My guess is that he owed back some overtime, which is why Baltimore Police Officer James Fowler’s signature was on red light tickets, the ones issued after cameras caught motorists running red lights.  The way it’s supposed to work is that an officer reviews the images and issues tickets only to those who earned them.  The issuing officer then signs the ticket.

From Packratt at Injustice Everywhere, a  WBAL-TV 11 News story exposed a bit of a problem with 2,000 of the tickets signed by Officer Fowler.

The problem concerns the sworn statement that appears on the citations confirming a police officer has reviewed the camera images to verify a violation has occurred.

On the citations in question, that signature belongs to Baltimore Officer James Fowler, who was killed in a car accident in Pennsylvania on Sept. 27, I-Team lead investigative reporter Jayne Miller said.

That would make P.O. Fowler the hardest working cop ever, or a zombie. Or it exposes the methodology claimed by the Baltimore police as a fraud.  Sadly, the latter appears the most likely explanation.

Unlike offenses that are actually observed by police, red light cameras are notorious as revenue raisers rather than public safety protectors.  They reflect a cynical use of technology that does nothing to prevent people from engaging in dangerous conduct while creating an opportunity to suck money out without recourse.  It’s essentially impossible to challenge a red light camera ticket, there being no explanation that will suffice to overcome what the camera says.  And whether the camera is right is a bedrock principle.  Red light cameras can never be wrong.

Except for the fact that the Baltimore tickets were signed by a dead guy.

A city police representative blamed the problem on a computer glitch, which is the fault of the company that operates the camera system, and he said the problem has been rectified. Letters are being sent to people who got the violation notice.

After all, nobody can argue with a computer glitch.  We all have them, and as much as we rely on computers for everything, we similarly understand how things inexplicably go wrong.  Right?  Well, maybe not quite, since tickets aren’t supposed to be issued directly by the company that operates the camera system, which has a major interest in the cameras showing tons of red-light runners that make money for the municipality that issues the contract to the company that operates the system.

The question remains, so what if the company that operates the cameras has a computer glitch.  What happened to the real life cop who is supposed to observe the images and determine wrong doing?  What happened to the sworn allegation, sworn as in under oath, to which the officer endorses his signature?  What role does a computer glitch play in his ability to see the picture, determine that an offense occurred, and sign his name on the undotted line?

The Police Department said it does not blanket approve citations, and only the violators got the erroneous copies. A department representative said internal copies show the name of the officer who actually reviewed the violations.

Problem solved.  The department says so.  Then again, few departments approve (as opposed to disapprove, since they don’t do that either) of police officers giving a perp a good tuning after he demonstrated a lack of respect for authority.  Yet it happens.  As for “internal copies” naming the cop who “actually reviews the violations,” one might surmise that this refers to the officer’s assignment.  Certainly, it’s likely that a cop was given the duty.  That he didn’t do a bang up job seems pretty obvious.  That he may not have done any job at all seems possible as well.

What none of this serves to explain is how the Baltimore Police Department has any credibility that its backroom red-light operation is legit.  And by no means does this relate solely to Baltimore.  The entire red-light scheme is a backroom function, with the capture of violations occurring secretly and the “decision” to issue a summons occurring mechanically.

Given that police are decidedly less than thrilled with citizens observing and recording their conduct in public, given their occasional glitch in professionalism as demonstrated by needless beatings of innocent people, there is good reason to fear that police functions that occur entirely in private are complete and total shams.  And then the occasional glitch, like a dead cops signing tickets, comes along to confirm our worst fears.

For local politicians, the red-light revenue raisers were a gift, a source of funding that no righteous law-abiding citizen could complain about, a substitute for raising taxes, free money on the shoulders of nasty traffic violators.  What could be better than that for a municipality in need of quick cash?

But when it’s exposed as police operated scam, no one can ignore the impropriety of this quick-buck program.  May Baltimore Police Officer James Fowler rest in peace.  And may the red-light camera scam be put to rest as well.