CINCINNATI (AP) — An Ohio judge rebuffed an argumentThursday that traffic cameras make law
enforcement more efficient,stating sharply that violating motorists’ rights isn’t the American
way.HamiltonCounty Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman cited authoritarian regimessuch as Cuba and North
Korea as expedient, while saying the U.S.democratic system "can be messy.""But it’s a nice
mess to have," Ruehlman said.TheCincinnati-area village of Elmwood Place wants the judge, who in
Marchordered a halt to its camera use, to rule against motorists who areseeking nearly $1.8 million in
refunds of speeding fines and fees.Attorneys for the motorists say Ruehlman should order the refundswithout
a trial, since he has already compared the speed cameras to arigged card game.Ruehlman said he will issue
his decision Jan. 23.AttorneyJudd Uhl contended for Elmwood Place that camera enforcement can makethe
community safer by allowing police to focus on violent crimes anddrugs and have more presence on the
streets."Why not free them up to do something else?" Uhl said."Don’t make them sit there in
the cruisers."Attorneysfor the motorists argued that the cameras violated constitutionalrights to due
process, giving drivers little chance to challenge thecamera-generated citations. They also said the village
didn’t giveproper notice that the camera enforcement was starting, resulting inthousands of speeding
citations within the first month in a village of2,200 people.Uhl said speeders rarely win challenges to
ticketshanded out by police, and that drivers can avoid tickets by going thespeed limit. He also said camera
enforcement has been increasingly usedin communities across Ohio and the country, and has been upheld by
othercourts."This is the 21st Century," Uhl said.But MikeAllen, attorney for the drivers, said
there is a growing groundswellagainst camera enforcement, including in Ohio, where legislators
areconsidering a bill for a statewide ban.Allen said the judge’sMarch order, which called the camera system
a scam and a con game, was"strong language, but accurate language."He said many of thosegetting
the $105 tickets were people on fixed incomes, single mothersand others whose household budgets were hit
hard. Ruehlman has said theoriginal 2012 lawsuit filed by Allen can be expanded to all drivers whogot
tickets before he halted the camera enforcement.Elmwood Placesaid the judge should wait until after its
appeals of his earlierrulings are completed, and until after the Ohio Supreme Court rules in apending case
over camera enforcement in Toledo. The village also saidcomplicating an order for Elmwood Place to pay
refunds is that 40percent of the revenues went to a Lanham, Md.-based company,Optotraffic, which owned and
operated the cameras.The ElmwoodPlace case helped spur new lawsuits against cameras in the nearbyvillage of
New Miami and in the northern Ohio village of Lucas, and hasdrawn the attention of national opponents of
camera enforcement.___Contact the reporter at http://www.twitter.com/dansewellCopyright
2013 The Associated Press. All rightsreserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten
orredistributed.