What would you do?

[Toy4x4]

I recently got a photo ticket for going through a red light. I did it, but did so believing it was the more appropriate thing to do under the circumstances.
The circumstances: I was driving down the middle lane of three at ~40mph. The right lane ahead has about 6-7 cars stopped at the green light due to a city bus on the other side of the intersection at its stop. Two vehicles decide they don't want to wait and pull out in front of me and I have to hit the brakes and slow down to ~28mph. I am watching them and the cars still in the lane in case anything else happens. Well, the light changed to yellow while this was going on and I didn't see it. When I do notice it, I think: 1st How long has it been yellow? and 2nd I'm too close to the intersection to stop without locking up the wheels (I don't have ABS). I hit the crosswalk and the light turns red and see the photo flashes go off as I go over the red paint line for red light runners.
The picture clearly shows the stopped bus and the first vehicle
waiting to go once the bus starts moving again. It also shows me going through the light at 28 mph.
I'm wanting to go through with the court date to explain what happened to have the ticket dismissed. I would argue that its better to have gone through the light than to possibly skid at an intersection during a hard brake.
Should I not bother because its a no-win situation in court and pay the ticket or try to win my case? Do they even consider something like this? Ie: deem it okay to break a traffic law to err on the side of safety.
Ask questions of you're not clear on any points.
Thanks!

 

[crazyoildude]

check your state laws!
California was issuing tickets with cameras and people were paying them but it turned out later that the law said it was up to the person to decide to pay or not...

It went something like that you can look it up online

 

[daves87rs]

I think you have a chance. Just explain why...

I was pulled over for blowing a red light to avoid a guy who did not bother to use a blinker for a right turn (or even slow down).
Lucky for me, he saw the guy too, and let me go with no issues ...

 

[Toy4x4]

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
check your state laws!
California was issuing tickets with cameras and people were paying them but it turned out later that the law said it was up to the person to decide to pay or not...

It went something like that you can look it up online


Oh, you have to pay! If you ignore the ticket here, they start sending process servers out to you. I don't want to be a recluse for four months.

(If they don't serve you within that time frame, the ticket is voided).

 

[expat]

Honestly, go to court and explain your story, give all the facts in detail, have photos of the intersection, have Google earth imaginary of the intersection, get an accident histogram for that section of highway, In short, go to court with a mountain of paperwork and talk S L O W
I guarantee, halfway through you will be dismissed with a warning.

 

[Jim 5]

Here's some random thoughts based on how it works around here. You don't get if you don't ask. The ticket could be thrown out for any number of reasons. Also, what expat said, but below is some more detail as to why, and some other things to think about.

It's possible around here that if you show up ready to go to trial and explain the situation to the prosecuting attorney, (if possibile to have a conversation with him), he may decide it's not worth his 20 minutes to run a trial for the $100 or whatever the fine is. If he believes he'll have to run a trial for the sake of $100 when the other 999 out of 1000 are just mailing in a cheque, he might decide to let you go. Especially if he has a tee-time at 3:15.

The trick is, you've got do 2 things. First, you need to show up at the appointed time, and appear to have a viable and well-reasoned defence. You don't even have to win the case to beat the prosecutor in this situation because you have nothing to lose. Even if you lose, he loses if you are credible and well-reasoned enough for a judge to pay attention to you for 20-30 minutes. This is 20 or 30 minutes he won't get paid for either way win or lose. He (personally) loses either way. The stack of paper/photos/histograms etc mentioned by expat either looks like a good defence or it looks like a long time to get through. After all, you get to tell your story. The way it works around here is that once he's through his stack of cases, he gets to go home (or golfing). Win or lose, he doesn't want a long story.

But before you can even be seen as a time/win threat to the prosecutor, you have to take away anything that would disqualify you from being seen that way. Wear your nicest clothes, be as polite, sensible and prepared as you can. You have to be credible and show him some potential to put forth a defence a judge might buy, and failing that, you need to look like the type of citizen a judge will make time to listen to. The other thing you have to do is be very polite so you don't give the prosecutor any reason to want to stick it to you and run a trial no matter how long it takes. Instead, give him a reason to cut a decent guy a break.

If that fails, run the trial and tell the judge your story. If you can plant the seed that you may have had a sensible and prudent reason to go through that red light, the judge might let you off. You're not guilty until the judge says you are....unless you admit you're guilty by voluntarily paying the fine.

In the end if it you run the trial and you're convicted, a judge might grant you anywhere from 1 to 6 months to pay the fine if he believes it might be difficult based on your current financial situation. Again, you don't get if you don't ask.

Finally, you're going to have to take a morning or afternoon off work and sit around until your case comes up. This could be 3 hours. This fact alone takes away the value of fighting a ticket that's worth less $ than a certain amount.

I always take a run at these things if I have the time. In a free and democratic society, you have the right to be innocent until proven guilty. That means you have the right to be convicted at trial. I do not believe you should hesitate or apologize for expecting this from the system.

At the very least a person can learn something about how the legal system works. Not to mention sitting through a few hours of the docket makes you realize how difficult life is for some people and be thankful for the life you have.

 

[The_Jeff]

^ That! Well said. Mercy from the prosecutor is the best plan of attack, IMO.

Beware if you have any court costs that could add to your aggravation.

Take note the prosecutor will imply you weren't in control of your car or the situation. An intent of a red light camera is absolute, ask-no-questions control of the intersection. Maybe some traffic engineer studied this intersection and noted its above average light running rate and decided to put the keibosh on that. (We have engineers here who noted people slinking through a breakdown lane to make legal right turns, and put cobble stones and zebra stripes in to discourage this, as it was against their engineering objective of making everyone wait.)

 

[javacontour]

A few questions.

1. Are red light tickets traffic offenses that go against your record?

2. How much is the ticket?

3. How much is your time worth?

While I'm not a fan of RLC's, I'm also pragmatic. If such tickets don't count against your driving record because a camera took it vs an officer who can judge the situation AND the value of time off work is more than what you would pay for the ticket, then just mail the check. Likely you are looking at 1/2 day off work to deal with this. Unless you work shift work and can make a court appearance during your normal off hours, you will likely take some vacation, or use some goodwill from your boss to handle this.

You have been given some good advice to heed should you decide to fight the ticket. Hopefully I've given you some things to consider when deciding if fighting the ticket is your best course of action.

 

[AandPDan]

You're going to lose.

Have you ever gone to court? You really don't get to tell your side of the story.

From what I hear in yours, you were going through an intersection at 28 mph. There was no way that you could safely stop in a timely manner if you had to. Translation: you were speeding, maybe not as to what is posted, but for the conditions. Remember, it is a speed limit, not what you are required to do.

You also admit to not seeing the light turn yellow. Yes, you were focused on these other cars and the stopped bus.

Both the cars and bus should have caused to you realize that you need to be prepared to stop. Conditions were not ideal and you were traveling at excessive speed if you were not prepared to stop safely.

Therefore, you weren't fully aware of the road/traffic conditions and did not have the vehicle under complete control.

Pay up.

 

[Smokescreen]

I have been to court for running an "orange" light (yellow-turned red). I went in with a stack of papers, explaining the road regulations of safetly stopping before the cross-walk stop line, weather and road conditions and physics calculations on velocity and reaction time etc. When the judge saw my stack of papers he inquired what they were..

..he dropped the charges right there and I was free to go. I was a tiny bit disappointed because I had worked on the presentation for a couple of hours...only a tiny bit disappointed though

 

[expat]

At some point your Driving history is going to come up.
If you have a history of speeding or running Red lights, Don't bother fighting this one.

 

[Toy4x4]

to javacontour,
1. yes
2. $258 + defensive driving school + possible higher insurance
3. I can take a day off as my job is open 24/7.

I think I've found out I can take the class and nothing will show on record or insurance. I didn't notice that on the literature sent by the courts. It is sort of deceiving the way its laid out. Its as if they want you to pay instead of knowing the other options.

 

[Toy4x4]

to AandPDan,
No . I've never been to court.
That doesn't make sense.
Basically what you're saying is anytime there is some unforeseeable road condition that jumps out at someone or has priority for action and causes them to break a rule, they are at fault because they didn't foresee the unknown.

 

[Shannow]

Wasn't paying attention, missed an orange and ran a red ?

Suck it up

 

[Toy4x4]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Wasn't paying attention, missed an orange and ran a red ?

Suck it up


No. Go back and reread the post.

 

[Shannow]

I did read the first post...you missed the yellow, and went through the red...

And in the land of the loophole, no-one wants to be responsible for their actions.

You were the driver, you were at an intersection, and were traveling too fast for what was obviously a situation where you should have been traveling slower and more attentive. 28MPH through a hectic situation is pretty fast.

A speed limit is not a defence.

 

[Toy4x4]

Well, as an armchair quarterback who wasn't there I can see how you'd think that. Its always easy to second guess someone else's actions from a short post.
I'm not trying to make it through a loophole. At the time I deemed standing on the brakes irresponsible.
Too fast? Who's to say what speed is too fast in any given unfolding situation? What speed should I been going? I'd already scrubbed ~12mph and downshifted to avoid an accident and created a safe distance. 4.1 seconds (yellow light) is a small amount of time to avoid an accident, scan other potentials, notice an already yellow light, move foot to pedal and safely brake in time.
And where did I say the 40mph speed limit was my defense?

 

[AandPDan]

Originally Posted By: Toy4x4
to AandPDan,
No . I've never been to court.
That doesn't make sense.
Basically what you're saying is anytime there is some unforeseeable road condition that jumps out at someone or has priority for action and causes them to break a rule, they are at fault because they didn't foresee the unknown.


Nobody jumped out. You said that you saw this situation with the bus developing, "2 cars pulled out in front of me", and you just tapped the brakes. You are supposed to be able to keep the car under control at all times.

You then admit you didn't see the light turn yellow.

Just from these statements alone you've lost your case.

The judge or whoever is handling your case is going to want to keep things moving. You won't be able to talk forever, they want you to cut to the chase.

In some cases the judge questions you and doesn't just let you ramble on. If that happens it is very difficult to make your case.

Basically, you were zipping along in complete disregard to the traffic conditions (stopped bus and had to slow for these two cars). You weren't paying attention to the traffic light, you then used poor judgement to go through the intersection at 28 mph. Face it, you didn't even attempt to stop. Traffic lights are known to turn from green to red and YOU WEREN'T PAYING ATTENTION.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Toy4x4
Well, as an armchair quarterback who wasn't there I can see how you'd think that. Its always easy to second guess someone else's actions from a short post.
I'm not trying to make it through a loophole. At the time I deemed standing on the brakes irresponsible.
Too fast? Who's to say what speed is too fast in any given unfolding situation? What speed should I been going? I'd already scrubbed ~12mph and downshifted to avoid an accident and created a safe distance. 4.1 seconds (yellow light) is a small amount of time to avoid an accident, scan other potentials, notice an already yellow light, move foot to pedal and safely brake in time.
And where did I say the 40mph speed limit was my defense?




Easy now, you're getting defensive, and that attitude will get you crushed in court. Steve has simply pointed out what I would point out were I the prosecution. When in court, you must be unemotional, calm and reasonable. Get defensive, get emotional, and you've lost the credibility you need to present your case in its best light. Act, and dress, like you're a reasonable, responsible, person.

From your own testimony, while you were looking at the stopped traffic and the bus, you failed to notice (not your words, but you "missed" the change, ergo, you failed to notice) the change to yellow and elected to proceed through the intersection and did so on a red light.

Those are the facts: You did not see the change. You entered the intersection on the Red.

So, the question becomes: will the judge accept the mitigating curcumstances? Will he accept the "why" (your explanation) of the above facts as reasonable and prudent driving?Was your decision to ignore the traffic signal to focus on the other traffic a good one?

The only way to find that out is to go to court and present your case.

The Judge might agree with you.

He might not.

 

[Toy4x4]

Yes they did "jump out". If I hadn't braked I would have hit the rear end of the RangeRover in front of me. Neither of them should have pulled out due to where I was on the road. THAT is why I missed the change.
Your last paragraph is a laughable embellishment of what happened.