthermore, there is NOTHING in
OCGA 40-6-20
that states anything about commercially licensed vehicles.
Therefore that is FRAUD as well on the part of the Kourts.
Without a name and
address, the courts are getting nowhere in prosecuting these
tickets.
Georgia law does not provide for the owner having to provide the
address, only the name of the operator. Nevertheless, all of these
cities have written it into their code anyway, which conflicts with
state law.
What the
Georgia Court of
Appeals have said about such instances in numerous opinions.
Giles v. City of
Locust Grove
|
[16] |
The appeal
procedures set forth in OCGA § 40-13-28 clearly take precedence
over any conflicting rules of procedure contained in the city
charter, both because the Code
section is the latest expression of the General Assembly on the
subject, see State
v. Ramsey, 147 Ga. App. 150, 151-152 (248 S.E.2d 289) (1978),
and also "by reason of the general provision in the Georgia
Constitution, and implementing legislation, mandating uniform
rules of practice and procedure in each class of courts in the
state." State v. Majia, 254 Ga. 660 (333 S.E.2d 834) (1985).
|
When the kourts sends
these tickets in the mail addressed to you, and tell you the local
ordinance mandates you have to do something, that you really do not
have to do, they are simply lying to you, and that is fraud on the
parts of the kourts.
Think about it. The
current civil monetary penalty for a red light camera violation in
ANY city or county across the entire state of
Georgia is $70.00
dollars. That is because that is all that state law under OCGA
40-6-20 allows. The local kourts can no more change that fine amount
from the state law in which their local ordinances are adopted from
by reference, than they can change the allowable defenses.
Copyright ©2004-2010, the
Georgia $peedingTICKETKILLER
All Rights Reserved

Click
on the BUY NOW button to Purchase Your Copy of
the Georgia
$peedingTICKETKILLER CD
via Major Credit Card Today! |