Red light ticket advice
Thread Starter
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 124
From: 925
Car Info: 2016 STI
Red light ticket advice
I got nailed by a red light ticket in Oakland a couple weeks ago and got a summons in the mail this week. I would normally just take the extortionist $500 traffic school and be done with it, but the camera popped me before I even got to the crosswalk line! I remember stopping, getting flashed by the camera, pulling up some more to see around a truck, stopping, and then taking a legal right.
Can't say it wasn't me, the camera set up is fancy and it has my face picture, too.
The picture clearly shows me BEFORE the stop line, with my brake and signal lights on.
Any advice? I have no priors so I could just do the traffic school, I guess, but that's a lot of money for something I don't think I even did.
Back home in Seattle, there were some great traffic lawyers that specialized in this stuff, anyone like that here?
Can't say it wasn't me, the camera set up is fancy and it has my face picture, too.
The picture clearly shows me BEFORE the stop line, with my brake and signal lights on.
Any advice? I have no priors so I could just do the traffic school, I guess, but that's a lot of money for something I don't think I even did.
Back home in Seattle, there were some great traffic lawyers that specialized in this stuff, anyone like that here?
If you believe you are not guilty. Fight it. The first summons is just about whether you are guilty or not..just let the judge know that the picture taken that you were behind the cross walk and you did not run the light and you were just sent this ticket.. You can contact the photo enforced company because they are usually ran by a third party and not the city/state. They should be able to provide you with video/pictures. Bay area is a notorious in falsifying fines and tickets. Hell I gotten about 5 tickets from passing the toll plaza on the bay bridge. Always ask for a receipt when paying or you're Sol .
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,695
From: S.F.BayArea
Car Info: Whatever The Lot Provides ;)
**This one time at Band-Camp**
3 things...
1. Those flashes are long enough at night to leave an area lit up well enough that the company in Arizona can then use the next few frames in the video to make it appear a Yes/No on the truth of the accused violation.
2. You legally have full right and privilege to a review of that video prior to your court date and can call it into evidence at the court date which by law also means you then can call into witness the supervisor or reviewer of said video to the courtroom for a cross examination to whatever statements they present.
3. By law you have a right to face your original accuser, which in this case is a camera, a non-sentient being that has had to have it's witness accusation reviewed by the human eye which will be the following: Camera Tech at their facility in Arizona, the Supervisor to the Camera Tech in their Arizona Facility, and finally those two decisions are passed back to the locally assigned O.P.D. Traffic Officer or the C.O. of the Traffic Officer. The Traffic Officer and C.O. are the final word on whether or not an actual citation is issued.
See where I am going with all this?
Something to consider, recently when in doubt, the minute the camera had gotten plenty of video capture to prove what my argument was, about 10-15 seconds post flash of me sitting there, I have pulled over and immediately called the local enforcement agency to advise of a potentially false camera shot and logged a formal complaint with their C.O. . That following my complaint they legally had 72 hours to perform a return contact follow-up and it had to be a verbally recorded conversation. That if in any form of doubt I would be immediately exercising my legal rights and doing the following...
A. Call into Witness the camera's purchase, maintenance, and repair records.
B. Call into Witness the Arizona Camera Tech.
C. Call into Witness the Arizona Camera Tech's Supervisor.
D. Call into Witness the local Traffic Officer.
E. Call into Witness the local Traffic Officer's C.O. .
F. Call into Witness any other individuals associated with any form of Camera Citation at that location over the past 6 month time frame, including public individuals who were cited similarly.
They pretty much didn't want a headache b/c the video clearly showed I was in the right. I got a call less than 24 hours later stating the issue was immediately dropped. I got the Officer's name and location and sent a Certified Return Request and PrePaid Mailer with a letter they had to sign which covered what was just said. Pain in the *** for me to take the time to do it but way cheaper than $500.
YMMV.
3 things...
1. Those flashes are long enough at night to leave an area lit up well enough that the company in Arizona can then use the next few frames in the video to make it appear a Yes/No on the truth of the accused violation.
2. You legally have full right and privilege to a review of that video prior to your court date and can call it into evidence at the court date which by law also means you then can call into witness the supervisor or reviewer of said video to the courtroom for a cross examination to whatever statements they present.
3. By law you have a right to face your original accuser, which in this case is a camera, a non-sentient being that has had to have it's witness accusation reviewed by the human eye which will be the following: Camera Tech at their facility in Arizona, the Supervisor to the Camera Tech in their Arizona Facility, and finally those two decisions are passed back to the locally assigned O.P.D. Traffic Officer or the C.O. of the Traffic Officer. The Traffic Officer and C.O. are the final word on whether or not an actual citation is issued.
See where I am going with all this?
Something to consider, recently when in doubt, the minute the camera had gotten plenty of video capture to prove what my argument was, about 10-15 seconds post flash of me sitting there, I have pulled over and immediately called the local enforcement agency to advise of a potentially false camera shot and logged a formal complaint with their C.O. . That following my complaint they legally had 72 hours to perform a return contact follow-up and it had to be a verbally recorded conversation. That if in any form of doubt I would be immediately exercising my legal rights and doing the following...
A. Call into Witness the camera's purchase, maintenance, and repair records.
B. Call into Witness the Arizona Camera Tech.
C. Call into Witness the Arizona Camera Tech's Supervisor.
D. Call into Witness the local Traffic Officer.
E. Call into Witness the local Traffic Officer's C.O. .
F. Call into Witness any other individuals associated with any form of Camera Citation at that location over the past 6 month time frame, including public individuals who were cited similarly.
They pretty much didn't want a headache b/c the video clearly showed I was in the right. I got a call less than 24 hours later stating the issue was immediately dropped. I got the Officer's name and location and sent a Certified Return Request and PrePaid Mailer with a letter they had to sign which covered what was just said. Pain in the *** for me to take the time to do it but way cheaper than $500.
YMMV.
Last edited by TheFozz; Apr 28, 2013 at 01:27 PM.
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,695
From: S.F.BayArea
Car Info: Whatever The Lot Provides ;)
Actually, 5 things...
4. IN CALIFORNIA THERE IS A BIG LEGAL MOVEMENT TO HAVE THOSE DEVICES OUTLAWED AND REMOVED.
We recently had all of ours removed from Union City.
5. If you appear before a judge to state your claim (Not Guilty) and said Judge is like one was in San Jose recently and basically states before calling anyone to state or as proceedings commence "I don't care what you say you all are guilty." he then under law is committing a Pre-Disposed and Biased Opinion and you therefore are under clause to immediately call for a dismissal. Have your Camera Phone Set to Video as the Court also Video's the proceedings. IN a case such as that one I immediately went up the ladder. They'll tell you they are the final decision but that is a summation of the truth, not the actual factual full truth.
How else would all the Lawyers and Officers have been able to overturn citations and remove the cameras in my town?
**Camera Flashes temporarily blind other drivers and are also illegal for that.**
You owe me a case of Boylan Rootbeer or $120/hr for the legal advise bro.
4. IN CALIFORNIA THERE IS A BIG LEGAL MOVEMENT TO HAVE THOSE DEVICES OUTLAWED AND REMOVED.
We recently had all of ours removed from Union City.
5. If you appear before a judge to state your claim (Not Guilty) and said Judge is like one was in San Jose recently and basically states before calling anyone to state or as proceedings commence "I don't care what you say you all are guilty." he then under law is committing a Pre-Disposed and Biased Opinion and you therefore are under clause to immediately call for a dismissal. Have your Camera Phone Set to Video as the Court also Video's the proceedings. IN a case such as that one I immediately went up the ladder. They'll tell you they are the final decision but that is a summation of the truth, not the actual factual full truth.
How else would all the Lawyers and Officers have been able to overturn citations and remove the cameras in my town?
**Camera Flashes temporarily blind other drivers and are also illegal for that.**
You owe me a case of Boylan Rootbeer or $120/hr for the legal advise bro.
Last edited by TheFozz; Apr 28, 2013 at 01:25 PM.
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,911
From: Orinda/Palo Alto/Los Altos
Car Info: Subaru STi Sedan '13
I've been in this situation once before and I fought it and got out. Did you stop completely or was it a california stop? If it was a california stop you may be able to ask for a plea and they will either reduce the fine or dismiss it completely
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,695
From: S.F.BayArea
Car Info: Whatever The Lot Provides ;)
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,911
From: Orinda/Palo Alto/Los Altos
Car Info: Subaru STi Sedan '13
o.O please go be a judge at Redwood City.. Their cameras flash even at 3mph and I ended up fighting for like a week and a half telling the judge yo dude i was safe about what I did can you dismiss it.. im a student blah blah blah I cant spend time and money on this.
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,695
From: S.F.BayArea
Car Info: Whatever The Lot Provides ;)
..or have someone on retainer and good references who are L.E.O./S.W.A.T. who'll stand up with ya.
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,911
From: Orinda/Palo Alto/Los Altos
Car Info: Subaru STi Sedan '13
There's your error. You assumed the Judge even cares. Go in dressed like you have the money and ready to present your case in a proper fashion or drag someone with you who can...
..or have someone on retainer and good references who are L.E.O./S.W.A.T. who'll stand up with ya.
..or have someone on retainer and good references who are L.E.O./S.W.A.T. who'll stand up with ya.
Churro Aficionado
iTrader: (38)
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 54,661
From: IG - @thomas.teammoist
Car Info: IG - @TEAMMOISTOFFICIAL
**This one time at Band-Camp**
3 things...
1. Those flashes are long enough at night to leave an area lit up well enough that the company in Arizona can then use the next few frames in the video to make it appear a Yes/No on the truth of the accused violation.
2. You legally have full right and privilege to a review of that video prior to your court date and can call it into evidence at the court date which by law also means you then can call into witness the supervisor or reviewer of said video to the courtroom for a cross examination to whatever statements they present.
3. By law you have a right to face your original accuser, which in this case is a camera, a non-sentient being that has had to have it's witness accusation reviewed by the human eye which will be the following: Camera Tech at their facility in Arizona, the Supervisor to the Camera Tech in their Arizona Facility, and finally those two decisions are passed back to the locally assigned O.P.D. Traffic Officer or the C.O. of the Traffic Officer. The Traffic Officer and C.O. are the final word on whether or not an actual citation is issued.
See where I am going with all this?
Something to consider, recently when in doubt, the minute the camera had gotten plenty of video capture to prove what my argument was, about 10-15 seconds post flash of me sitting there, I have pulled over and immediately called the local enforcement agency to advise of a potentially false camera shot and logged a formal complaint with their C.O. . That following my complaint they legally had 72 hours to perform a return contact follow-up and it had to be a verbally recorded conversation. That if in any form of doubt I would be immediately exercising my legal rights and doing the following...
A. Call into Witness the camera's purchase, maintenance, and repair records.
B. Call into Witness the Arizona Camera Tech.
C. Call into Witness the Arizona Camera Tech's Supervisor.
D. Call into Witness the local Traffic Officer.
E. Call into Witness the local Traffic Officer's C.O. .
F. Call into Witness any other individuals associated with any form of Camera Citation at that location over the past 6 month time frame, including public individuals who were cited similarly.
They pretty much didn't want a headache b/c the video clearly showed I was in the right. I got a call less than 24 hours later stating the issue was immediately dropped. I got the Officer's name and location and sent a Certified Return Request and PrePaid Mailer with a letter they had to sign which covered what was just said. Pain in the *** for me to take the time to do it but way cheaper than $500.
YMMV.
3 things...
1. Those flashes are long enough at night to leave an area lit up well enough that the company in Arizona can then use the next few frames in the video to make it appear a Yes/No on the truth of the accused violation.
2. You legally have full right and privilege to a review of that video prior to your court date and can call it into evidence at the court date which by law also means you then can call into witness the supervisor or reviewer of said video to the courtroom for a cross examination to whatever statements they present.
3. By law you have a right to face your original accuser, which in this case is a camera, a non-sentient being that has had to have it's witness accusation reviewed by the human eye which will be the following: Camera Tech at their facility in Arizona, the Supervisor to the Camera Tech in their Arizona Facility, and finally those two decisions are passed back to the locally assigned O.P.D. Traffic Officer or the C.O. of the Traffic Officer. The Traffic Officer and C.O. are the final word on whether or not an actual citation is issued.
See where I am going with all this?
Something to consider, recently when in doubt, the minute the camera had gotten plenty of video capture to prove what my argument was, about 10-15 seconds post flash of me sitting there, I have pulled over and immediately called the local enforcement agency to advise of a potentially false camera shot and logged a formal complaint with their C.O. . That following my complaint they legally had 72 hours to perform a return contact follow-up and it had to be a verbally recorded conversation. That if in any form of doubt I would be immediately exercising my legal rights and doing the following...
A. Call into Witness the camera's purchase, maintenance, and repair records.
B. Call into Witness the Arizona Camera Tech.
C. Call into Witness the Arizona Camera Tech's Supervisor.
D. Call into Witness the local Traffic Officer.
E. Call into Witness the local Traffic Officer's C.O. .
F. Call into Witness any other individuals associated with any form of Camera Citation at that location over the past 6 month time frame, including public individuals who were cited similarly.
They pretty much didn't want a headache b/c the video clearly showed I was in the right. I got a call less than 24 hours later stating the issue was immediately dropped. I got the Officer's name and location and sent a Certified Return Request and PrePaid Mailer with a letter they had to sign which covered what was just said. Pain in the *** for me to take the time to do it but way cheaper than $500.
YMMV.