Redflex CEO Just Given 14 Months In Prison For Bribing Politicians to Extort Citizens with Traffic Cameras

OFF THE WIRE
The huge scam to get red light cameras installed just backfired.
Guilty of bribery.
Next step should be to sue the politicians and jurisdictions who used the cameras and stole your money "for safety."
After being found guilty of bribing politicians to implement her due process-removing products, Karen Finley, former CEO of the red light company Redflex, was sentenced last week to 14 months in prison this week. In addition to the charges that she was sentenced for, Finley is also awaiting sentencing on similar charges in a different state, which could potentially compound her jail time.
The prosecutors laid out the case against Finley in the following court statement:
From December 2005 to February 2013, Finley served as CEO of a red light camera enforcement company. As part of her plea agreement, Finley admitted that, between 2005 and 2013, she participated in a scheme in which the company made campaign contributions to elected public officials in the cities of Columbus and Cincinnati through a consultant retained by the company. According to admissions made in connection with her plea, Finley and others, including another executive of the company, agreed to provide the conduit campaign contributions with the understanding that the elected public officials would assist the company in obtaining or retaining municipal contracts, including a photo red light enforcement contract with the City of Columbus.
This case has shed doubt on the process by which red light cameras are installed in cities across the US.
Even US District Judge Michael H. Watson, the judge presiding over the case, admitted that the whole process could be a “sham.”

“This sort of crime goes to the very integrity of government. It certainly calls into question whether the competitive bidding process is real or a sham. At least with respect to your situation and Redflex’s situation, it would appear this playing field was less than level. Indeed, one could fairly question whether this is the basis for the letting of other contracts in local government,” Watson said in court this week.