Got a Photo red light ticket? Well guess what! Good news!!
08-15-09, 04:05 PM
#26
you know, the city of fremont which is 35 miles south of where i live but happens to be the city of my school (wyotech) has those cameras all over the damned place. Theres TONS of asians in that area, being that a vast majority of people who live in the silicon valley are asian or middle eastern, and they are already terrible drivers (not all, just those in that area) these cameras are just ******* stupid to have.
kinda makes me wonder what exactly the angles they get on the photos gets me thinking about, what if i were to drift through an intersection with those cameras? thatd be a badass picture to show in court. ide take the fine just for the picture!
Lloyd
kinda makes me wonder what exactly the angles they get on the photos gets me thinking about, what if i were to drift through an intersection with those cameras? thatd be a badass picture to show in court. ide take the fine just for the picture!
Lloyd
08-15-09, 04:20 PM
#27
you know, the city of fremont which is 35 miles south of where i live but happens to be the city of my school (wyotech) has those cameras all over the damned place. Theres TONS of asians in that area, being that a vast majority of people who live in the silicon valley are asian or middle eastern, and they are already terrible drivers (not all, just those in that area) these cameras are just ******* stupid to have.
kinda makes me wonder what exactly the angles they get on the photos gets me thinking about, what if i were to drift through an intersection with those cameras? thatd be a badass picture to show in court. ide take the fine just for the picture!
Lloyd
kinda makes me wonder what exactly the angles they get on the photos gets me thinking about, what if i were to drift through an intersection with those cameras? thatd be a badass picture to show in court. ide take the fine just for the picture!
Lloyd
Drifting through an intersection is a bad idea. Take it off road, somewhere safe.
You said these cameras are just stupid to have but just prior to that said the vast majority of people in the area are terrible drivers. To me, having terrible drivers, is a PERFECT reason to have those cameras there. You can bet the gov't is counting on that very same fact too.
08-15-09, 05:40 PM
#28
Driving RX7's since 1979
Thread Starter
iTrader: (43)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Live2drive15: "Yes THAT day there were 10, you can't say that all of the camera tickets for the last 7 years were of the same circumstances."
I put it out there for you but I guess you missed it. So I'll repeat for your benefit. The statistical observation since the program was initiated in 2002 (or "The last 7 years") was made (suggest you read it) that:
"The vast majority of red light tickets in the city were mailed to vehicles accused of entering an intersection less than half-a-second after the light had turned red." Again I'll repeat, for your benefit, that it was announced the interval would be 4.5 seconds but actual practice at the 17 other locations were 4 seconds or less.
Live2drive15: "Shifting and coasting are not the same thing. You are just being technical to prove a point."
Absolutley. To prove the point that the “vast majority” of the time of these camera tickets aren’t so much for improved public safety as much as taking advantage of a “technical” and abusive foothold to generate revenue at about $460 a pop.
The real issue is recognizing that traffic citations are a $3 Billion dollar industry. Given the states financial situation, the sad situation is that we can very well expect abusive practices like this will continue to be tolerated until called out one by one in the legal system by people with ***** enough to do so.
I put it out there for you but I guess you missed it. So I'll repeat for your benefit. The statistical observation since the program was initiated in 2002 (or "The last 7 years") was made (suggest you read it) that:
"The vast majority of red light tickets in the city were mailed to vehicles accused of entering an intersection less than half-a-second after the light had turned red." Again I'll repeat, for your benefit, that it was announced the interval would be 4.5 seconds but actual practice at the 17 other locations were 4 seconds or less.
Live2drive15: "Shifting and coasting are not the same thing. You are just being technical to prove a point."
Absolutley. To prove the point that the “vast majority” of the time of these camera tickets aren’t so much for improved public safety as much as taking advantage of a “technical” and abusive foothold to generate revenue at about $460 a pop.
The real issue is recognizing that traffic citations are a $3 Billion dollar industry. Given the states financial situation, the sad situation is that we can very well expect abusive practices like this will continue to be tolerated until called out one by one in the legal system by people with ***** enough to do so.
08-16-09, 07:06 PM
#29
Driving RX7's since 1979
Thread Starter
iTrader: (43)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
In response to a few PM's I've received on this subject, all this doesn't mean the City of Santa Ana or any of the other similar practiced 67 cities have turned off their camera's. You get you picture taken in the wrong place, you'll still get the ticket in the mail.
BUT, good chance you'll beat the ticket in court if you just go to court and ask the prosecutor (probably a police officer) for evidence that the required 30 day notice was given for that intersection. If he/she can't (which will probably be the case) ask for dismissal for that reason giving reference to the published court decision as recited in the articles (given in more detail in the pleading paper the article will link you to). A suggestion, unless you can prove with a picture it wasn't you*, other than yes sir and no sir don't say anything more than recite that point to the judge. You don't want to supply amunition that can be shot back at yah.
Good luck.
*The ticket you get in the mail is from the contractor Redflex and will say if it isn't you, then identify who it is. But they are asking for that information as their primary goal is to turn the ticket into $. I've read that there is NO law that requires you to identify who the actual driver was. Don't say you don't know, especially if you do. Just simply write in the section that you decline to respond to that question, include a picture of yourself to show it isn't you in the return envelope, and it should end there. If it doesn't end there, again feel confident about your chances in court.
BUT, good chance you'll beat the ticket in court if you just go to court and ask the prosecutor (probably a police officer) for evidence that the required 30 day notice was given for that intersection. If he/she can't (which will probably be the case) ask for dismissal for that reason giving reference to the published court decision as recited in the articles (given in more detail in the pleading paper the article will link you to). A suggestion, unless you can prove with a picture it wasn't you*, other than yes sir and no sir don't say anything more than recite that point to the judge. You don't want to supply amunition that can be shot back at yah.
Good luck.
*The ticket you get in the mail is from the contractor Redflex and will say if it isn't you, then identify who it is. But they are asking for that information as their primary goal is to turn the ticket into $. I've read that there is NO law that requires you to identify who the actual driver was. Don't say you don't know, especially if you do. Just simply write in the section that you decline to respond to that question, include a picture of yourself to show it isn't you in the return envelope, and it should end there. If it doesn't end there, again feel confident about your chances in court.
08-17-09, 03:35 AM
#30
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MORENO VALLEY CA
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theres no way around it.
i Filed "Letter of Decoloration"
within 3 months i was found guilty
THE STATE NEEDS MONEY!!!! PERIOD....
TAKE SIDE STREETS.
WAIT FOR RED LIGHTS..
**** BLOCKED INTERSECTIONS
i Filed "Letter of Decoloration"
within 3 months i was found guilty
THE STATE NEEDS MONEY!!!! PERIOD....
TAKE SIDE STREETS.
WAIT FOR RED LIGHTS..
**** BLOCKED INTERSECTIONS
08-17-09, 12:27 PM
#31
Driving RX7's since 1979
Thread Starter
iTrader: (43)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Trial by Declaration
MolososLotus FC3S,
Not surprised. I had a similar experience. Honestly, the only time I would expect you would get your case dismissed in a Trial by Declaration is if the cop doesn't respond. A reasonable chance that might happen on regular tickets as this process is a relative pain in the *** for cops to deal with. But the key thing to know is that by exercising your right for a Trial by Declaration, you don't give up your right to still have your day in court.
At the least a trial by declaration buys you time to figure things out, expecially valuable if this is the first time you've dealt with something like this.
For Camera tickets, the police response if so efficient it's almost automated. The camera ticket process is so efficient that they are now essentially ATM's for the government to take money out of your wallet. Like in most traffic court trials, the cops version is almost always taken by the Judge as the actual version. So, practically speaking, a Trial by Declaration where the cop responds in most cases is no more than an exercise. However, for Camera tickets, if in your Trial by Declaration you simply recite your request that the ticket be dismissed because of the 30 day notice rule already discussed, at least for the short term you have a good chance you'll get a happy verdict in the mail.
Anyway, now that you've received your Guilty verdict in the mail, go to the clerk window at the court and exercise your right to have your day in court. READ YOUR PAPERWORK as I beleive you have to make this request within 30 days of when the verdict was entered. So you still have the chance to follow the strategy previously discussed. Your new court date will be set about 40 days from when you go to the court clerk and ask for it. If you wait longer than what your verdict paperwork indicates to go to the clerk, your done.
Look, I'm no lawyer. But if you want a REALLLLLLLY good one for situations like this, call Mark. http://www.trafficattorneys.com/ He is one of the two attorneys that won that recent landmark case for camera lights, his fees are reasonable (about what the camera fine is) and he's truely one of the really good guys.
Good luck.
Not surprised. I had a similar experience. Honestly, the only time I would expect you would get your case dismissed in a Trial by Declaration is if the cop doesn't respond. A reasonable chance that might happen on regular tickets as this process is a relative pain in the *** for cops to deal with. But the key thing to know is that by exercising your right for a Trial by Declaration, you don't give up your right to still have your day in court.
At the least a trial by declaration buys you time to figure things out, expecially valuable if this is the first time you've dealt with something like this.
For Camera tickets, the police response if so efficient it's almost automated. The camera ticket process is so efficient that they are now essentially ATM's for the government to take money out of your wallet. Like in most traffic court trials, the cops version is almost always taken by the Judge as the actual version. So, practically speaking, a Trial by Declaration where the cop responds in most cases is no more than an exercise. However, for Camera tickets, if in your Trial by Declaration you simply recite your request that the ticket be dismissed because of the 30 day notice rule already discussed, at least for the short term you have a good chance you'll get a happy verdict in the mail.
Anyway, now that you've received your Guilty verdict in the mail, go to the clerk window at the court and exercise your right to have your day in court. READ YOUR PAPERWORK as I beleive you have to make this request within 30 days of when the verdict was entered. So you still have the chance to follow the strategy previously discussed. Your new court date will be set about 40 days from when you go to the court clerk and ask for it. If you wait longer than what your verdict paperwork indicates to go to the clerk, your done.
Look, I'm no lawyer. But if you want a REALLLLLLLY good one for situations like this, call Mark. http://www.trafficattorneys.com/ He is one of the two attorneys that won that recent landmark case for camera lights, his fees are reasonable (about what the camera fine is) and he's truely one of the really good guys.
Good luck.
08-17-09, 02:01 PM
#33
Driving RX7's since 1979
Thread Starter
iTrader: (43)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Good catch. We do have a constitutional right to confront our accuser. Camera tickets stand on a foundation of legal faith in a certificate that claims to confirm the total reliability of a machine's reading. So far, that foundation has proven in the courts to be durable.
However, there was a US Supreme Court ruling that wounded SPEED camera. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2854.asp But it apparently doesn't quite do the job on traffic light camera's.
However, there was a US Supreme Court ruling that wounded SPEED camera. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/28/2854.asp But it apparently doesn't quite do the job on traffic light camera's.
08-17-09, 02:40 PM
#34
Driving RX7's since 1979
Thread Starter
iTrader: (43)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
More
This foundation is that 'certificates' are functionally identical to live, in-court testimony, doing precisely what a witness does on direct examination as in the case of camera situations they provide "neutral testimony". That is, testimony that would not change if your accuser was actually in the court.
And, when I said this decision doesn't quite do the job I meant not yet! It's a bullet in a gun aimed that the red light camera industries head. A process still needs to take place before the trigger can be pulled.
It doesn't matter if a police officer gives you the ticket in person or in the mail. All the cop is giving you is a notice to appear.
This foundation is that 'certificates' are functionally identical to live, in-court testimony, doing precisely what a witness does on direct examination as in the case of camera situations they provide "neutral testimony". That is, testimony that would not change if your accuser was actually in the court.
And, when I said this decision doesn't quite do the job I meant not yet! It's a bullet in a gun aimed that the red light camera industries head. A process still needs to take place before the trigger can be pulled.
It doesn't matter if a police officer gives you the ticket in person or in the mail. All the cop is giving you is a notice to appear.
08-18-09, 01:26 AM
#35
I fix planes...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Murica
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am impartial. I could care less about the lights. We have a few here in Modesto and I drive like I normally do. I can't say much about anywhere else but here I think they work perfectly fine.
08-18-09, 10:24 AM
#36
Driving RX7's since 1979
Thread Starter
iTrader: (43)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
What I don't agree with is when they set the camera systems up in a bait and switch entrapment manner. That's abuse. Since that seems to be the case more often than not, all is fair in how you defend yourself.
One final note to live2drive15, a good book you should read is George Orwells "1984".
08-18-09, 04:54 PM
#37
all im saying is sliding through an intersection full well knowing that those cameras are there and having them take the picture i think would be priceless.
i would never do that, ive got too much going for me to A) be drifting on the street and B) be driving a non street legal car while having a smog licence, im just saying i think it would be a funny court session.
Lloyd
i would never do that, ive got too much going for me to A) be drifting on the street and B) be driving a non street legal car while having a smog licence, im just saying i think it would be a funny court session.
Lloyd
08-18-09, 10:25 PM
#38
Driving RX7's since 1979
Thread Starter
iTrader: (43)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Only $10.37 at Amazon.com. The world as it is evolving to be. Be concerned. 
http://www.amazon.com/Nineteen-Eight...0652232&sr=1-1
http://www.amazon.com/Nineteen-Eight...0652232&sr=1-1
08-19-09, 12:19 PM
#39
dude, we are already ******* there, and with obama in office, that whole 2012 thing just might come to fruition.
i swear to god, i wish people could just use their ******* brains for a minute and actually contemplate **** instead of just going "well, im a democrat, lets only vote for them"
im a "republican" only by household, i put regan on my ballot, i dont think anyone at this point can actually do **** for us as a nation without completely restructuring the ENTIRE senate and all affiliates related. WAY too much curruption.
oh well, all we can do is just use the constitution as it was written to help fight the curruption.
ill tell you what, i had a ticket on my car a couple of weeks ago, cant read ****** anything on it i think it was for expired tags, got the tags renewed then called the cops to have them sign it off, this is what i got
"im sorry, we just dont have the resources to come to your house to look at your car to see if you updated the registration" "hold on, what youre telling me is that you had the resources to come to MY HOUSE and issue me a ticket that you wont come sign off" "well, thats not my problem" "its a 40 year old car, you have got to be joking me, it doesnt run at the moment and the part that failed doesnt exist anymore" "again, not my problem"
i swear to god, im not paying the ******* 10$ ticket because my car was parked ON MY DRIVEWAY with the tags expired, im going to court for this ****
sorry to thread jack, just reminded me of my dillema
Lloyd
i swear to god, i wish people could just use their ******* brains for a minute and actually contemplate **** instead of just going "well, im a democrat, lets only vote for them"
im a "republican" only by household, i put regan on my ballot, i dont think anyone at this point can actually do **** for us as a nation without completely restructuring the ENTIRE senate and all affiliates related. WAY too much curruption.
oh well, all we can do is just use the constitution as it was written to help fight the curruption.
ill tell you what, i had a ticket on my car a couple of weeks ago, cant read ****** anything on it i think it was for expired tags, got the tags renewed then called the cops to have them sign it off, this is what i got
"im sorry, we just dont have the resources to come to your house to look at your car to see if you updated the registration" "hold on, what youre telling me is that you had the resources to come to MY HOUSE and issue me a ticket that you wont come sign off" "well, thats not my problem" "its a 40 year old car, you have got to be joking me, it doesnt run at the moment and the part that failed doesnt exist anymore" "again, not my problem"
i swear to god, im not paying the ******* 10$ ticket because my car was parked ON MY DRIVEWAY with the tags expired, im going to court for this ****
sorry to thread jack, just reminded me of my dillema
Lloyd
08-20-09, 04:49 AM
#40
Full Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: OC
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
all im saying is sliding through an intersection full well knowing that those cameras are there and having them take the picture i think would be priceless.
i would never do that, ive got too much going for me to A) be drifting on the street and B) be driving a non street legal car while having a smog licence, im just saying i think it would be a funny court session.
Lloyd
i would never do that, ive got too much going for me to A) be drifting on the street and B) be driving a non street legal car while having a smog licence, im just saying i think it would be a funny court session.
Lloyd
08-20-09, 12:07 PM
#41
Driving RX7's since 1979
Thread Starter
iTrader: (43)
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: So Cal where the OC/LA/SB counties meet
Posts: 6,096
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
magus,
If your car was parked on private property at the time, you unfortunately had the misfortune to have a cop with WAY too much time on his hands drive by your place. You pay registration fees for the privilege for your car to be on public streets. But that didn't change the fact that the computer confirms you owed back fees. Thus the cops excuse.
Solution otherwise, take your plates and current registration and tags to your local plice station and get it signed off. They don't have to be on the car for sign off purposes.
Suggest you also register you car as a non-op until you can get it running again. I had The Beast on Non-op for about 7 years while it sat on private property waiting for me to get around to it. The registration fee clock stayed turned off those 7 years until I finally needed to get current tags when I was ready to put it on the streets.
If your car was parked on private property at the time, you unfortunately had the misfortune to have a cop with WAY too much time on his hands drive by your place. You pay registration fees for the privilege for your car to be on public streets. But that didn't change the fact that the computer confirms you owed back fees. Thus the cops excuse.
Solution otherwise, take your plates and current registration and tags to your local plice station and get it signed off. They don't have to be on the car for sign off purposes.
Suggest you also register you car as a non-op until you can get it running again. I had The Beast on Non-op for about 7 years while it sat on private property waiting for me to get around to it. The registration fee clock stayed turned off those 7 years until I finally needed to get current tags when I was ready to put it on the streets.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rx8volks
Canadian Forum
0
08-13-15 04:55 AM
