Judge reinstates red light camera tickets in St. Louis

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

ST. LOUIS, MO (KTVI) – A judge has re-instated the red light camera ticket program in St. Louis. All money collected from the tickets will now go into an escrow fund in case the red light camera law is overturned.

This goes against a ruling earlier this week. On Wednesday the same judge that just reinstated the program, Judge Steven Ohmer, ruled that the city’s red light camera ordinance was invalid. He agreed with an appeals court ruled the city’s ordinance was void and invalid. As a result, Ohmer said the city should not enforce the law.

City leaders have argued the cameras are about safety. But, the attorneys argue that the cameras are nothing but a money grab.

St. Louis City has the largest red light camera program in Missouri.

Previous story: St. Louis judge stops red light camera ticket program

27 comments

  • GFFM

    Badly written piece. Which judge reinstated it? Much more info needed beyond what is written here . Jaco’s tweet is useless for the same reason.

    • Sandy

      Lol, this was the question which popped into my head. And the reason the judge’s name was left out of the article (not accounting for the fact the article is poorly written)? … because there would be many St. Louis residents who would want this judge out of the office!

      • Allen

        Its in the story. It was the same judge that cancelled it and is also the judge that reinstated it.

        As for Jaco’s tweets, do you REALLY think anyone will ever get a refund? Thats like saying that a temporary tax is really temporary.

        And its been proven over and over that the red light cameras do NOT increase safety, rather the opposite. The only way to make the streets safer is to get rid of the idiot drivers causing the issues in the first place.

  • Simba

    More reason why the State Legslature needs to pass HB 1533 and get rid of these SCAMeras for GOOD! Stop all the legal BS and do the right thing!

  • Lorrie Durbin

    I have over 20 tickets issued. However my plates were stolen and I was not driving the car. I have filed a report with the police and revoked the plates with the DMV but I am still receiving tickets. If anyone knows what I can do to resolve this issue please help. This has been going on since January 2013 when I junked the car.

    • David A

      Tell the company to remove you from the mailing list and that if you continue to receive mail at your address you will file a lawsuit against them for harassment. That’s what I told them. I said I will sue your company for $50,000 for harassment if you continue to send me these unlawful fines. If you don’t feel like confronting them, just throw the mailings away. What they are doing IS COMPLETELY ILLEGAL. Cameras cannot issue citations. This is nothing but a Billy Goats Gruff Toll that citizens are will fully paying, when they don’t have to. Bottom line is, DO NOT PAY THEM.

  • Ann king

    I think they should get rid of the red light cameras quit laying the. Police office off they need to b out there doing the ticket thing the reds r crooket

  • ByeByeToTheRite

    This is to be expected – after all, it’s America! Money talk$!

    I guess one of the wealthy pigs who owns the red light monitoring program and some of his political buddies in the city took the judge out on a hunting trip of maybe some girls are – well, with judges doing crack, who knows? I’m sure MONEY is what this judge change his mind.

    These are SO SO blatantly unconstitutional and afoul of the law, the fact they HAVEN’T yet been thrown out just PROVES beyond any reasonable doubt what a corrupt and injust system we have.

    Best way to handle this: Don’t pay and don’t show up! If everyone did this, there’d be no money, and no case.

  • Jheth

    I understand that the cops have more important things to deal with, like real crime. But I rarely see people getting pulled over for traffic violations. I have witnessed several cops just mosey on about there day after witnessing someone breaking the rules of the road. However, I think the red light cameras are a joke. I just received a $100 fine for turning right on red (clearly shown in the video). It was a legal turn, I wasn’t interfering with the other traffic and there wasn’t a sign posted against it. But I can’t seem to be able to get ahold of anyone who can help me expunge this fine from my record. Those cameras need to be used to mintor other criminal activity, not just of someone made a right on red.

  • Donn Levin

    It’s funny that your story starts with “a judge”. Are you now siding with the judge to reinstate red light cameras. You could have started with “the judge steven ohmer”. It’s obvious someone got to the judge,
    maybe a guy named slay threatened his judgeship. I’ve lost all respect.

  • Darin

    Jheth did you come to a complete stop before turning right at the light or just yield to traffic? A red light is the same as a stop sign so you have to come to a stop before proceeding. If you made a complete stop I think there is am appeal process on the ticket. I really don’t understand how one state can call them illegal an another one deem them fine. MN had them a number of years ago and was thrown out after a judge considered them unconstitutional. Iowa is worse because they have speeding cameras in some cities which you will get a ticket in the mail for going 2 miles over the limit.

  • Tim Huffman

    These lights are for money only. They make millions off of them. Judges get paid off a lot of times and are crooks. They are judges because they could not make it in private practice

  • Juanita Hinrichs

    If they take thes cameras out an you are ever injured in an accident, an it wasn’t your fault you will wish that camera was still there. If you drive like you should you wouldn’t have to worry about getting a ticket!! Grow up an get over yourselves, an look st the good they can do.

  • Jusatyro

    Under the The U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Missouri v. McNeely. – An officer can use ‘ Probable Cause’ to apply for a search warrant for drunk driving if a judge has all the facts to issue the warrant.
    but……?……,
    How can states ,or cities, now argue that traffic roadblocks are reasonable use of ‘ Probable Cause’ for searches and seizures, if a majority of the cities traffic violations, are done by traffic cameras ?…DUH

    Red Light Cameras and Speed Cameras defeats the argument that Chief Justice Rehnquist gave for allowing the justification of a state reasons to violate the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution in allowing traffic roadblocks ..

    Would Chief Justice Rehnquist have the same opinion today, if he would have known that states and cities with red light cameras and speed cameras have on their own admission stated it’s unnecessary to stop motorists for traffic violations and that the Federal and State Point System is unnecessary.

    How can states ,or cities now argue that traffic roadblocks are reasonable use for searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, if a majority of the states major cities traffic violations are done by traffic cameras ?…

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.