PDA

View Full Version : Judge dismisses charges against man accused of destroying redlight cameras




disorderlyvision
08-04-2009, 03:16 PM
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2009/aug/04/charges-dismissed-in-red-light-camera-case/


Charges that Clifford E. Clark III shot out a red-light camera have been dismissed. But that did not give him a green light out of his legal entanglements.

In separate incidents, Clark, now 48, still faces trials for allegedly threatening plainclothes deputies with a shotgun and criminal trespassing.

Prosecutors also say they are contemplating an appeal of Criminal Court Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz's decision last week to dismiss the camera case.

"We are looking at that possibility, we certainly are," Knox County Assistant District Attorney General Zane Scarlett said Monday.

Clark's attorney, Ron Newcomb, declined comment, citing the still pending cases.

"I hope that my exoneration will receive as much publicity as my arrest," Clark said in a brief videotaped statement posted on the Web site he created about the red-light case, www.cliffspeaks.com.

Clark, now 48, was arrested in November 2007 after shots were fired into the red light traffic enforcement camera at the intersection of Broadway and Interstate 640. Police responding to a "shots fired" call in the early morning hours stopped Clark's vehicle in the vicinity, and from his car took a .30-caliber rifle. Clark's vehicle was the last one photographed, authorities said, and empty cartridge cases found nearby were later matched to the rifle taken from Clark's car, according to Scarlett.

But the circumstances of the arrest were not sufficient for the arresting officers to have searched the car without a warrant, Leibowitz ruled. That, combined with the fact that parts of the camera that Clark's lawyer wanted to examine are missing, require the case to be dismissed, Leibowitz wrote in her ruling.

In April 2008, Clark was charged with trespassing on University of Tennessee property and then with aggravated assault when he allegedly pointed a shotgun at a plainclothes deputy who came to his house to serve the trespass warrant. He said he wielded the shotgun because the officers did not initially identify themselves or show their badges. The deputies said they had in fact done so.

The aggravated assault case is set for trial Oct. 26, the trespass case is set to be heard Nov. 16.

satchelmcqueen
08-04-2009, 07:13 PM
bump for awesome!

Matt Collins
08-04-2009, 07:55 PM
YouTube - Santa's helpers disable naughty cameras in Tempe (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T43LtGNFLPw)

piratenews
08-07-2009, 08:21 PM
Order of dismissal in State v Clark (http://www.wbir.com/pdf/08032009_clifford_clark_dismissal.pdf)

Yes, that pesky Constitution is a mere technicality protecting We The People from a Police State.

Beyond the constitutional reasons named in the judge’s order, it appears the reason charges were dismissed was that Mr Clark subpoenaed a Knox County deputy to testify that a Knox deputy confessed to shooting a redlight camera. That subpoena was provided to KNS and local TV news, but they failed to report that fact.

YouTube - COPS CONFESS TO SHOOTING REDLIGHT CAMERA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25wIadTDcXo)

Mr Clark provided an exclusive interview (http://piratenews-tv.blogspot.com/2009/08/charges-dismissed-against-accused.html)to my public access TV show after the dismissal, but that interview was all but censored by KNS and the TV stations. We broadcast that 6 minute interview in its entirety today on WBCR 1470 am in a 1-hour interview (http://www.archive.org/details/CopsConfessToShootingRedlightCamera), where Mr Clark discussed that subpoena of a deputy to testify against another deputy about confession to shooting a redlight camera. Odd that the case was dismissed 1 week before trial. BTW my TV show broadcast all hearings in this case unedited for 2 years, then was banned from the courtroom right before trial. What is the State suddenly afraid of being reported?

Mr Clark also mentioned that all ballistic evidence was destroyed by KPD - the camera housing with bullet holes, and even the recovered bullet fragments themselves were thrown away, so no way to even check what caliber was used. All audiotaped “confessions” and “consents” to search his car and home that Mr Clark allegedly made were also thrown away by KPD, and Mr Clark empahtically denied making those statements. Even Redflex refused to testify in this case, perhaps out of spite since their contract got terminated during this trial, one week after Mr Clark’s lawyer confirmed that deputies said a deputy shot a camera. Mr Clark never got a redlight ticket, and he is very wealthy, so why shoot a redlight camera? The camera stopped working 6 hours before his arrest, so how did his bullets travel back in time? He never even got a traffic ticket during his traffic stop for allegedly "leaving a parking lot at a high rate of speed".

The only “evidence” against Mr Clark was that he was transporting an unloaded firearm in his vehicle, which is not a crime. Will KPD arrest every person carrying a firearm and accuse them of all crimes in the neighborhood? I carry a gun at all times -- does that make me guilty of all crimes while driving past random crime scenes?

If a person is accused of a crime, does that make it ok for police to break into homes and vehicles without a warrant, testilie and fabricate as much evidence as required to convict? Then steal all their guns out of a locked gun safe without a search warrant. After all, that’s what Hollywood stars do on TV every day…

Note that Redflex is an Australian company (http://www.redflex.com)that exports 75% of ticket profit out of USA, except for the $35-million in bribes paid to politicians in each state. Note that no person has to pay a camera ticket, for lack of personal service of process (http://piratenews.org/kill-robocops.html), according to all laws, lawyers, judges and politicians.


John Lee: Did you shoot the redlight camera?

Cliff Clark: No. I'd been asked this time and time again. I did not shoot the redlight camera. And I'm not quite certain if the redlight camera was shot. I never got to see the camera after this incident, or after these allegations. I got to see photos of pieces of equipment. So I'm not convinced that the incident took place as it was alleged.

JL: Did the camera housing disappear?

CC: Yes, many parts of the camera disappeared from evidence. The outside cover of the camera disappeared. That, of course, if the camera had been shot, that would have given ballistics evidence of trajectory, azimuth, et cetera, and that's gone. There are no bullets or bullet fragments amongst the evidence, which to me indicates that there was no shooting. Even if the bullets had disintegrated then the parts of the bullets would be within the camera housing. The official police report says three bullets entered the camera, and one bullet passed through, so there should still be fragments from three bullets. But no fragments exist, no bullets or bullet fragments exist. So I'm reluctant to believe that either the camera was shot, or very certainly, I did not shoot that camera or any other camera.

JL: Who do you believe actually shot the camera?

CC: I think it was the police. If that camera was shot, I can only believe it was the police who shot that camera.

JL: Why do you believe that?

CC: Every time a camera is damaged, the City of Knoxville pays the camera operators reimbursment for that damage. Which means destroying those cameras is profitable for the camera company itself. Another story in Washington, D.C. had the camera operators commissioning people to steal their cameras, so they could bill back the cost to the city as the leasee who is responsible for the cost of those cameras.

JL: Did you subpoena anybody who had evidence that a police officer had shot the cameras?

CC: Absolutely. I don't want to use his name on camera. But there was a witness, actually more than one witness, that has said publicly that deputies were responsible for other redlight cameras being shot. Of course, now the trial and charges have been dismissed.
So at least for the moment we're not going to hear that testimony.

JL: You did subpoena one of those witnesses?

CC: Absolutely. The subpoena was issued for a witness who has said that a deputy had shot that camera, or had shot a redlight camera.

Reporters Committee on Freedom of the Press reports on the ban of Pirate News from the courtroom in this case (http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=10945), "because public access TV is not real news (http://piratenews.org/order-denying-pntv-media-request-1july09.pdf)and you don't have a real business card", according to Judge Liebowitz. Four previous judges did grant Pirate News TV access to shoot video in that same trial for the past 2 years. Local news corporations censored this ban of public access TV, and testified against Pirate News by secret affidavit.

YouTube - Anti-Speed Camera Vigilantism Discussed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCLSTjCt_Gw)

Jay Leno and BBC TV tell cheering audience to shoot all Gatso traffic cameras (http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2859.asp)

piratenews
10-10-2009, 02:59 AM
All charges were dismissed against Clifford Clark one week before trial, after he subpoenaed a Knox County deputy to testify that a deputy confessed to shooting a redlight camera.
theknoxvillejournal.com/inside/pages/news/Accused-camera-shooter.html (http://theknoxvillejournal.com/inside/pages/news/Accused-camera-shooter.html)

Cliff Clark has now had a massive stroke, while awaiting the other bogus trials that he would also win easily, since govt can never dismiss charges against innocent people for risk of lawsuits for false arrest and malicious prosecution. Beware hypertension spike by serotonin syndrome for correct use of prescription meds:
piratenews.org/cliff-stroke-continuance-trial-date150a.jpg (http://piratenews.org/cliff-stroke-continuance-trial-date150a.jpg)

TV and radio crew threatened with arrest by judge in Clifford Clark trial:
archive.org/details/PirateNewsRadioShow9-11-09 (http://archive.org/details/PirateNewsRadioShow9-11-09)
PirateNews.org (http://PirateNews.org)

squarepusher
10-10-2009, 03:26 AM
wow, a framing by the police?