Here we go again: Everyone in the U.S. is entitled to due process except law enforcement centered in Ridgeland.
This newspaper has pronounced each and every move made by the police department as guilty of something. Only the penalty phase remains to be adjudicated by your bulk ink supply.
The pre-decisional dissonance manifest in your April 21 editorial assures the readers that you alone are judge and jury in this matter. Your continued reliance on allegations made by an interest-bound attorney in the present litigation seems to be your view. Not believing allegations contained in the litigation, and repeated in your editorial, I took it upon myself to verify the existence of the 66 percent collection agreement between iTraffic and the town of Ridgeland. After speaking with an official in Ridgeland, I was assured there is no such agreement in existence and never has been.
Incidentally, that was your job to verify, not mine. Please take the time to read Title 57 Highways, Bridges and Ferries Chapter 5. State Highway Systems; Article 9. Turnpike Projects, where your good old boys in Columbia set out affirmative defenses for the scoundrels that violated the legal photo taking of motor vehicle violations. That's a defense wherein the scoundrel must prove his innocence, not the police prove him guilty.
Digital Access for only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.
John A. Varone
Editor's note: The lawsuit's exhibits include an unsigned copy of a collection agency agreement between iTraffic and the town of Ridgeland.