Red Light Camera Infraction - Worth Trying to Fight?

Got a notice of getting nabbed by a red light camera. I have the option to request a hearing for it, and trying to decide if it is even worth it to do so. The fine is $95 and there is nothing on the notice charging me with any particularly titled moving violation, so I don't know if this would be any points on my license. The description is "Automated Traffic Control Photographic System Red Light Violation". I think I was operating my vehicle in a safe manner and was the victim of a weirdly designed intersection that didn't give me time to notice the light and stop safely before it turned red. Not sure that even matters to the people making these decisions.

What happened:
So this was a weird intersection. I was turning left from a one-way road onto a more major one-way road in downtown. There was the intersection I was turning from, and another intersection about 100' down the road, which is where I got the notice for. Traffic was flowing lightly on the more-major road. I waited for a car to go past to be sure he wouldn't merge into the lane I was trying to get onto. He goes past at speed. I look right to be sure I'm clear of other traffic, pull into the road and start to accelerate. The light at the intersection 100' down went from green to yellow just as I'm starting my turn. My attention as I turn is down the road away from the intersection on the oncoming traffic until I'm sure it isn't a factor. By the time I look up at the light, it's already yellow, and I don't think I really have time to stop safely before entering the intersection. The light turns red pretty much as I get to the white line to stop before the intersection. The cameras clocked my speed at 21 mph in a 35 zone crossing that line. There was video for me to review online, and this happened at night, so you can clearly see my headlights that I am turning left and what the timing is on it.

Not sure if you can follow that or if it even makes sense as a reasonable defense. Or if it is even worth taking the time out of a day to fight over $95.

Tell them you would like to face your accuser in court and question them about the allegation. You know, that little 6th Amendment thing. Oh, wait...

I have nothing constructive to add. Sorry.

I got one from a semi in front of me. It took it so long to get moving it set off the camera on my car. Process was appeal, sit with a judge who reviewed the photos/video, listened to everyone's lame excuses and gave a verdict. He looked surprised at my argument, but agreed. 99/100 will be paying the fine.

Red light cameras are 25% about traffic safety and 75% about revenue.

In reply to oldtin:

I suspect my case is probably a bit weaker than your's but stronger than most people. The intersection was weird, and my attention was on traffic elsewhere for the 3 seconds it took between the light being green, and me be too close to the intersection to stop short.

Did the camera take a picture of you in the intersection when the light was red? Do you suppose they put that camera there because they knew it was a weird intersection? Will the judge thank you for your contribution?

Pony up the dough and move on.

Pay the berkeleyers in nickels. Legal tender, bitch.

Yeah, Pony up and move on. For two reasons, in most states it is a civil infraction. Which means you are not being charged with a crime you are being charged a debt, so the 6th amendment doesn't apply. So your credit will get hit and blah blah blah. Check with the laws in your state.

Second, I have received one of these tickets and it was for running the light 0.051 seconds after it changed (that was the number listed on the ticket). You have to go in with proof to offset their proof. Which is difficult to do.

Best advice, as much as it pains me, pay your fee to use the intersection tab and vote in the next local election against every politician in favor of traffic cams.

In reply to Flight Service:

That's pretty much what I'm leaning towards. If there were license points on the line, maybe. But taking a day off work on the slim probability I might no have to pay $25...

Just... grr...

Fueled by Caffeine wrote: Red light cameras are 25% about traffic safety and 75% about revenue.

More like -10% safety and 110% revenue.

At least, in the areas where they found that shortening the yellowe increases traffic camera fines, with only a slight increase in traffic collisions.

In reply to Knurled:

Yeah they have found out that the long yellows virtually eliminate red light violation traffic incidents.

Humm, change a setting and statistically eliminate the public safety issue or install large fine generating box and leave/shorten timing at the risk to public safety. What would be the best for the populace? I wonder...

That sucks. Was it Nationwide and Fourth? That intersection causes a lot of problems for people. I've seen what can happen when people run it thought - I was on my bicycle and just went through the intersection when a cross-traffic car ran the light and t-boned a car behind me, pretty hard. It's a E36 M3ty layout.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=nationwide+blvd+and+fourth+st,+columbus,+oh&hl=en&ll=39.969198,-82.997471&spn=0.004006,0.005681&sll=40.365277,-82.669252&sspn=5.766632,11.634521&t=h&hnear=Columbus,+Ohio&z=18

Did you get a video of you going through the intersection?

I got a violation for a right turn where I thought I went through on a yellow. They sent me a video of myself, and using the pause button, I determined that the light turned red .03 seconds before I entered the intersection. I paid

There has been a number of newspaper stories in the Chicago papers in the past months covering the use of photo red light cameras in Chicago. I won't go into details but one of the facts found that increased violations was that "someone" cut the yellow light time to less then 3 seconds. I wonder how that happened?

These cameras have brought in millions of dollars into Chicago's piggy bank with little to show for in safety wise.

Most people running red lights do so knowingly. When the light turns yellow and you are doing the speed limit you should be able to stop safely and smoothly while more than 2 seconds from the intersection's legal stop line. If you knew the intersection is trouble you should be prepared to slow accordingly. If you had never been through the intersection then you might have an argument.

That being said, GO TO COURT and make them earn that money. You may also want to find out if they shortened the yellow light time after adding the cameras. If it becomes costlier for them to enforce then eventually they will get rid of them.

Most intersections with cameras have seen an increase in rear-end collisions as people follow too closely, are distracted, and don't prepare to slow soon enough. Hate the things.

Did the state send you the ticket or a company? link

dculberson wrote: That sucks. Was it Nationwide and Fourth? That intersection causes a lot of problems for people. I've seen what can happen when people run it thought - I was on my bicycle and just went through the intersection when a cross-traffic car ran the light and t-boned a car behind me, pretty hard. It's a E36 M3ty layout. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=nationwide+blvd+and+fourth+st,+columbus,+oh&hl=en&ll=39.969198,-82.997471&spn=0.004006,0.005681&sll=40.365277,-82.669252&sspn=5.766632,11.634521&t=h&hnear=Columbus,+Ohio&z=18

Yup. Turning from Nationwide onto 4th, and trying to get all the way across to merge onto 670. This intersection is more evidence that the civil engineers who designed the roads and ramps here need to be nut-punched.

slowride wrote: Did you get a video of you going through the intersection? I got a violation for a right turn where I thought I went through on a yellow. They sent me a video of myself, and using the pause button, I determined that the light turned red .03 seconds before I entered the intersection. I paid

Did get a video. It was definitely red before I entered the intersection. It's tough to explain, but I wasn't turning into this intersection. I was turning from an intersection about 4 car lengths down from the one where I got ticketed for blowing the light. I was accelerating and going an odd speed, below the limit, where I was too fast to stop before I entered but not fast enough to get in before the light.

fight it... fight it as far as they will allow it... if nothing else, it makes damn sure that even if you do wind up paying the fine it cost the city/county/state more than they are making off you. if they lose money on every ticket, it's a pretty safe assumption that they will suddenly decide that the cameras don't help keep the public safer and get rid of them..

and if it was sent from a private company and not from the city/county/state, i'm pretty sure you can just file it in the round file and never have to worry about it. at least that's the way it works in some areas.

i read this whole thing, and to me, there's one aspect no one has covered. whats the judge gonna say? ask yourself what a tired, angry, short tempered, revenue minded judge is gonna say to your reasoning. my guess is one of these three:

1- "whatever, pay half. next case." now you have burned a day off, spent the entire time getting less tolerant of bureaucratic nonsense that is the legal system, and gotten what? $45. whoopie.

2- "it is the responsibility of each driver to be aware of his surroundings 100% of the time. if the traffic flow was such that you were unable to concentrate on anything but oncoming traffic, then you should not have entered said traffic flow." now, this is articulate, even for a judge, but you get the idea. same rules apply, you still lose a day, and you get nothing in return.

3- (and this one is slim, but iv'e heard of it secondhand, so it does happen)"seems to me you pulled out in front of moving traffic at such a speed as to indicate you cut them off, and then tried to beat the light. you're lucky you didn't receive a reckless driving ticket." now, your indicated speed being as low as it was may null this one, but you never know. you still lose a day, and $95.

pay it. i got three of them in AZ. i ignored mine. speeding ones too. got two of those. but AZ laws are different. pay it.

-J0N

Fight it.. I around here I am pretty sure they gave up on issuing tickets from those things.

What are the chances they actually have a definitively recognizable picture of YOU in the car?

No?

Sounds like reasonable doubt to me?

Thank them for letting you know you shouldn't allow that friend to borrow your car and move on...

nutty internet letter..... said: To Whom it May Concern, I received a letter claiming I committed a violation of a speeding law in the District of Columbia on 04/21/2012. As per the instructions, I am writing to plead 'not guilty' to this charge. Although this option is said to result in this matter going to court; it is my suggestion that the charges simply be dropped. This suggestion comes out of respect for tax payers, and my request that their hard earned money not be wasted in such proceedings. As there is no evidence of my involvement with this alleged 'crime', as well as the fact that I am not granted my 6th amendment right to face my 'accuser' (a camera); I see no way the government could prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I also see find no legal requirement for me to implicate someone else in this process, as it is the government's responsibility to prove a person's guilt. It is also my 5th amendment right to remain silent on the matter. If it is the government's decision to move forward in this matter, I would request copies of any evidence the prosecution may have of my involvement in the "offense"; as well as, all maintenance records for the camera(s) involved. Sincerely, Nathan Cox United States Army Veteran

Appleseed wrote: Pay the berkeleyers in nickels. Legal tender, bitch.

The ones where they have been beaten are when the amount of time the yellow is on is not at the minimum legal amount. There is a requirement on the length of the yellow based upon the speed limit preceding the intersection. Although many of the lights are times electronically to be exactly at the proper amount of time, the light is not visibly on that amount. This is especially true on the older incandescent lights where the filament takes a moment to warm up. The switching mechanism may state that the yellow is on for 3 seconds but the actual viable light is on for 2.85 seconds.

If you can video the light with a very accurate time overlayed it should show you. I have not idea how to do that but I am sure there is a fairly simeple way.

Good luck, Soctt

ronholm wrote: Fight it.. I around here I am pretty sure they gave up on issuing tickets from those things. What are the chances they actually have a definitively recognizable picture of YOU in the car? No? Sounds like reasonable doubt to me? Thank them for letting you know you shouldn't allow that friend to borrow your car and move on...

nutty internet letter..... said: To Whom it May Concern, I received a letter claiming I committed a violation of a speeding law in the District of Columbia on 04/21/2012. As per the instructions, I am writing to plead 'not guilty' to this charge. Although this option is said to result in this matter going to court; it is my suggestion that the charges simply be dropped. This suggestion comes out of respect for tax payers, and my request that their hard earned money not be wasted in such proceedings. As there is no evidence of my involvement with this alleged 'crime', as well as the fact that I am not granted my 6th amendment right to face my 'accuser' (a camera); I see no way the government could prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I also see find no legal requirement for me to implicate someone else in this process, as it is the government's responsibility to prove a person's guilt. It is also my 5th amendment right to remain silent on the matter. If it is the government's decision to move forward in this matter, I would request copies of any evidence the prosecution may have of my involvement in the "offense"; as well as, all maintenance records for the camera(s) involved. Sincerely, Nathan Cox United States Army Veteran

a letter to a government office that has references to not one, but two amendments in the Bill of Rights will get you labelled as a domestic terrorist and put on all sorts of watch lists these days.. so i retract my last post about fighting it out of spite or ignoring it: just be good sheeple and pay it even if it's not technically legal and goes against several aspects of the founding principles of the country..

You guys really need to spend $30 or whatever a year and join the NMA. I've been a member since the 55 NMSL days and they have all the resources to help you fight these sorts of tickets. NMA - Red Light Cameras Funny to me how so many car guys will spend money to belong to the NRA but when it comes to protecting their driving from revenue generation they dismiss it as unnecessary.

no red light cameras anywhere that I go … other than VIR (Danville) and their cameras all point at the front of the car as it approaches the intersection … or so it seems … since no front tag in NC … I'm betting that they'd have a tough time finding me LOL

+I don't run red lights anymore … never in that big of a hurry

oh, and I really don't see the problem of being put on any watch lists