Exhibit 4DConflicts of Interest

Canon Code of Conduct for U.S. judges(B) Outside Influence. A judge should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment. A judge should neither lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. A judge should not testify voluntarily as a character witness.

Judges in most courts are expected to recuse themselves from a case if they have a personal or financial interest in the case. This conflict of interest rule only should be ignored if there is no other judge qualified to hear the case. This rule has been a part of judicial law for hundreds of years.

The idea of controlling the harmful effects was an important issue to our founding fathers. Oddly judges in traffic court appear to have a conflict of interests in that the decisions they make impact the courts financially although it does not necessarily impact the judges personally.

In the following pages I obtained documents from the Tucson Police Traffic Division’s official website Traffic Division. I clicked on the tab Traffic Safety. Then I clicked on the link Traffic Safety Camera Program Annual Report.

The other document I got from the Tucson Police Traffic Division official website. Then I clicked on Traffic Enforcement Division. Clicked on the tab Traffic Safety. Then clicked on the link Traffic Safety Camera Program Quarterly Report..

In the two documents it shows the profits(revenues) and expenditures to operate the program. It shows that the City Courts get a significant amount of revenue from this program.

It is my contention that judges have a tendency to rule in favor of fining perceived violators without considering other factors to determine guilt because these fines support the court financially. Such an interest is more likely to over rule a defendant’s desire to question and challenge his accusers.

It is the only answer I can come up with for such courts for allowing a party to introduce evidence without any independent party being allowed to challenge the reliability, validity or character of that party or of the evidence the party has entered against the defendant. The court accepts the plaintiffs evidence, the camera and light that cited me as truth without any independent party verifying the reliability, validity and character of the plaintiff and the evidence the plaintiff has introduced into court. The court simply accepts this plaintiffs word as truth. See page 9 of the court record paragraphs 1-6 at about 16 minutes.(Exhibit 1A).

1

Constitutional Questions Regarding Photo Enforcement and My Defense

The Constitution protects citizens against deprivation of Life liberty and property without due process of law.

The Supreme Court up holds two general principles regarding defendants: the presumption of innocence and the right to confront your accusers. See 1965 Supreme Court Pointer v Texas, 380 U.S. 400, 403 (holding “the Sixth Amendment’s right of an accused to confront the witnesses against him is likewise a fundamental right and is made obligatory on the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. See article Wrong on Red, the Constitutional Case Against Red Light Cameras and the 14th Amendment in the Washington University Journal of Law and Policy.

A 6th amendment right to face accusers confrontation clause see Crawford verses Washington 541 U.S. 38 2004

The Constitution protects these principles in criminal proceedings. Does it protect these rights in civil cases? Will you allow me to question my accusers or those who represent my accusers so all here can examine their credibility?

A complaint I have, is I cannot directly confront the creditability of camera because it is not here. I requested information in writing as per the FOA and Arizona Open Records Law from ATS, but was told I must submit a subpoena to obtain this information. If an ATS representative is here will I be allowed to question him or her during this trial regarding the questions I have in the letter I sent.

I also have questions for the officer who determined that I violated 28-645A3A(PE)? May I also question the officer?

2

My defense concerns the creditability of the cameras and those who operate them so I request the opportunity to question my accusers.

3

To get to this document, go to Tucson Police Traffic Division Official Website – Traffic Enforcement Division – Tab Traffic Safety then link to Traffic Safety Camera Program. The Document looks much better on the website than the document below. Below is a link to the document http://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/police/Quarterly_FY13_TCSP4th.pdf If the link does not work then google Traffic Safety Camera Quarterly Report.

Tucson City CourtTraffic Safety Camera Program Statistics FY13 Tucson City Court - Photo Enforcement Program Statistics Page one -Revenues and Expenditures

First Quarter Second Quarter

Third Quarter Fourth Quarter Totals

Funds Remitted to City of Tucson Base Fine $306,612.65 $316,177.00 $408,063.00 $338,616.00 $1,369,468.65

Defensive Driving Diversion Fees $430,800.00 $341,760.00 $437,040.00 $383,760.00 $1,593,360.00

Required Court Fees $193,476.52 $218,860.00 $250,264.00 $211,255.00 $873,855.52 Subtotal - City of Tucson $930,889.17 $876,797.00 $1,095,367.00 $933,631.00 $3,836,684.17

Funds Remitted to Other Government $368,631.99 $371,954.00 $506,178.00 $411,922.00 $1,658,685.99

Total Fines/Fees Collected $1,299,521.16 $1,248,751.00 $1,601,545.00 $1,345,553.00 $5,495,370.16

FY13 Tucson City Court - Photo Enforcement Program Revenue Statistics Expenditures First Quarter

Second Quarter

Third Quarter Fourth Quarter

Totals

Gross Revenue Remitted to City of Tucson $930,889.17 $876,797.00 $1,095,367.00 $933,631.00 $3,836,684.17

Payments to Contractor 1 $0.00 $556,921.00 $398,674.00 $690,376.00 $1,645,971.00

Estimated TPD costs to operate program 2 $88,581.57 $88,581.57 $88,581.57 $88,581.57 $354,326.28

Estimated Court costs to operate program 2 $66,291.00 $80,470.00 $92,981.00 $68,377.00 $308,119.00

Estimated Cost of Program $154,872.57 $725,972.57 $580,236.57 $847,334.57 $2,308,416.28

City of Tucson Net Revenue $776,016.60 $150,824.43 $515,130.43 $86,296.43 $1,528,267.89 1 For the first quarter, the payment made applied to fiscal year 2012. The expenditure was accrued in fiscal year 2012 and reversed in the first quarter of fiscal year 2013, so the total for the first quarter is $0. 2The police department costs estimates are based on the average wage of police officers assigned to the program while the estimated court costs are based on the weighted workload percentage of violations filed with the court.

4

FY13 Tucson City Court - Photo Enforcement Program Statistics Page Two - Charges Filed First Quarter Second Quarter Third Quarter Fourth Quarter Totals

Citations Citations Issued 7,712 9,839 9,948 7,331 34,830

Charge Detail Charges Issued 8,314 10,477 10,607 7,431 36,829

Violation Codes Cited Fail to stop for Red Light 5,119 6,883 7,022 5,170 24,194 Lap and Shoulder Belt Required 410 423 416 101 1,350 No Valid Driver License 139 144 173 19 475 Speed Over Limit 2,490 2,767 2,793 2,043 10,093 Speed Over Limit in School Zone 104 189 133 118 544 No Current Registration 52 69 70 10 201 Fail to Display Legible Plate - - - - - TOTALS 8,314 10,475 10,607 7,461 36,857

Case/Charge Activity Hearings Held 510 340 522 361 1,733

Charges Dismissed 3 4,059 3,913 3,270 3,915 15,157

Pled Responsible 2 2,364 1,986 2,428 1,970 8,748

Defensive Driving Completio 3 3,703 2,930 3,587 3,127 13,347

Appeals Filed 1 1 2 - 4

Charges Defaulted 3 779 1,147 849 922 3,697

Charges Pending 4 5,398 9,638 8,585 6,692 9,638 3

Statistics based on charge disposition date within fiscal year.4

Charges pending are cumulative and include previous quarter/FY pending cases

          

5

Below is the link to the comprehensive report. Page 8 is what I submitted to the City and Superior Court. The City Court did not place these documents into evidence. I requested that the Superior Court place them into evidence. Page 8 of the document shows various sources of revenue remitted to the City of Tucson from the traffic safety program.

                           http://www.tucsonaz.gov/files/police/pdf/Annual_Report-_FY2012-_Traf_Safety_Cam_Prog.pdf

If this link does not work, google City of Tucson, Traffic Safety Camera Program, Comprehensive Report

6