[Fat Abe]

Kali, it's easy enough to pin anything on anyone. If this were a police department matter, an Internal Affairs investigator would be put on the case to shadow any employee reported to be in violation of city or state policy. Thus, Tri-Met could theoretically verify cell phone usage or game playing by other bus drivers, just by placing an undercover investigator on the vehicle. Eventually the violator would be caught red-handed doing his/her number. I'd say the violators were habitual offenders. (In fact, don't most cell phone companies keep a record of calls? That's hard evidence to me.)

Anyway, people have been sentenced on felony charges with nothing more than eyewitness testimony. If the credibility of the witness cannot be impugned, then why would Tri-Met necessarily need a smoking gun (photo or videotape) as evidence?