Exhibit 1A Transcript

8/12/2019 Exhibit 1A Transcript

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/exhibit-1a-transcript 1/30

1

Exhibit 1A

Transcript of State of Arizona versus Underhill City CourtTucson Arizona Hearing held 10/1/13

My note In places where I put ??? or ??? in the beginning,middle or end of a sentence means that part of the transcriptwas unintelligible or I could not understand what was being saidat the time.

Judge Leavitt: Alright, we are on record on docket TR13063378,City of Tucson vs Mr. Underhill. Mr. Underhill you were cited forfailure to stop at a red light in violation of the code 28-645A#A

Location of North bound Oracle road and West River Road. On May20th 2013 was the violation date, 3:37 p.m. You’re ordered to thisproceeding today.

Officer Kates will testify first for the city of Tucson as the burden ofproof. After he is done testifying if you have any questions after histestimony he presented that would be you’re opportunity to askquestions regarding his testimony and I will swear you in to tell yourside.

John Defendant: Oh let me see that I understand that, after he isdone testifying I can ask questions?

Judge Leavitt: Yes you can ask the officer questions in regards towhat he testified to and then you are going to tell me your side.

John Defendant: OK.

Judge Leavitt: So officer Kates, Please raise your right hand. Do

you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Officer Kates: I do.Approximately 1 minute“Good afternoon your honor my name is Officer Richard Kates 35368a motor officer assigned to the photo enforcement by the TucsonPolice Department traffic section. In the case before the court today,



2

the violation took place on May 20, 2013 at 3:37 p.m. in theafternoon. at the intersection of north bound north Oracle road atwest River Road. The location was at the time and is currently withinthe city limits of Tucson Az. Officer Brad Lichty ID 42129 viewed theviolation in it’s entirety to include the video which will be presented ina few minutes. After which it was determined the citation for failure tostop at a red light was appropiate to be issued to the defendant JohnJay Underhill who is seated at this table here wearing a blue shirt. ” He then turned on the monitor with the pictures. “This is theenforcement document that was issued. Officer Lichty on 6/27/2013issued it Approximately 2 minutes It shows the defendants name, address, date of birth, driver licensenumber, the vehicle he is operating being a 2011 Toyota Prius andthe location. I request this be placed in evidence for the state 1A.”

Judge Leavitt: Any objections sir?

John: From me you mean?

Judge Leavitt: Yes the citation to be admitted into evidence.

John: The only thing that I would like to say and I don’t know if it isan objection or not but on the form my name is spelled in all caps Iknow that the Sovereignty people they believe it is bad to do that.

Note: I explained to the judge before we went on the record of how Ispelled my name,, Capital J then lower case for the rest of the lettersin my first name, then capital J lower case for the rest of my middlename then capital U and lower case for the rest of the letters of mylast name.

Judge Leavitt: OK, so ok, all right, but do you have any objection tothat being admitted? I understand what you said that the name is all

in caps with your first middle and last name.Approximately 3 minutes

John: Yes what he said in terms of what the video shows um I do notremember. I remember being in the intersection so the time iscorrect, I do not remember the arrow seemed like it was yellow when



3

I proceeded with caution but the video definitely showed that I did notreach the line in terms of when they claimed.

Judge Leavitt: All right, do you have any objections? I guess you doobject to this citation being admitted is that correct?

John: I object, my reservation, I guess I will get into more of thislater, I primarily defense rest on the fact that I have not been able toobtain documents necessary to question, to confront or crossexamine my accusers.Approximately 4 minutes

Judge Leavitt: You’re testifying now.

John: Excuse me.

Judge Leavitt: The issue I guess you object to the citation beingadmitted so I will admit that over your objections I’ll go ahead andadmit that into evidence.

John: OK..Officer Kates: Thank you your honor. On October 2007, The TucsonPolice Department in conjunction with American Traffic Solutionsimplemented the photo red light camera program. This is a detectionsystem with in ground sensors that cover the enforced traffic lanesprior to the point of violation. When a vehicle drives over the inground sensors after the light has turned red, the system trips thedigital camera to record the violation. This is in conjunction with thevideo camera that captures and stores the violation. ?? Thatcaptures the rear image of the violation and front image of the vehicleafter it has entered the intersection. On the on the monitor right nowis what we received from American Traffic solutions indicating that

the operation of this intersection is operating correctly referenced bythe complaint number, PO193635 and the locationApproximately 5 minutesThat being north Oracle and west River Road. It indicates that thedeployment started on May 20th, 2013 at 12 AM and indicating thatthe operational tests passed at that time. The violation camethrough the intersection on the same date at 3:37 p.m. and the



4

deployment ended at 11:59 p.m. Once again indicating thatoperational tests passed. This is a live system no delays the violatorsvehicle ???and checks are done routinely on the system to check thestatus. The system itself is ??? If a problem occurs the system willno longer capture violations and go off line until a technicianresponds and addresses the problem. I request you place this intostates evidence as 1B.

Judge Leavitt: Any objections sir.

John: Not that I can think of.

Judge Leavitt: OK

Officer Kates: The next photograph I will refer to the A framephotograph? This shows the layout of the intersectionApproximately 6 minutes.

Actually it shows the stop bar ?? fortunately here at the bottom of thephotograph? And the last line is the point of violation. In theinformation bar across the top of the photograph shows ??? Thedefendant’s vehicle as described in lane number 2. I am circlingwith my curser. At that point the defendant vehicle is actively ?proceeding while the light has been red for some period of time. Itindicates that the date was 5/20/2013 and the violation time was 3:37and the amber light phase was recorded as being 3.5 seconds inlength. The speed was recorded as 26 miles per hour, the phase ofthe light was red and the r time indicates that it had been red for 3/10of a second??? Lots of static…Approximately 7 minutes.

At this point 1,2,3,4, 5 red lights are displayed and I request that youput this into evidence as 1C.

Judge Leavitt: Any objections?

John: The only objection, I don’ know if it is relevant here, static I’mnot sure if the phase of the yellow light is accurate here. In terms ofthe rest of the evidence I do not have any objections.

Judge Leavitt: OK I will go ahead and do that.



5

Officer Kates: The next picture on the monitor I refer to as a Bframe. It simply shows that it is a moving vehicle showing that it hadmoved into the intersection and in fact was a moving vehicle. Irequest that you enter this into evidence as 1D.

Judge Leavitt: Any objections sir?

John: Static, No?

Officer Kates: The next photograph Approximately 8minutesIs the license plate shot of the vehicle AVF6374 then officer Litchywould run this license through the Motor vehicle registration andcome up with the registered owner. That registered owner has a

customer number attached to it, that customer number is the driver’slicense number of that individual. He would then take that numberand place it into the driver license system and come up with aphotograph of the registered owner of the vehicle. I request to putthis into states evidence as 1E.

Judge Leavitt: Static I am guessing, Do you have any objections sir.

John: Well I have a question. Only from my forensic video affidavitthat he believed that some of the photographs were in violation ofFederal guidelines as per the Manual of Uniform Traffic ControlSignals. The gentleman representing me here, not my lawyerbelieves there are some violations in the photos.Approximately 9 minutes

Judge: Leavitt: This photo here?

John: I believe this was one of them in terms of federal codes, whichI don’t understand. Would I say that I object then?

Judge Leavitt: Yes if you have an objection to this exhibit.

John: I may have an objection to the other one but I am not sure ofthe codes or procedures.

Judge: Leavitt: Alright



6

John: Is that something I don’t worry about until I present myevidence and it is accepted. How does that work?

Judge: Yea, you are objecting to this being admitted but you reallydon’t know why? Is that correct?

John: I don’t know why but in the affidavit he had problems withsome of the still photos.

Judge Leavitt: Ok. Approximately 10minutes. Judge Leavitt: Despite your objection I will go ahead and admit thatanyway. Go ahead.

Officer Kates: This is the photograph obtained from the Departmentof Motor Vehicles. It is the photograph we compare with thewindshield shot. Looking at the 2 photographs this does appear to bethe individual involved in the incident. I request this be placed intostates evidence as 1F.

Judge Leavitt: Any objection?

John: No ma’am. Approximately 11minutes.

Judge Leavitt: Go ahead and admit.

Officer Kates: I concur with officer Lichty that that the twophotographs are of the same individual. ???I am requesting that thisbe placed into evidence as 1G

Judge Leavitt: Any objections?

John:?? I could not hear what I said.

Officer Kates: The next item is the video of the ??Incident. In thisvideo we are able to see the full time of the amber light. Static youcan see the amber light is on now. In the number 1 lane you see avehicle coming to a stop appropriately to the cycling red light. Static,



7

Right next to it you see the defendant traveling through the line intothe intersection in violation of the red light. Continued static. Next Iam going to stop the video about the time the amber cycles into thered light, which is now. You can see red lights all across theintersection. You can see a significant distance between thedefendant’s vehicle and the point of violation.Approximately 12 minutes.You can see as I point my curser. As I play the video again heproceeds into the intersection causing the activation of the systemand photographs to be taken. I like this to be placed into evidence asstates 1 H.

Judge Leavitt: Static Do you have any objections sir?

John: Only that I am contesting the stated length of the yellow lightphase. I Static? believe that the yellow light phase was closer to 3.1seconds rather than the 3.5 seconds as stated in the citation?

Judge Leavitt: All right I will make that notation. Objection.Approximately 13 minutes.

Officer Kates: Thank you your honor states c the ? photograph,there’s information on the information bar across the top, we useequations to equate the times to the distances. The ticket indicatesthe light was 3.6 seconds long that indicates. The speed was 26miles per hour. The r time was 3/10 of a second. We can equatethat to distances with a multiplier of 1.47 times miles per hour, whichwould give us speed in feet per second. ?? Static next sentenceunclear. That conversion factor is commonly used in policeinvestigations in my career as an investigator and traffic enforcementofficer. At 26 miles per hour times 1.47 gives me a result of 38.22feet per second at a speed of 26 miles per hour. If you multiply thatfigure by 3.5 seconds you

Approximately 14 minutes.come up with a distance of just over 134 feet in that 3 and ½seconds. Add to that an r time of .3 seconds you get 11.46 feet.Those figures when added together come out to over 146 feet whichis more than adequate distance for a driver to react to a cycling lightand to come to a stop prior to the point of violation. ?Static could not



8

understand next sentence? Once again this is within the city ofTucson that concludes my testimony for now.

Judge Leavitt: All right do you have any questions for the officer?

John: Well, you did mention in the prior testimony that the phase ofthe amber light was 3.6 when on the citation it claims the phase was3.5. Approximately 15 minutes.

Officer Kates: 3.5 is 26 miles per hour.

John: No I’m just saying I thought you said 3.6.

Judge Leavitt: Do you have any other questions?

John: I don’t think so. I will say no.

Judge Leavitt: Ok, if you don’t then I will go ahead and swear you inand you can tell me your side. Please raise your right hand. Do youswear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

John: I do.

Judge: Ok go ahead.

John: I have kind of a quick defense and then I have some questionsfor you or the officers.

Judge Leavitt: I want to ask you, do you have any questions for theofficer?Approximately 16 minutesBefore you said you didn’t have any questions.

John: Oh OK so I was going to do that as part of my testimony so Ishould do that now?

Judge Leavitt: Yea so ok yea do you have any questions you wantto ask the officer?



9

John: Ok I should look through these. Just one off the top of myhead, is there anyone here from the camera company or who worksfor the Tucson Traffic solutions?

Officer Kates: It is the American Traffic Solutions whom is thevendor providing the information?

John: OK, long pause ok, another long pauseApproximately 17 minutesDo you know where I can find a certification for the accuracy of thecameras or any agency or government agency that independentlycertifies the accuracy of the cameras performed by an independentagency?

Officer Kates: I don’t know of any agency that independently certifiesthe cameras. This is the information I presented earlier from thecompany that the cameras are operating correctly?

John: And how would you know that they are telling the truth sincethere is no one to certify them?

Officer Kates: Truth has not been an issue since they have beenaccepted by the court.

John: I turned to the Judge and asked, So how does the court certifythat the cameras are accurate since there is no independent?, oh Iguess I can not question you. Turning back to the police officer, doyou know any Federal, state, city or local government agency oragencies that independently certify or modify the red light cameras orthe company American Traffic Solutions?Approximately 18 minutes

Officer Kates: Monitors the company American Traffic Solutions?

John: For example what I mean is if I go to

Officer Kates: That is a very complex question, can you simplify itthat is about 20 questions in one.



10

John: OK I’ll try. If I go to the grocery market Fry’s, Rey’s or Wholefoods right, um and I decide to by some produce from the supermarket, say a pound of potatoes. It is a certain price and it is all I canafford. When I put them in the scale and the scale says one pound,I’m assuming I am buying one pound. I am trusting that they are notrecalibrating the machine to sayApproximately 19 minutes14 or 15 ounces equals a pound. So what I am asking you is,??? Asfar as my research there is an Arizona Department of Weights andMeasures that

Officer Kates: Is there a question here?

Judge Leavitt: What’s the question?

John: My question to you is do you know what Federal State or city orlocal government agency or agencies independently certify or monitorthe red light cameras in the city or monitors the company AmericanTraffic Solutions? Who is in charge of regulating them? As a teacherI get monitored by the state and by my principal as well.

Officer Kates: There are traffic standards that the city follows. Asfar as an answer regarding American Traffic Solutions I don’t know.

Approximately 20 minutes.

John:? I guess I will consider this question later? Pause. Do youhave any idea how they are checked?

Officer Kates: I already answered that question in the testimony Igave earlier

Judge Leavitt: Yea.

John: I’m sorry. They say the check themselves every 12 hours?Tell me I’ve forgotten.

Officer Kates: Basically it is every 24 hours for red light violations.Every hour for speed determinations. Beyond that as I have told youmuch of the information that you have requested is of a proprietarynature, which the company doesn’t have to disclose.



11

John: OK. The next question isApproximately 21 minutes

And I have been trying to figure this out too, I have asked AmericanTraffic Solutions as well as to provide maintenance records for thecameras. Do you know where I can get access to records fromwhatever agency regulates them that provide guidance on how andhow often these cameras should be maintained? For example likethe Manual for Maintenance of Traffic Signal Devices. There arefederal regulations about how often lights should be maintained. Doyou know if there are any such manuals for the cameras?Approximately 22 minutes

Officer Kates: I do not but what you are doing is asking for the

regulation of the regulators. ??They are monitored by the manual,which you are referring to???

John: Yes, But I am still uncomfortable because I don’t know how toknow when they say their cameras or doing something, how do Iknow they are doing what they say the are?

Officer Kates: Let me answer your question with your analogy youused a moment ago. When you go to the store and weigh somethingin a scale, how do you know the person who calibrates the scale isaccurate? Where do we stop the question process? Where do we???

John: My answer to that is the person that

Officer Kates: I am not asking you a question I am just using youranalogy to make???

John: So

Approximately 23 minutes

Officer Kates: Do you have another question?

John: So. I don’t know if you can answer this but what percent of thetime do your cameras misfire. For example what percent of the timedo the cameras clicked on cars not speeding or are parked and cars



12

have been flashed not running red lights. I have somedocumentation but not in my defense of places back east where thathas happened. They were clicking pictures of parked cars.

Judge Leavitt: So what is your question?

John: My question is what percent of the time do the cameras misfirealthough, actually I am going to take that question back because Ibelieve you said that they stop working. Is there ever a time theydon’t stop working and they misfire?Approximately 24 minutes.

Officer Kates: I wouldn’t have any idea if it keeps flashing or not. Ifthere is something wrong with the system it automatically shuts down.

John: I will ask this question, I don’t think you will know the answerto it but I will ask it anyway. Um I did that one already pause, there isa long pause while I figure out what question to ask nextApproximately 25 minutes.I have some questions, do you have any idea how often the city ofTucson checks the timings of their lights and how often they maintaintheir lights.

Officer Kates: ?? Static I did not hear his answer to the question.My recollection is that he did not know and he said I needed to checkwith the transportation department. Because of the static I could notunderstand the next statement but I think he stated impatiently thathe is not a city engineer thus he did not have an answer to thequestion.

John: Well they are not here and I still feel I need to answer thequestions. Um one of the issues I have is they have not given medocuments that I want static so I don’t understand and I don’t know if

you can answer this eitherApproximately 26 minutesI’ve asked for some, I asked for an analysis of how their lights workbut they have not presented that to me. Is

Officer Kates. Static unclear ???I think he said I believe this hasbeen answered in my direct testimony.



13

John: Perhaps I am not asking the right question then. What I meanis I have asked the city to provide timing information like how oftenthey time their lights.

Officer Kates: I’ve answered that question.

Judge Leavitt: Yea

Officer Kates: “Yes engineering.” He kept talking but I am talkingover him so I don’t understand what he is saying.

John: But in relation to that question um one of the problems I havehad is maybe they don’t provide me with that information because

you know, it is a hardship for them to print out the big paper orsomething but then I realized that can I show you this.Approximately 27 minutesI found this document on line and printed it. It has nothing to do withthe case other than the data that I am asking for can easily beprovided without hardship. This is called The Final Draft Plan TucsonCity of Tucson General & Sustainability Plan 2013. The only reason Iam showing you this is because it is online. Everything is on linenow. Do you know why they cannot provide me some of thisinformation on line?

Officer Kates: ???As far as the city goes I don’t know as for the camera company perhaps it pertains to propriatory information.??Lots of static. They are not going to disclose that kind of informationto the public.

John: OK. Since I feel I am not getting a lot of the documentationthat I need for my defense regarding the light phase, the burden ofproof is on the state, or the city in this case, to establish guilt beyond

a reasonable doubt Approximately 28 minutes.

Officer Kates: Are there any more questions for me, you are testifyingagain.

Judge: Leavitt Yea do you have any more questions?



14

John: Oh I am sorry. I’m sorry. Pause. You answered this one.Let’s consider the training you obtained to interpret that data from thered light cameras, what organization or organizations did youobtained your training from?

Officer Kates: The material we obtained is from static I think he said, American Traffic Solutions?

John: Did they train you?

Officer Kates: Other employees that were trained by them trained us.

John: OK. But originally they trained you. Were there any otherorganizations or groups involved in the training static?

Officer Kates: Not to my knowledge.

John: Did you obtain any independent forensics training?

Officer Kates: In regards to what?Approximately 29 minutes

John: I guess in regard to how to interpret videos or look for errors.

Officer Kates: ??? the information is presented to us we do look forinconsistencies. We try to make sure that we have driver’s licenses,locations, and other pieces of information that is correct. ????

John: I guess what I am asking though and this is all done initially bythe American Traffic Solutions people?

Officer Kates: American Traffic Solutions provides all theinformation. We review it when an officer makes a decision ???

when identifying the driver.Approximately 30 minutes

John: No other organizations were involved in the initial training?

Officer Kates: No American Traffic Solutions is the vender.



15

John: The video I was provided by the Tucson Police atwww.violation.com where did you get that video from, or who createdit?

Officer Kates: American Traffic Solutions.

John: OK. Can you tell me the format of the video?

Officer Kates: No I am not aware of what kind of format it is? It playson the computer so you can review it.

John: In my affidavit it says it is a windows media playerApproximately 31 minutesUsing window media player how accurately can you estimate the time

intervals?

Officer Kates: With the static I cannot understand his answer?

John: What I mean is can you estimate to the second, tenth of asecond, etc?

Officer Kates: The information provided by American TrafficSolutions is to the tenth of a second.

John: I know when I try to view the video it is only accurate to thesecond. Can you tell me now you measure the 3.5-second phase ofthe yellow light?

Officer Kates: ???? Don’t know what the police officer said.

John: Do you know how the police or the people that create thephase, what does the yellow light mean?

Officer Kates: That is how long the amber light is. ???

John: I mean is it when it first comes on, or is it when it is a steadyamber light?

http://www.violation.com/




16

Officer Kates:???. It’s what you see on the video. I cannotunderstand what the police officer is saying.Approximately 33 minutes

John: He says on his affidavit that there is a violation on picturenumber 2.

Officer Kates: Is there a question?

John: Yes the video forensic experts states there are violations interms of the MUTSD. Are you aware of any violations?

Officer Kates: I am not aware of any violations or anything that isextreme. Second sentence that he uttered is unclear.

John: So should I, unclear because of static. I think I got myquestions messed up. I spend some time organizing the questions tosee if I missed any.Approximately 34 minutesI do have some more questions, I think, maybe. OK here are thequestions. There’s a national group called The TransportationOperations ?? There is a question at the end of this. They issue anational report card called The National Signals Report Card. Theyhave been doing so for several years.

Officer Kates: Is there a question?

John: I just said there would be. The National grade has beensteadily going up. Do you know the grade for 2012? Do you knowhow the city of Tucson fared?

Officer Kates: I have no idea what you are talking about?Approximately 35 minutes

John: It is a group that monitors traffic lights throughout the country.It is a consumer advocacy group to monitor the safety of traffic lightslike Ralph Nader’s group monitored the safety of cars. That’s my lineof reasoning.



17

Judge Leavitt: I think he just said that he did not know what youwere talking about.

John: Do you have any idea why the city, the city according toMichael Hicks and he is the, I will get into that later but he is the trafficengineer in charge of Tucson lights. He said the last time that theyused the tool; they scored themselves with a grade of D. Do youhave any idea why they gave themselves such a poor grade? What Iam trying to get at is maybe they are not maintaining the lights as wellas they should.Approximately 36 minutesMy question is do you have any idea why the city gave itself thisgrade?

Officer Kates: No.

John: Should I continue with the questions or go into my testimony?

Judge Leavitt: You can go into your side of the story?

John: No I got some more questions. Do you have any idea of howoften the city checks the timings on their lights or how often theyshould do so?

Officer Kates: No I do not.

John: Do you know how often the city does check the timing on theirlights?

Officer Kates: I cannot hear his answer but I believe he said I wouldhave to check with the traffic engineers in the city.

John: I may have asked you this already but here; do you have any

idea where I can get the Traffic Timing Information Survey Report or Analysis for the City of Tucson?

Officer Kates: The answer he gave was garbled. I pretty sure he didnot know the answer but he probably said check with the city trafficengineers.



18

John: Yea I actually tried to get the information from them.Approximately 37 minutesI’m done with that so should I go ahead and tell my side/

Judge Leavitt: Yea. Judge makes a couple of other statements butit is garbled so I do not understand. At the end of it she says, “Goahead.”

John: My primary reason for not pleading responsible and paying theticket is the fact that I have not been able to obtain these documentsand by the way can I ask you a question, no I can’t ask you aquestion. Can I ask the question and not have you answer?

Judge Leavitt: She says something but I do not understand what

she says.

John: OK I will do that and just go on.My primary defense rests on the fact that I don’t have thedocumentation to challenge, question or cross examine my accusersin order to examine their credibility. This is a right I think is affordedto me by the fifth and sixth amendments to the Constitution.Approximately 38 minutesWhat I don’t know is whether these rights apply more to criminaltrials. I don’t know if the Constitutional rights also apply to civil trials.????

Here is my data that I can show it to you. The city of Tucson hasfailed to provide requested documents. I requested the city’s timingSurvey. Should I show you some of the page numbers of the letters?

Judge Leavitt: Yea.

John: or should I just state it?

Judge Leavitt: Garbled I think she said just tell us the main points.

John: So, I am hoping I don’t mess up this order here. Approximately 39 minutesSo the first 1 is on page 3 paragraph 2. This is a letter to MichaelHicks, Transportation Department City of Tucson I said please send



19

me the traffic engineering Timing Survey for the city of Tucson. I willread the rest of the question here but not read it all on the otherpages. If you are not responsible for this please send this to theindividual or individuals that can fulfill this request. If you can notsend the whole report can you send the one overseeing the left handturn signal from north bound Oracle to west River Road. Also canyou send me the certificate of accuracy for your red light cameras?

At the time I did not know they did not deal with the cameras.Approximately 40 minutes

Number 2, Michael Hicks did not/???? Page 4 paragraph 2. Thisletter I wrote to, oh I’m sorry this letter is to Paul Burton.Transportation Department City of Tucson, Supervisor Paul Burton, Ithink it was the agency concerning Streets and Maintenance. He did

not answer any of my questions but I think he deferred to MichaelHicks so for the city I primarily communicated with Michael Hicks.

The next one is page 4 paragraph 2. This one is to Mike Hicks. He isin Engineering Transportation department City of Tucson.Approximately 41 minutesSame question. These letters were mailed out to them on August20th. Michael Hicks did not know when the light that had issued mycitation was checked for its timing and maintenance.

Page 9 starting on paragraph 4. So I corresponded a lot with him(Michael Hicks) he sent me a couple of letters. I asked when did thelight on Oracle and River go through its regular maintenance check?Approximately 42 minutes“For example the light phasing of the lights especially the oneinvolved in my citation.” Did not get next sentence. “In the aboveletter he indicated that it did not go through any maintenance in May.In fact, according to one of these Federal organizations lights shouldhave their maintenance checked once every 2 or 3 years. I will talk

about that later. He indicated he last checked the light in July of thisyear after my citation. He did not know the date it was checked priorto my ticket so I asked him, Can I get that information prior to mycourt date and he said probably not because he would have to checkthe light itself to see when it was last checked.” Approximately 43 minutes



20

My problem with that as I realized this morning was that when theycheck their lights don’t they have to put it on line somewhere? Ifsomeone gets killed there might be lawsuits. They are going to wantto cover themselves. That answer Hicks gave does not make senseto me. I also asked him if he could give me an estimation of howoften the lights, the signals were checked in Tucson. He said hecould not because he was severely understaffed.Approximately 44 minutesI would think they would put that on line somewhere”. I could notdecipher the next sentence.

“The city of Tucson may not properly maintain their lights. Page 8paragraph 4, he said the City Traffic Report card for, I asked himabout the self-assessment, he said we gave ourselves a grade of a

D+ the last time we used the tool. This was during our phoneconversation although he said he had not actually given the grade.The city had over 400 traffic signals and hawks ? section ofengineers ? along with a number of technicians and traffic engineersin the streets and traffic maintenance division. This is datedSeptember 18th he sent this to me.” Approximately 45 minutes

Next is page 9 paragraph 2 and this is a phone conversation so this isnot a letter from him. I don’t know how relevant it is to the court, Ihope it is. In the above letter he stated that the city gave itself agrade of D+ grade. I asked why they gave themselves that grade?He told me it was done before he was on the job. I did not rememberto ask how long he was on the job. He believed the grade wasassigned because they were understaffed to properly maintain thesignals. I did not have the mindfulness to ask him at the time, “Whatgrade would you give yourself now?” But with some of his things hetold me on the phone you could infer what kind of grade he mightgive. Approximately 46

minutes

I asked him when did the light on River and Oracle go through itsregular check. Ok I already went through that with you. ? I askedhim about his staff? He stated that he had one person supervised byhim and there is another one from another department that alsosupervises all the lights in town. He did not indicate how many traffic



21

signal technicians work in the city in his letter so when I asked himdirectly he said they had a shop with 4 or 5 technicians responsiblefor over 400 lights. This comes out to about 80 lights per technician.He indicated that technicians are not assigned to specific lights; theyall are responsible for all the lights in Tucson. He did not specify howmany lights each technician should be responsible for during anyparticular period of time.Approximately 47 minutesWhen I asked him ideally what size should his staff be he indicatedbetween 10 and 15, which would be between 2 maybe 3 times itspresent size. He also claimed

Judge: Leavitt: I don’t think that is relevant but go-ahead sir.

John: I’m only trying to say it’s relevant because the lights may notbe maintained as often as they should be. On this page here I wentto the traffic signal operations and staffing guidelines from TheDepartment of Transportation, Federal Highway Department. It isprovided under the Summary section paragraph 2, page 27,Publication Traffic Signal Authorization and Staffing Guidelines, U.S.Department of Transportation Federal Highway Department. 2009.The website also provides Operational Maintenance of TrafficSignals. It states one traffic supervisor should oversee between 75 to100 traffic signals.Approximately 48 minutesNow in his case, he’s got 3 supervisors overseeing 400 lights. Each

person is supervising approximately 133 signals. It is a little bit high.He says he has 4 or 5 people working as signal technicians Theyshould be responsible for 40 or 50 signals according to theguidelines. He has 4 or 5 signal technicians each responsible forbetween 80 to 100 depending if 4 or 5 work for him. Another words,they are doing a lot more than the Federal guidelines say. Also theguidelines say signal timings should be checked every 2-3 years at a

minimum and he has not given a timing list or schedule and I think Ishould be able to obtain that.

He did say his staff for maintaining traffic signals is severelyunderstaffed. He has 2 people working under him and 4 or 5 signaltechnicians, which I think I just said.Approximately 49 minutes



22

What’s the next thing? American Traffic Solutions failed to submit thedocuments I requested and these documents were not onlyrequested by me but by the gentleman that was helping me fromMichigan. I asked for an independent certification accuracy of thecameras on page 1 and 2. OK this is in a letter I sent to ArizonaTraffic Solutions. Please send me a certification for the accuracy ofyour red light cameras in the city of Tucson. If you are notresponsible for this please direct me to the individual or individualsthat can fulfill this request. Do you have a certificate for the accuracyfor each of your cameras? If so I definitely need one for the cameramonitoring left hand turns from North bound Oracle road towestbound River Road.Approximately 50 minutes

Here are some additional questions I had. Can you send me thenames of people that can help me? I will leave my phone and emailaddress. I need the maintenance records of the cameras especiallythe one that gave me my citation in the month of May 2013. Can yousend me an over all summary of the accuracy of your cameras aswell? Can you tell me what Federal, state; city or local agenciescertify and monitor your photo radar red light cameras? Thank youand I gave them my telephone numbers etc. Do I need to include allthat? Do I need to state all that here?

Judge Leavitt: NO, no that’s fine.

John: and then I sent these questions to other departments I talkedto in Tucson.I got a response from Tom Karac who is a representative from

American Traffic Solutions.Approximately 51 minutes

About 8:25 Wednesday August 28th 2013, Tom Karac called andhere’s a phone number. He provided his email address and phone.

He told me he worked with the Tucson Police. He was a very friendlyvery nice, pleasant person. He told me to normally obtain cameraaccuracy, timing information ??? and maintenance records, I mustobtain a subpoena from the court. I could not afford to hire a lawyerso I did not. So I asked him, I thought I could obtain the informationfrom the freedom of information act. I don’t know if anyone knowsthat here, I don’t know if I can ask. He asked me to send him the



23

letter I sent to ATS (Public Relations) at their company. Actually Isent them another letter as well. He asked for that letter ??? and afew other comments about our phone conversationApproximately 52 minutes.I also asked him if he could tell me how often the lights were checkedin the city of Tucson. He told me he didn’t know. I would think theywould put that on line somewhere?

Then I asked him because I was not thinking electronics so I told himI would be willing to pay for any expenses for copies. And I said asfar as our phone conversation he said ATS releases thesedocuments if they are subpoenaed from the company and I amassuming I can obtain this information from the Freedom ofInformation Act or due??? Anyway they did not answer me so maybe

they do not have to. I also thought maybe there wasApproximately 53 minutes??? … This was just something I saw on the internet.

I feel like I need these materials because there is a significantdifference in the yellow light times in the police video. I did with thestop watch which is the timer here. Now I started the time when Ithought the green light ended and the yellow light began until theyellow phase ended and I ended up with some times. I never wentover 3.5. I went from 3.31 to 3.41 so I feel like it is a little bit short butit is only 1/10 of a difference. But then I did itApproximately 54 minuteswith his video, (the forensic video expert) and I was getting like 3.1.3.13 was my shortest. 3.19 was my longest. The average was 3.16.In his affidavit he clocked me in, he actually clocked me in 2 figures.The one I made for my testimony here is 3.172.So I don’t know what the discr epancy is. This video here (found onthe www.violation.com website has higher yellow light phase timesthan his video (The Forensic Video Expert). The discrepancy in the

times is around 3/10 of a second. This is relevant to me because ifthe yellow light times were short as the second video indicates, hadthe yellow been 3.5 seconds I would have been in the intersectionand not been cited.

Addressing the Judge, As you were addressing one of the ladieshere, you said if you stop before you reach the intersection, you will





24

not be cited. I did not know that. I guess ignorance is no excuse butonce I get passed the cross walk I can still stop before reaching theintersection. It is good to know.Approximately 55 minutesI would like to present this affidavit and the video. He has somecertifications, also discuss a little bit what I found out with mystopwatch and do some miscellaneous things. I think I am almostdone. How long can I go?

Judge Leavitt: We should be wrapping this up.

John: OK yea. Um, let me find the video clip. Long pause. Oh hereit is.Approximately 56 minutes

I am going to show you his curriculum vitae. It has all of hiseducation stuff. I don’t know if I just hand that to you?

Judge Leavitt: Show that to Officer Kates. Pause is that somethingyou will be wanting in evidence?

John: Yea, it seems like it is relevant. I have a question but I don’tknow how to ask it. If you submit an affidavit to the court and you lie,don’t you get in trouble? I mean it is a signed affidavit. It is like yoursuppose to be telling the truth right?

Judge Leavitt: Well you are presenting is, lots of static, hearsaywhich is admissible in this case?? We will go ahead and give that tothe officer and see if he has any objection.Approximately 57 minutes

John: OK now I was going to go through some of it. Next sentence Icannot understand what I said.

Officer Kates: This whole thing?

John: Yes. Pause. Do I wait while he looks through it, right?

Judge Leavitt: However or whatever, hard to decipher. Pause ofabout 20 seconds

About how long is your video?



25

John: Maybe it is 3 or 4 minutes.

Judge Leavitt: Do we need to put that on right now?

John: Sure. ??? We might have to go through it once? I don’t knowhow to put it in.Approximately 58 minutes“Will you guys do that?” The officer puts in the video.“Can I stop it at certain points to offer brief explanations? Do I just tellyou guys to stop it?”

Judge or Officer: Uh huh. They are conversing but I cannot herewhat they are saying.

Judge Leavitt: Any objection to this being put in?

Officer Kates: I can’t hear what he is saying but I think he says, “No”. Approximately 59 minutes

John: The video is playing for some time then I say, “This is theviolation. Please stop right there. So that is the time it took for theyellow light to change. It has the time in seconds and hundredths ofa second after.

Officer Kates: ?Your honor this is visibly faster, you can see the carsin the other lanes traveling faster than in the other video.??

John: Stop here.

Officer Kates: Here? This here? Still hard to understand whatofficer Kates is saying.This is where he talks about some of his ?

Officer Kates: It is still running. Pause about 20 seconds

Judge Leavitt: Hard to decipher what she is saying. I think she issaying to the officer, “What do you think?”



26

John: The video is still playing. “This is the stop watch he used totest against his electronic stop watch used to time the video”. Afterabout 20 more seconds of watching the video I say, 20 second test.Approximately 1 hour or 60 minutes.

After 10 more seconds I say, “This is supposedly a testing stopwatchhe used and the electronic stopwatch he used to time the phase ofthe yellow light is 3 thousandths of a second off in the 20 second test.So that is the video”. In the video he goes through some of theprocedures he used to verify the accuracy of his watches and howthey were tested for accuracy.

Judge Leavitt: Any objection to that being put in?

Officer Kates: ??Obviously this video is faster than the other one put

into evidence.?? ?? It is faster than 3.5 seconds on the amber.Approximately 61 minutes

John: I am going to say this quickly. He had a stopwatch. I alsohave a stopwatch. It is like a cheap stopwatch. It’s amazing, I did thetest at the same time testing my stopwatch against the tester watch inhis video and it had the same time as the tester watch in his video,20.00 seconds. I decided I was going to check it on my violationvideo and check it on his. On my violation video I had 5 times, 3.37,3.31, 3.41, 3.41, 3.37 = 16.87. I divided that by 5 and came out with3.374. What I noted about those times considering the human erroris some of the times should have been over 3.5 and some a bit under3.5. But it seems a tenth short by your video. That is not verysignificant for me.

Judge Leavitt: All right.Approximately 62 minutesJohn: I also did the same with his video. 3.13, 3.19, 3.16, 3.13, 3,19= 15.8 after dividing by 5, I came out with a time of 3.16. This is very

close to the time in his affidavit. He clocked the yellow phase at 3.17.Then he did an analysis where he counted the frames. Is that mine?I’ll take that. He counted the frames during the yellow light phase andeach frame was worth a certain amount of time. He multiplied theunit of time by the number of frames; do you know where I am gettingat? And he found the yellow light phase duration to be 3.102 I think.So that is all I have. Oh



27

Judge Leavitt: OK go ahead.

John: Basically my summary is I am upset and probably going to paya lot more in the fine.Approximately 63 minutes But I feel like, I don’t know who certifies the camera companies. Ispent all of yesterday trying to figure that out. I went to calleddifferent agencies both Federal and state wide and nobody certifiesthem as far as I can tell. I know that some people when they are notbeing held accountable they don’t always do honest things.

I have a few miscellaneous things, how much time do I have?

Judge: If you will just hurry.

John: I will hurry. I hope I don’t offend you with this but I wanted toshare this. I took a document to her I found online from the TucsonPolice Department showing revenue generating by photo radartickets and how much of that revenue is given to the courts. One ofthe things I have a problem with is the court here has and I am notapplying it is you um but it seems it is an impropriety somehow and Idon’t know if this is in the Constitution or not, I have read it a fewtimes I don’t understand it well butApproximately 64 minutes“I know in our legal history if you are a judge not in a city court butsomewhere else, and a case comes before you with a company thatyou have a financial interest in or conflict of interest, you wouldrecuse yourself I would presume. That is just kind of the policy. Oneof the things I am a little bit concerned with here and I am assumingthat you are salaried, so whatever decision you make doesn’t affectyour salary. But I have this from the city court and I will just show it toyou. I take it that a lot of money that the tickets you get, the money

goes back to the courts. And here again required court fees.” I amshowing this to the judge, so I can’t hear what I am saying but I think Isaid, “It might be something you might want to look at.”

Judge Leavitt: Is this something you want admitted as evidence?Approximately 65 minutes



28

John: I do want it admitted into evidence and the reason I want thisadmitted is because

Judge Leavitt: “Do you want to look at that officer?” She hands thedocument to officer Kates.

Officer Kates: Lots of static. “I do not see how this relates to theviolation at all. It has nothing to do with the hearing.”

Judge Leavitt: I’m not sure what the judge said because of thestatic. I think she said, “I don’t think I’m going to admit that but goahead. OK anything else?”

John: I cannot hear what I said. I uttered 1 or 2 sentences.

Judge Leavitt: I am going to ask you a question. Sir did you stop forthe red light?

John: I did fail to stop for the red light yes?

Judge: “OK, alright, anything else? “ Unclear I think she said, “I wantto give the officer time for a rebuttal.”Approximately 66 minutes

John: I may have tucked away my paper but I think I am done. Ithink I already summarized, didn’t I. Yea I think I am. I appreciateyou allowing me to speak my mind.

Judge: OK the Officers rebuttal.

Officer Kates: I will be brief your honor. The evidence shows with nodoubt. It shows a vehicle appropriately stopping for the recyclingtraffic signal while…?? many of the questions brought up are beyond

my scope and knowledge yet he has the obligation to … Approximately 67 minutes unclear… and not the state. Even if we take the standard that theamber yellow time is 3.1, the Federal standard for the amber light is3.0 to 6.0. The evidence speaks for itself.



29

Judge Leavitt: Officer if there was a malfunction what would happenanyway?

Officer Kates: I indicated in my testimony that the system would shutdown and not record violations until the problem was addressed.That’s it.

Judge: All right. Mr. Underhill based on the evidence presentedtoday I do find that the city has submitted the burden of proof for theviolation. I am going to impose a fine today of $300 dollars. If youare able to pay that today, if not I can put you on a payment plan andgive you a due date to pay. I would require you to attend an 8-hourtraffic survival class.Approximately 68 minutes

John: OK.

Judge Leavitt: How would you like to pay today?

John: Can I pay like $100 today?

Judge Leavitt: However you want to do it.

John: OK. Now is this the end of the line in terms

Judge Leavitt: I will give you information about how to file an appeal.We will get you that paperwork.

John: OK.

Judge Leavitt: So you want to be on a monthly payment plan? I canput you on a payment plan of 25 to 50 dollars a month.

John: I want to pay a hundred or fifty a month.

Judge Leavitt: We will say fifty a month and you are welcome to pay$100 today. The court is going to add a $20 dollar transaction feesince you can’t pay it in full today. Approximately 69 minutes



John: OK. That’s fine, I understand. Does that include the summonsguy?

Judge Leavitt: Yes that is different.

John: I think it is $351. Now do I get any of this stuff back?

Judge Leavitt: It goes to the appeal.

John: Oh it goes to the appeal.

Judge Leavitt: “Yea. The disc and all of the ?” static I did not hearthe rest of her sentence,

John: What happens in the appeal? Do I have to pay court costsand lawyers and stuff like that?

Judge: No they will give you information at the ????? and yourresponse.??? And the officer ????

Officer Kates: Your honor… The last 11 seconds are silent.

Documents

Exhibit 1A Transcript