Post # 1
so, I got a notice in the mail that I got caught doing a “rolling stop” when making a right on red. It was caught with an auto traffic camera, the kind they install up on poles. in the photo, however, it does not look like I’ve crossed the line (and my brake lights are on) so I am not sure if it’s actually proving anytihng. of course there were no eye witnesses.
I want to contest it, but it’s a risk because sometimes if they disagree, then you have to pay the ticket ($125) and a court fee on top of it!
Here are my arguments:
1. I’m not sure if the photo shows me actually proves anything, but I can’t tell for sure.
2. I have had a flawless driving record for the past 11 years! (except for a couple of parking tickets)
what do you say, bees? should I do it? do you think I have a case? any advice?
bonus points if you happen to know these things specifically for washington state.
Post # 3
The thing about those cameras is they switch on X amount of seconds after the light goes red, and are motion sensored. So if they turn on 3 seconds after the light goes red and catch movement, then they automatically have you on a moving violation because the camera could not have caught you if a) the light wasn’t red and b) you weren’t moving. It’s REALLY hard to contest those tickets because of the precision of the cameras and because while you say they can’t say for sure there’s movement, YOU can’t prove there’s NOT. I’d honestly just pay the ticket and not worry about fighting it. It’s really hard to get a traffic violation thrown out.
Post # 4
ohheavenlyday, I don’t really know much of traffic law and such, but isn’t the burden of proof on them? She doesn’t have to prove her innocence, right? They just have to prove her guilt. But maybe that’s just in criminal cases? Idk, but I’d probably fight it for the sake of a spotless driving record.
Post # 5
To me it depends on what the law is in your state. If it is legal to turn right on a red light as it is here, then it is no surprise that your car would be moving during the red light.
Whether or not the picture is able to show whether you stopped , then started moving again, I have no idea.
I know it certainly would be my arguement that I already came to a full stop and then completed my right turn.
Post # 6
My brother got a ticket for the same thing. He contested and had to pay. They only sent him a clip of a 3 second video they had where he clearly didn’t come to a complete stop. If you are sure you made a complete stop and then turned by all means contest but some cameras get you for longer than just that picture you see.
Post # 7
Their proof of guilt is the picture they sent her. If you’re going to contest it, you have to have some kind of argument- there was no sign saying no turn on red, I can show you I was stopped, etc. etc. My husband used to be a cop and explained this stuff to me; you can try to contest traffic violations, but usually once they’ve got you on that camera, they’ve got you, and it’s pretty difficult to change their mind. It’s you vs. a camera. Typically you just end up losing and paying more anyway.
Post # 8
Rolling stops aren’t legal stops, though! Traffic violations typically fall under the Strict Liability category. Personally, I wouldn’t contest it. Depending on where you live, it may not even add points to your driver’s record.
Post # 9
gah, WB ate my post again!
@MrsPinkPeony: I probably did do a rolling stop, it’s a bad habit, I know!
In new mexico, if you contesetd a ticket and the officer didn’t show up, your case would be thrown out. it was unlikelly that the officer would show up because it would be a waste of time for the most part. but maybe that’s only the case for parking tickets in NM.
maybe I won’t risk it–I did the crime, I guess I’ll pay!
it makes me so mad because I see people running red lights every day, going really fast, nearly hitting pedestrians (like me, for instance) and they get away from it — I never see the traffic camera flash! I do one little rolling stop in a completely deserted intersection and get nailed $125.
well, life ain’t fair boo hoo 🙂 I think I will pay. thanks for the advice, ladies!
Post # 10
Did you reply to the ticket already? They have to have proof of service within a certain amount of days (120 I think). I would just avoid being personally served within the service limit. This mailing your ticket to you to acheive service is bullshit, in my opinion.
The downside to that is, if they do get someone to personally serve you and do reach you, you will have to pay the service fee. Look into it and see if that’s something your state does.
Post # 11
@SoupyCat: interesting. I heard that the point of the cameras is so they could mail you a ticket. nobody ever mentions being personally served.
as a taxpayer, I would actually be pretty peeved if people were being paid to do this. our law enforcement here is not getting enough money, and is pretty under staffed.
but anyway, you make an interesting point!
Post # 12
I’ve never actually contested a violation before (just one ticket when I was 16 that I was definitely at fault for!) but I do know that several years ago the traffic cameras were banned in some states, including my own, because the camera can prove it was your car but that doesn’t necessarily mean that you were the one driving it. So, unless the camera shows that it was you in the driver’s seat, you could maybe weasel your way out of it?
Post # 13
@janie-janie: I suggest you go to court and plead guilty. It’s hard to fight those camera tickets-I don’t know anyone who has gotten out of that yet. But if you show up in court you can at least get the fine reduced, sometimes by half.
And I don’t think they have to personally serve you. You already got served-by mail and that is all they are required to do. No way are they going to send process servers out to every single person who gets a camera ticket. So, if say, you hadn’t updated your address with the DMV, it would be your fault you didn’t get the ticket in the mail.
Post # 14
If you are caught on camera it means you did go past the line after the light turned red, because the camera wouldnt take the picture otherwise. I would just plead guilty too
Post # 15
Hey! Specifically for Washington state, if you’re caught on a traffic camera it is NOT a moving violation. Weirdly enough. So it WON’T go on your record! I don’t know about contesting it, but that should help 🙂
Post # 16
@PutABirdOnIt: The rules of civil procedure says you have to be served. That is how I understand it anyhow. Or else how can they verify that you ever got the notice of your accusal? Things get lost in the mail all the time.