Fighting a ticket

[shooter27 116]

Figure I'd put this one here instead of starting a new thread.

Does anyone have experience with fighting and beating a red light camera ticket? Normally it's something I would just pay, but at $500 I'm going to try to fight it.

[supa 3]

A red light camera does not take a picture unless you enter and exit the intersection on a full red light.

don't possibly see you can can deny running a red light here, unless you were making a right turn, but then you probably wouldnt have gotten it.

[shooter27 116]

I didn't say I wasn't guilty, but that doesn't mean the ticket can't be fought. I've fought and won against speeding tickets when I was speeding, so I would think this falls into the same category.

[iceman8310 105]

ticket busters

[Zylos45 118]

Say you sneezed three times while driving through the intersection.....

Can't sneeze with your eyes open.

Say light was green on first sneeze.

[RadioGaGa 162]

I got one a couple years ago - $320. I choose to "fight" it....but the only thing you are allowed to argue is financial hardship. They knocked mine down to $180.

[JR Boucicaut 3795]

You're not beating that.

My friend is a cop and we talked about that one day; sometimes they let you slide based of the position of the car when the picture is taken and not issue the ticket, but by all accounts you'll be hard-pressed to make a case.

[wrangler 157]

State, city?

[shooter27 116]

It's Santa Ana, CA in Orange county. The one thing I've found online is that in CA the apparently need to have a clear picture of your face, but in the shot they sent me you can only see the bottom half of my face. I don't know if that's a true way to get out of it, but I'm looking into it. There are a number of lawyers that say they can beat it for $200, so I may just go that route.

[Buzz_LightBeer 969]

It's Santa Ana, CA in Orange county. The one thing I've found online is that in CA the apparently need to have a clear picture of your face, but in the shot they sent me you can only see the bottom half of my face. I don't know if that's a true way to get out of it, but I'm looking into it. There are a number of lawyers that say they can beat it for $200, so I may just go that route.

Regardless, if the vehicle is registered to you, wouldn't that make you ultimately responsible?

But good luck;

[JR Boucicaut 3795]

It's Santa Ana, CA in Orange county. The one thing I've found online is that in CA the apparently need to have a clear picture of your face, but in the shot they sent me you can only see the bottom half of my face. I don't know if that's a true way to get out of it, but I'm looking into it. There are a number of lawyers that say they can beat it for $200, so I may just go that route.

So if you wore a luchador mask when you ran the light you'd get out of it?

In all seriousness, they will charge the person who the car is registered to. If you run a red light in my car, I get the ticket.

Just plead no contest when you get to court. The judge will appreciate you not wasting his time and just might give you a break.

[wrangler 157]

Regardless, if the vehicle is registered to you, wouldn't that make you ultimately responsible?

But good luck;

No; just the likeliest suspect. They have to establish that the person they charged was driving the vehicle, in order to convict. That's the theory; in practice a judge can do whatever he wants in a case that's not going to be appealed.

[RadioGaGa 162]

Up here, it's a fine to the vehicle and the registered owner. The picture doesn't show the drivers face at all. A pic of the vehicle in the intersection and a close up of the rear license plate is what you get. I believe the notice doesn't even address you as the driver, it says "This vehicle, at this date and this time was involved in a red light camera offense" (or something to that affect).

I suppose the only way to kick it 100% is if you can show evidence that the car had been stolen prior to the offense happening, but "I wasn't the driver" doesn't fly up here.

[wrangler 157]

It seems crazy to me to go after the vehicle owner, rather than the driver who committed the act. That makes the offense "allowing your car to go through a red light", rather than driving through the red light.

Sounds like a driver could get away with any number of these type of offenses, and still keep his license. I'm curious what the court would do if, for example, a Canuck came in with a video of him playing in an away game at the time the picture of his car was taken.

[RadioGaGa 162]

That was my biggest fear was having points taken. No points attached to the red light ticket.

[shooter27 116]

Apparently, in the city of Los Angeles, it has been deemed that paying these tickets is voluntary, because they're not enforcable due to lack of live witnesses.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/red-light-cameras-ticket-fines-voluntary/story?id=14176755#.UWRrgErNlhA

In fact, they've since stopped issuing them altogether.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar/29/local/la-me-0329-red-light-cameras-20120329

Now, these articles apply specifically to LA, but I'm wondering how it would be possible that these are not enforcable in LA but are enforcable in the rest of California.

[wrangler 157]

There's a bit more info here: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jul/27/local/la-me-0727-red-light-cameras-20110727

If it's based on a local ordinance, then, in addition to the local court policy, LA would involve some different issues. Also, it sounds like there's policy involved, not just enforceability.

[smu 29]

In Nova Scotia we don't have the cameras, but here, if the police saw you go through a definite red light, it would be your word against his.

This would be heard before a judge and a determination of credibility between you and the police officer would have to be made by the judge, based on your presentation, UNDER OATH as well as the police officer. If you gave a compelling story (I don't know how you could/would do that) then the judge might side with you. Otherwise, in my opinion, the judge will side with the officer as being more credible, but this is usually...

I would guess that in your area it is also NOT allowed to proceed through a yellow light - "unless the stop cannot be made in safety". We are not even talking about a RED light yet and that would be a point of contention in the courtroom.

In a yellow light situation you have some argument that you could have not stopped quickly enough and would have caused the brakes to be jammed on throwing passengers around or ending up over the cross walk or stopping in the middle of the intersection. In this case the argument is based on your perceived ability to stop safely, but it only goes so far.

Since I do not have the expertise with the "cameras" you would have to speak with a lawyer versed in your Motor Vehicle Act and past case histories that others might have tried to fight or in fact won! The more you pay for the expertise the better are your chances of winning just about anything.

Alan