A question on a camera ticket

[locogringo]

My wife received a letter from the court showing that she received a ticket for a left hand turn when the light had turned red. It turned red while she was halfway through the turn according to the picture (it was at night). What is the legality in this type of ticket? The company is based out of AZ. I went to the intersection she was going through (it is in Loma Linda on Redlands Blvd and Tippecannoe) and there are no signs saying there are cameras being used nor any other warning measures. From seeing a few of these cameras at intersections, I always remember seeing signs stating that there is either a red-light violation in place or that cameras are being used.
Are there supposed to be these signs? Are there any ways of her getting out of this?
If so, or if you'd like to enlighten me on any of this feel free.
Daniel

[BowTie Rick]

The car going straight from the opposite direction that held her up from completing the left turn in time is the one that ran the red and should be fined. I have often wondered about this very situation. Also, what if you make a right on a red? If she was trying to beat a yellow, I'd assume your SOL. Couldn't tell you about signage laws.

[locogringo]

The car going straight from the opposite direction that held her up from completing the left turn in time is the one that ran the red and should be fined. I have often wondered about this very situation. Also, what if you make a right on a red? If she was trying to beat a yellow, I'd assume your SOL. Couldn't tell you about signage laws.
That has a nice story to it but I don't remember her saying anything about the car in the opposite direction holding her up. Now if that car was making a right hand turn, then I could see the point.

[Wet Dream]

Ok, so if there wasn't a car holding her up, then the chances increase that your wife is impatient and self centered and didn't wan't to wait for the light to cycle. If thats the case, pay up.

[locogringo]

oh, I see what you read into. It was a left hand turn light only. Opposite traffic did not have a green yet.

[lalhc]

I know the intersection and avoid it as much as possible. You should ask for a copy of the video tape. It is my understanding that they will provide you a copy if you are disputing the ticket.

[locogringo]

Ok, so if there wasn't a car holding her up, then the chances increase that your wife is impatient and self centered and didn't wan't to wait for the light to cycle. If thats the case, pay up.
You may want to go wet dream yourself back into reality.
In 13 years she has never received a ticket (except for 5 months ago going to Havasu on the I-40 going 80 of all things. Impatient she is not. Self-centered... furthest thing from her mind. Now if you were talking about me, then I'd accept your stupid ramblings and probably would buy you a watered down beer while I was at it, but to call my wife that is seriously lacking in intelligence.

[HOTPURSUIT]

If the light turned red while your wife was in the intersection, then theres is no violation. She would have had to enter the intersection and pass the limit line (painted solid white line) on a red signal. So... basically if your front tires are over the line on a red then your in violation, but if its yellow and then turns red.. as long as you passed the solid white line under a yellow light then your ok. And I am almost positive that there does not need to be any signs advising of red light cameras... never heard that.. .. But ask kilrtoy, since he is all knowing..
j/k kt..

[locogringo]

From my numerous online traffic schools I have done, I remember that any part of a vehicle that is in the center of an intersection when a light turns red is in violation (technically). Is this not true?

[HOTPURSUIT]

From my numerous online traffic schools I have done, I remember that any part of a vehicle that is in the center of an intersection when a light turns red is in violation (technically). Is this not true?
thats not true.. here is an example.. if your making a left turn in an intersection on a green and then traffic gets backed up and your in the middle of the intersection and then the light turns yellow-red.. you are not in violation of running a red light.....
and if your in the intersection and you get hit by an oncoming car who has the green.. then that car is at fault... even tho he had the green..

[Wet Dream]

You may want to go wet dream yourself back into reality.
In 13 years she has never received a ticket (except for 5 months ago going to Havasu on the I-40 going 80 of all things. Impatient she is not. Self-centered... furthest thing from her mind. Now if you were talking about me, then I'd accept your stupid ramblings and probably would buy you a watered down beer while I was at it, but to call my wife that is seriously lacking in intelligence.
Just a shot in the dark, but most likely, not far off base. Most camera systems allow for a certain amount of delay before the camera goes 'click'. The cam doesn't take constant photos of each cycle, only when a violation has occured. I sense your urgency to have this one removed since that would make 2 violations in 6 months, and running a red carries 3 points, and speeding on top of that could warrant a driving suspension and certainly increased insurance rates. Now, just out of curiousity Mr. Comeback with all those great lines, how the hell can you wet dream yourself into reality, and what the fu(k does watered down beer have anything to do with this? I never drink light beer, and usually stick to Corona, Anchor, Sam, or Sierra, so what the hell are you getting at?

[Wet Dream]

thats not true.. here is an example.. if your making a left turn in an intersection on a green and then traffic gets backed up and your in the middle of the intersection and then the light turns yellow-red.. you are not in violation of running a red light.....
and if your in the intersection and you get hit by an oncoming car who has the green.. then that car is at fault... even tho he had the green..
No, but you are in violation of blocking traffic or an intersection.

[HOTPURSUIT]

locogringo.......... sorry, I forgot to add that, although she was not in violation, the camera will stay take a picture.. you will have to explain to the judge the circumstances .. look up section 21453 (c) of the vehicle code it will explain it better....

[HOTPURSUIT]

No, but you are in violation of blocking traffic or an intersection.
yes and no, thats one of those gray areas..

[Wet Dream]

Rather than all the speculation, why not post a copy of the picture?

[LHC Kirby]

BOATCOP = help this thread!

[78Eliminator]

I am in San Diego and the photo tickets cited here can all be viewed at this web site. I think this works for most if not all of California. They are actually videos.
www.photonotice.com
This will be the tell tale evidence that will let you know if you have a fighting chance.

[locogringo]

Just a shot in the dark, but most likely, not far off base. Most camera systems allow for a certain amount of delay before the camera goes 'click'. The cam doesn't take constant photos of each cycle, only when a violation has occured. I sense your urgency to have this one removed since that would make 2 violations in 6 months, and running a red carries 3 points, and speeding on top of that could warrant a driving suspension and certainly increased insurance rates. Now, just out of curiousity Mr. Comeback with all those great lines, how the hell can you wet dream yourself into reality, and what the fu(k does watered down beer have anything to do with this? I never drink light beer, and usually stick to Corona, Anchor, Sam, or Sierra, so what the hell are you getting at?
first things first, she took traffic school for the other offense and has zero points on her record.
Obviously, being from PA has inhibited your ability to decipher the jist of what I was saying.
locogringo.......... sorry, I forgot to add that, although she was not in violation, the camera will stay take a picture.. you will have to explain to the judge the circumstances .. look up section 21453 (c) of the vehicle code it will explain it better....
HotPursuit, thank you for your advise. I'll look into it for her.
I was expecting this type of feedback and was caught off-guard with people's renderings of Iconic Holier Than Thou statements. Should have remembered that it was ***boat and been prepared.
I am in San Diego and the photo tickets cited here can all be viewed at this web site. I think this works for most if not all of California. They are actually videos.
www.photonotice.com
This will be the tell tale evidence that will let you know if you have a fighting chance.
TY

[YeLLowBoaT]

In CA if you enter on a yellow and it goes red you get a ticket.( with in reason) The yellow light must be atleast 3 seconds long. Ask for the series of pics/vids. They are supose to be be looked at by some one to determine if you get a ticket or not...( IE could you have stoped when you noticed the Yellow)
I help my brother beat one of these last year, he was about 30 ft from the intersection when it went yellow. At the time he was going 50 mph( speed limit). I pulled a few studys that showed the average driver takes .5 sec to hit the break and that going 50 mph he would have traveled ~ 36 ft in that .5 sec so there is no way he could have stoped.

[Kilrtoy]

If the light turned red while your wife was in the intersection, then theres is no violation. She would have had to enter the intersection and pass the limit line (painted solid white line) on a red signal. So... basically if your front tires are over the line on a red then your in violation, but if its yellow and then turns red.. as long as you passed the solid white line under a yellow light then your ok. And I am almost positive that there does not need to be any signs advising of red light cameras... never heard that.. .. But ask kilrtoy, since he is all knowing..
j/k kt..
YOU RANG:D
here is the definition of a limit line
377. A "limit line" is a solid white line not less than 12 nor more than 24 inches wide, extending across a roadway or any portion thereof to indicate the point at which traffic is required to stop in compliance with legal requirements.
here is the requirements for the automated system
Traffic Signal Automated Enforcement: Photographic Records
21455.5. (a) The limit line, the intersection, or a place designated in Section 21455, where a driver is required to stop, may be equipped with an automated enforcement system if the governmental agency utilizing the system meets all of the following requirements:
(1) Identifies the system by signs that clearly indicate the system's presence and are visible to traffic approaching from all directions, or posts signs at all major entrances to the city, including, at a minimum, freeways, bridges, and state highway routes
(2) If it locates the system at an intersection, and ensures that the system meets the criteria specified in Section 21455.7.
(b) Prior to issuing citations under this section, a local jurisdiction utilizing an automated traffic enforcement system shall commence a program to issue only warning notices for 30 days. The local jurisdiction shall also make a public announcement of the automated traffic enforcement system at least 30 days prior to the commencement of the enforcement program.
(c) Only a governmental agency, in cooperation with a law enforcement agency, may operate an automated enforcement system. As used in this subdivision, "operate" includes all of the following activities:
(1) Developing uniform guidelines for screening and issuing violations and for the processing and storage of confidential information, and establishing procedures to ensure compliance with those guidelines.
(2) Performing administrative functions and day-to-day functions, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(A) Establishing guidelines for selection of location.
(B) Ensuring that the equipment is regularly inspected.
(C) Certifying that the equipment is properly installed and calibrated, and is operating properly.
(D) Regularly inspecting and maintaining warning signs placed under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a).
(E) Overseeing the establishment or change of signal phases and the timing thereof.
(F) Maintaining controls necessary to assure that only those citations that have been reviewed and approved by law enforcement are delivered to violators.
(d) The activities listed in subdivision (c) that relate to the operation of the system may be contracted out by the governmental agency, if it maintains overall control and supervision of the system. However, the activities listed in paragraph (1) of, and subparagraphs (A), (D), (E), and (F) of paragraph (2) of, subdivision (c) may not be contracted out to the manufacturer or supplier of the automated enforcement system.
(e) (1) Notwithstanding Section 6253 of the Government Code, or any other provision of law, photographic records made by an automated enforcement system shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to governmental agencies and law enforcement agencies and only for the purposes of this article.
(2) Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration or enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and may not be used for any other purpose.
(3) Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, the confidential records and information described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to six months from the date the information was first obtained, or until final disposition of the citation, whichever date is later, after which time the information shall be destroyed in a manner that will preserve the confidentiality of any person included in the record or information.
(f) Notwithstanding subdivision (d) , the registered owner or any individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review the photographic evidence of the alleged violation.
(g) (1) A contract between a governmental agency and a manufacturer or supplier of automated enforcement equipment may not include provision for the payment or compensation to the manufacturer or supplier based on the number of citations generated, or as a percentage of the revenue generated, as a result of the use of the equipment authorized under this section.
(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to a contract that was entered into by a governmental agency and a manufacturer or supplier of automated enforcement equipment before January 1, 2004, unless that contract is renewed, extended, or amended on or after January 1, 2004.
Added and Repealed Sec. 4, Ch. 922, Stats. 1995. Effective January 1, 1996. Repeal operative January 1, 1999.
Amended Sec. 3, Ch. 54, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 496, Stats. 2001. Effective January 1, 2002.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 511, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004.

[77charger]

I think you are ok to be in the intersection while red provided you entered it before turning red.Is what i have been told in traffic school and by police officers even seen cops sittin on bikes and let it go and also never see the cameras flash from the light near my house it is pretty good about this seen many barely make a bumper past the stop line as it goes red no flash but others barely miss and off goes the flash bulbs.
BUT if you enter on a yellow and for some reason you block flow of trafffic you can get popped for impeding flow of traffic or something like that(example)You enter to make a left turn but lane you are turing into is backed up and your light gos red and there you are sittin in the middle of intersection and cross traffic is blocked by your dumbass who thought you can make it to the lane.

[HOTPURSUIT]

YOU RANG:D
here is the definition of a limit line
377. A "limit line" is a solid white line not less than 12 nor more than 24 inches wide, extending across a roadway or any portion thereof to indicate the point at which traffic is required to stop in compliance with legal requirements.
here is the requirements for the automated system
Traffic Signal Automated Enforcement: Photographic Records
21455.5. (a) The limit line, the intersection, or a place designated in Section 21455, where a driver is required to stop, may be equipped with an automated enforcement system if the governmental agency utilizing the system meets all of the following requirements:
(1) Identifies the system by signs that clearly indicate the system's presence and are visible to traffic approaching from all directions, or posts signs at all major entrances to the city, including, at a minimum, freeways, bridges, and state highway routes
(2) If it locates the system at an intersection, and ensures that the system meets the criteria specified in Section 21455.7.
(b) Prior to issuing citations under this section, a local jurisdiction utilizing an automated traffic enforcement system shall commence a program to issue only warning notices for 30 days. The local jurisdiction shall also make a public announcement of the automated traffic enforcement system at least 30 days prior to the commencement of the enforcement program.
(c) Only a governmental agency, in cooperation with a law enforcement agency, may operate an automated enforcement system. As used in this subdivision, "operate" includes all of the following activities:
(1) Developing uniform guidelines for screening and issuing violations and for the processing and storage of confidential information, and establishing procedures to ensure compliance with those guidelines.
(2) Performing administrative functions and day-to-day functions, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
(A) Establishing guidelines for selection of location.
(B) Ensuring that the equipment is regularly inspected.
(C) Certifying that the equipment is properly installed and calibrated, and is operating properly.
(D) Regularly inspecting and maintaining warning signs placed under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a).
(E) Overseeing the establishment or change of signal phases and the timing thereof.
(F) Maintaining controls necessary to assure that only those citations that have been reviewed and approved by law enforcement are delivered to violators.
(d) The activities listed in subdivision (c) that relate to the operation of the system may be contracted out by the governmental agency, if it maintains overall control and supervision of the system. However, the activities listed in paragraph (1) of, and subparagraphs (A), (D), (E), and (F) of paragraph (2) of, subdivision (c) may not be contracted out to the manufacturer or supplier of the automated enforcement system.
(e) (1) Notwithstanding Section 6253 of the Government Code, or any other provision of law, photographic records made by an automated enforcement system shall be confidential, and shall be made available only to governmental agencies and law enforcement agencies and only for the purposes of this article.
(2) Confidential information obtained from the Department of Motor Vehicles for the administration or enforcement of this article shall be held confidential, and may not be used for any other purpose.
(3) Except for court records described in Section 68152 of the Government Code, the confidential records and information described in paragraphs (1) and (2) may be retained for up to six months from the date the information was first obtained, or until final disposition of the citation, whichever date is later, after which time the information shall be destroyed in a manner that will preserve the confidentiality of any person included in the record or information.
(f) Notwithstanding subdivision (d) , the registered owner or any individual identified by the registered owner as the driver of the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation shall be permitted to review the photographic evidence of the alleged violation.
(g) (1) A contract between a governmental agency and a manufacturer or supplier of automated enforcement equipment may not include provision for the payment or compensation to the manufacturer or supplier based on the number of citations generated, or as a percentage of the revenue generated, as a result of the use of the equipment authorized under this section.
(2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to a contract that was entered into by a governmental agency and a manufacturer or supplier of automated enforcement equipment before January 1, 2004, unless that contract is renewed, extended, or amended on or after January 1, 2004.
Added and Repealed Sec. 4, Ch. 922, Stats. 1995. Effective January 1, 1996. Repeal operative January 1, 1999.
Amended Sec. 3, Ch. 54, Stats. 1998. Effective January 1, 1999.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 496, Stats. 2001. Effective January 1, 2002.
Amended Sec. 1, Ch. 511, Stats. 2003. Effective January 1, 2004.
I bet you didnt even cut and paste that.... you knew it off the top of your head. Damn your good:D

[HOTPURSUIT]

I stand corrected on the needing of signs for red light cameras.......
however, there is still no violation due to the fact that she entered the intersection passing the limit line prior to the light turning red

[Havasu1986]

Where do you work out of Hotpursuit

[HOTPURSUIT]

Chp

[Havasu1986]

I'm sure theres not to many cameras or turn signals on the freeways.

[HOTPURSUIT]

I dont work the freeways usually. CHP patrols all unincorporated county areas ... actually I patrol uninc. areas of Yorba Linda

[Havasu1986]

Would that be Imperial Highway?

[HOTPURSUIT]

Imperial/Fairmont, Esperanza .. in thru that area ..

[Havasu1986]

If you ever see a white Tahoe with the plates HAVASUU don't lite me up. :D

[HOTPURSUIT]

I'm sure theres not to many cameras or turn signals on the freeways.
I'll remember you!:D

[Havasu1986]

Sent you a P.M.

[Wet Dream]

first things first, she took traffic school for the other offense and has zero points on her record.
Obviously, being from PA has inhibited your ability to decipher the jist of what I was saying.
You are prime example of a cum guzzler that can't make sense of shit. You didn't answer my question stupid. And another thing, I'm from CA dumbass. Pay the fine and get over it you cry-baby bitch.

[GasGuzzler]

They sent a picture of me running a redlite and a fine for 50 dollars. I sent them a picture of a 50 dollar bill. The next week they sent me a picture of handcuffs. I paid the 50 bux............:D
They took them down in our area, they beat them in court.
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3331
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/02/216.asp

[HOTPURSUIT]

They sent a picture of me running a redlite and a fine for 50 dollars. I sent them a picture of a 50 dollar bill. The next week they sent me a picture of handcuffs. I paid the 50 bux............:D
They took them down in our area, they beat them in court.
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=3331
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/02/216.asp
LMFAO:D

[SandbarScot]

Two photos are required in California courts. The first must show the signal was red BEFORE the violator enters the intersection (all portions of the vehicle still behind the limit line). The second photo must show the violator continued on to ENTER the intersection while the signal is still red.
Hope this helps.

[bchbum]

I don't know the law about this ,but the pictures sure are clear . We had 2 different guys at work get them , 1 you could read his name on his shirt . The other we could see the chesseburger he was stuffing in his face . Both were in company trucks

[locogringo]

You are prime example of a cum guzzler that can't make sense of shit. You didn't answer my question stupid. And another thing, I'm from CA dumbass. Pay the fine and get over it you cry-baby bitch.
LOL.
I would have thought there were brighter folk here. I stand corrected every day I enter here.
I was under the impresion that I wouldn't need to spell it out but it appears that in your case the obvious seems to be foreshadowed by the fog in between your ears.
Also, since you are a "supposed" wet dream and more than likely a "cum guzzler" as well, shouldn't you first realize that the purpose of gargling is to decipher if there are traces of shit in your mouth before you guzzle it down? Moron probably won't get what I am saying here either.
I guess your intelligence grows "De die in diem".
Your from CA? Hum, sure you are you fluffer.
I have no problem paying her fine if it was obviously one where she was at fault but she was in the intersection when it was yellow.
KILR: Thank you for posting that section. Based off of what it says there under A (1), being that there are no signs she should be exonerated from this in itself.

[HOTPURSUIT]

loco- at any rate, I would take it to court..
Remember... "you get half of what you ask for and none of what you don't"
HP

[locogringo]

Sent you a P.M.
sent you one back

[locogringo]

loco- at any rate, I would take it to court..
Remember... "you get half of what you ask for and none of what you don't"
HP
Very true Hot Pursuit. TY

[C-2]

FWIW, Riverside just installed camera's at 8 intersections. The three I've seen don't have any signs, is that code up to date?

[little rowe boat]

FWIW, Riverside just installed camera's at 8 intersections. The three I've seen don't have any signs, is that code up to date?
Yep, they are going up here in Riverside. They will start enforcing them after the first of the year.

[buzzaro]

KILR: Thank you for posting that section. Based off of what it says there under A (1), being that there are no signs she should be exonerated from this in itself.
Did you mean there were no signs near the intersection OR did you mean there were no signs at the entrances to the city, highways, near the intersection? Any of those would apply if you read the code the way its written.

[C-2]

The code is up to date.
It has a loophole for the sign issue though:
(1) Identifies the system by signs that clearly indicate the
system's presence and are visible to traffic approaching from all
directions, or posts signs at all major entrances to the city,
including, at a minimum, freeways, bridges, and state highway routes.
Loco it would be your burden of proof to win that sign argument - that might be impossible.
Stick to the limit line defense.

[Jack $hit]

Ok, if the light turned red half way through the intersection then chances are she saw it turn yellow..............correct? Now, when a light turns yellow im pretty sure it means a red is coming up and she shouldnt have tried to get through it on that run. Come on people, lights arent new and we all know how they work so if you get stung dont act like you're new to driving a damn car. Im guilty of doing it and I knew I did it right then and there too. Who cares if there was'nt a sign informing her of a camera, would that have made a difference in her decision to stop? I doubt it. I willing to bet that if she knew there was a black and white behind her she wouldnt have tried to get through the light......right? I do agree that if traffic was backed up due to holiday traffic then she would get out of the ticket pretty easy in court but if thats not the case then she should take the hit and move on, its not the end of the world.
Jack

[Kilrtoy]

Chp
How did I know that was coming.
I still like you:jawdrop:
STRIVE FOR FIVE BROTHER

[Liquid Courage]

You guys are missing this part of the code:
(1) Identifies the system by signs that clearly indicate the system's presence and are visible to traffic approaching from all directions, OR posts signs at all major entrances to the city, including, at a minimum, freeways, bridges, and state highway routes
The signs do not need to be posted at the specific location/intersection, just at all "major" entrances to the city.
The other issue about your wife being legally in the intersection or not....If your wifes vehicle is ANY part over the "limit line" (the first line of the intersection or crosswalk) then she has legal posession of the intersection. (side note: Vehicles entering on a green from the opposite direction actually have to yield for cross traffic that has legal possesion of the intersection or can be fined for unsafe start).
If in the first photo that was sent to you, your wifes traffic signal (arrow) was in the green phase and the second photo shows the traffic signal in the red phase, she is legally in the intersection and there was no violation.
Also, if in the first photo the traffic signal is red but her vehicle is OVER the limit line, then she is legally in the intersection as well. These types of incidents happen at times with the system for one reason or another. Rare, but they do happen.
Now if in the first photo the traffic signal is red and her vehicle is behind the limit line, and the second photo the signal is red and she's in the intersection, she's guilty.
Base fine of over 350 dollars. I would recommend going to court either way and a) see if the rep. for the PD shows up and b) if the rep does show up, beg the judge to lower the fine and request an extended traffic school (if she's been with in the last year and a half).
Good luck man, these camera systems are a biotch. EVERYONE needs to watch out for them.;)

[Kilrtoy]

Base fine of over 350 dollars. I would recommend going to court either way and a) see if the rep. for the PD shows up and b) if the rep does show up, beg the judge to lower the fine and request an extended traffic school (if she's been with in the last year and a half).
you are kidding right.
They have people that , THAT IS THEIR JOBS
ofcourse they will be there.

[MudPumper]

why is it every time someone gets a ticket they want info on how to get out of it ,speed,dui,oui WHAT EVER! :)everytime i get a ticket,I DESERVED IT:D ,if ya can't talk your way out of it on the SPOT!"PAY THE FOCKING TICKET"!:D
I encourage everybody to fight every ticket they get.........Everytime they do, I get 4 Hours of overtime whether I win or lose.:D

[cola]

It's not a ticket that they send you in the mail. If you don't reply and admit it's you, there is no ticket.
Mike

[BOBALOO]

I dont have time to read thru all the thread but I got a camera ticket in San Bernardino at the waterman/10 exit and they even had a website where I could watch a video of myself turning right on red without stopping completely.
The ticket showed everything, 2 pics of the truck and 1 of me driving.
Total cost 371**:mad:

[SandbarScot]

I dont have time to read thru all the thread but I got a camera ticket in San Bernardino at the waterman/10 exit and they even had a website where I could watch a video of myself turning right on red without stopping completely.
The ticket showed everything, 2 pics of the truck and 1 of me driving.
Total cost 371**:mad:
That is classic. Not to repeat myself, but the photo MUST SHOW THE SIGNAL WAS RED BEFORE THE VIOLATOR ENTERED THE INTERSECTION. I'm sure the one mentioned by Bobaloo did just that.
If the signal was red before she entered the intersection, why waste everyone's time..just pay the $371. If it was yellow, the photo will show. No brainer. It is not unlawful to enter an intersection when the signal is yellow.

[Jrocket]

They sent a picture of me running a redlite and a fine for 50 dollars. I sent them a picture of a 50 dollar bill. The next week they sent me a picture of handcuffs. I paid the 50 bux............:D
Thats got too be one of the funniest focking things said on this forum!:D
My sides hurt from laughing.

[No Name]

Don’t do the crime if you can’t pay the fine.
Or was it, don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time?
Either way pay the ticket and move on, life is to short.;)

[HOTPURSUIT]

That is classic. Not to repeat myself, but the photo MUST SHOW THE SIGNAL WAS RED BEFORE THE VIOLATOR ENTERED THE INTERSECTION. I'm sure the one mentioned by Bobaloo did just that.
If the signal was red before she entered the intersection, why waste everyone's time..just pay the $371. If it was yellow, the photo will show. No brainer. It is not unlawful to enter an intersection when the signal is yellow.
no spin truth!

[EAZYKILLER2006]

I encourage everybody to fight every ticket they get.........Everytime they do, I get 4 Hours of overtime whether I win or lose.:D
thats what i do ...fight every ticket I GET, cus ~there are more ppl than cops...JUST THINK... if every one, detains a officer in court ...the traffic COPS, arent giving someone ELSE a ticket... OH~AND when you have to pay ...make the amount a few cents off...they (the courts wont be able to process the ticket ) the court cant hold you for a late pay either...games ppl play...OK OK ~~~I WILL SAY IT...WTF DID SHE JUST SAY...:rolleyes:

[No Name]

OK OK ~~~I WILL SAY IT...WTF DID SHE JUST SAY...:rolleyes:
Actually, that’s the first post of yours I did understand…….;)
Just messing with you EAZYKILLER….....:D :D

[work2play]

You've all missed the real point here. The problem is she needs a faster car to get into the intersection faster, before the light turns red or even yellow!

[cola]

ya get a WARRANT :D
There is some guy ( not a officer ) in Az. looking through the pics. If he thinks you ran a red light he sends you a couple of pictures. You have to send a reply back to them before it becomes a ticket. They only have 90 days to perfect the ticket. Don't sign anything until you have to.

[Boatcop]

BOATCOP = help this thread!
I don't have any experience with traffic/red light cameras. Don't write a lot of traffic tickets. Someone has to really screw up in front of me to get one.
In AZ if any part of the vehicle is over the limit line (in the intersection) when the light turns RED, it's OK. There's a couple seconds delay between when a light turns red in one direction and turns green in the other.

[Kokopelli]

Base fine of over 350 dollars. I would recommend going to court either way and a) see if the rep. for the PD shows up and b) if the rep does show up, beg the judge to lower the fine and request an extended traffic school (if she's been with in the last year and a half).
Be careful with this. Most of our commisioners (traffic "judges") will not allow traffic school if you waste the officer's (and the court's) time by just hoping the officer doesn't show up.

[Liquid Courage]

Be careful with this. Most of our commisioners (traffic "judges") will not allow traffic school if you waste the officer's (and the court's) time by just hoping the officer doesn't show up.
Not in Vta County. The commisioners usually ask up front if anyone wants to change their plea to guilty after seeing the officer showed up. However, I do know some courts do this, even though, tecnically they're not supposed to be biased against the defendant for exersizing their right to trial.

[Liquid Courage]

There is some guy ( not a officer ) in Az. looking through the pics. If he thinks you ran a red light he sends you a couple of pictures. You have to send a reply back to them before it becomes a ticket. They only have 90 days to perfect the ticket. Don't sign anything until you have to.
Not entirely correct...Yes, the company in Az (redflex) does review the images first. Then, upon seeing theres a violation they forward the images to an officer who approves the images. The image is then sent back to Az. where they send out the citation. It is a Citation when you recieve it in the mail, you do not need to sign anything. Usually if you just ignore it and don't pay it with in 30 days, the citation goes to cival assesment (they double the fine). If you still don't take care of it, it is attached to your registration after it's been doubled a few times.

[Liquid Courage]

OH~AND when you have to pay ...make the amount a few cents off...they (the courts wont be able to process the ticket ) the court cant hold you for a late pay either...
This is absolutely false. It is an urban legend. There was something close to this a long time ago (a loop hole if you will) however, it has been remedeed for years now.

[Wet Dream]

I'm still waiting for Loco to post up the pics to let the HB community be the preliminary judges. :D

[cola]

Not entirely correct...Yes, the company in Az (redflex) does review the images first. Then, upon seeing theres a violation they forward the images to an officer who approves the images. The image is then sent back to Az. where they send out the citation. It is a Citation when you recieve it in the mail, you do not need to sign anything. Usually if you just ignore it and don't pay it with in 30 days, the citation goes to cival assesment (they double the fine). If you still don't take care of it, it is attached to your registration after it's been doubled a few times.
Unless they send the citation reg. mail they have no proof you received the alleged citation.

[C-2]

Not to spilt hairs and this adds nothing to loco's post - but unless the court receives the letter back as undeliverable - it was delivered. The court handles all their legal mailings in this fashion. It's the defendant's burden of proof to show otherwise.
Even with Certified/RR mail, it's not bulletproof. For example, an illegible siggy, or not the named party.
That's why, a few years back, Cali DMV experimented with having suspension notices personally served, instead of via Certified/RR.