By Tom Liotti
In the 1980’s the State of New York allowed for the establishment of Traffic Adjudication Bureaus. They exist in New York City, Suffolk County and throughout much of the state but not in Nassau. The reason is that the Hon. Frank Santagata, our Associate Village Justice in Westbury for 28 years and a Past President of the Nassau Bar Association, convinced local lawmakers that the Adjudication Bureaus would violate the Constitutional rights of defendants because there was no plea bargaining and the burden of proof was by clear and convincing evidence not beyond a reasonable doubt. There were no prosecutors just administrative judges and police officers who acted as prosecutors. Frank argued that this was a denial of due process of law and that it was overriding the function of local village, town and district courts.
As an alternative, Nassau established the Traffic Violations Bureau leaving District Courts with misdemeanor jurisdiction and village courts with jurisdiction over violations of Vehicle and Traffic laws (VTLs). VTLs from unincorporated areas or from County or State roads would go to the Bureau. For example in my village, I have jurisdiction over the VTLs alleged to be committed on the streets of Westbury but not on Jericho Turnpike, Old Country Road or Northern State Parkway.
The bureau has functioned well until recent years when lawmakers recognized it as a cash cow. Plea bargaining occurred and trials could occur with proof beyond a reasonable doubt as the standard. Their lobbyists got involved and red light cameras came into being followed more recently by speed cameras. Plea bargaining was eliminated on those cases and if you secured a dismissal you still had to pay an administrative fee.
Frank was right. There is a denial of due process in our Traffic Violations Bureau. Lawmakers have chosen money over the Constitution. That should be unacceptable to all of us.
When speed cameras first came into existence I sued the county under my not-for-profit Pro Bono Publico, Inc. Bar Association to disband them. As usual, I did this with my own time and money through the association which I incorporated in 2009 in order to challenge errant public policies such as red light and speed cameras. I lost. The system was against due process. I could not afford to keep the fight going but the reality is that red light and speed cameras are a denial of Constitutional rights. They are part of initiatives such as arbitration and mediation that deny people access to the courts, due process and trials before a judge or jury.
