<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Helvetica, Verdana">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Camerashy:
I've just received 2 traffic tickets (Failure to stop by red lite) one after other by a week interval. My car was captured on film by a camera installed at the intersection. The notice to appear and a picture of my car and license plate showed my car in middle of intersection and the lite. The middle lite suppose to show it was red, but I can barely see red on the picture, the sun light washed out the red lite almost completely. The pedestrian red lite across the street on my direction suppose to show red,but I can't tell at all due to bad photo. The data imprinted on the photo indicated I was traveling at 40 mph. The data imprinted also indicated the red lite was on for .3 second.
This incident occurred in city of Laguna Niguel, Orange County, California. I believe this camera was installed reasonly less than a year old. The red light at the intersection did not appear to have a hood or lense to prevent harsh flare from sun lite.
My questions are:
1. Do I have the right to question my accuser in a traffic court ?
2. If I do, who or what is my accuser in this case ?
3. Can I file verified complaint, as IAAL has posted ?
4. Can I file a motion of discovery for the timing devive and accuracy of the camera ?
5. Do I have a chance to fight these tickets ?
Please help,
Thanks<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
My response:
You asked:
1. Do I have the right to question my accuser in a traffic court ?
<<Absolutely. That's your Consitutional Right to confront all accusers.>>
2. If I do, who or what is my accuser in this case ?
<<That's the problem, under the Constitution. There is no accuser, which is why most cities and States have outlawed photo radar.>>
3. Can I file verified complaint, as IAAL has posted ?
<<Yes, absolutely. Do Not Accept a "Notice to Appear" as a Governmental Complaint. You can copy the Motion, put in your specific information, and file the same with the court 10 days prior to your scheduled appearance. The court will rule from the Bench on your motion, and make its orders for further action.>>
4. Can I file a motion of discovery for the timing devive and accuracy of the camera ?
<<Yes, however, the better route to take would be a Motion to Dismiss at time of trial, based on Constitutional grounds.>>
5. Do I have a chance to fight these tickets ?
<<Yes, see below.>>
PROBLEMS WITH, AND GROUNDS FOR OBJECTION TO, "PHOTO ENFORCEMENT"
Inadequate notification of defendants
Most governments using photo enforcement notify defendants via first class mail. There is no reasonable guarantee that the person to whom the letter is addressed will actually get the letter, understand the letter nor know how to properly respond. However, the government makes the assumption that proper notification was achieved and the defendant is willingly ignoring the order to appear or pay. The result can be a warrant issued for the arrest of the person named on the ticket.
Failure to positively identify the driver of the vehicle.
Frequently, the photo does not adequately identify the driver of the offending vehicle. The owner of the vehicle is mailed the ticket, even though the owner was not driving the vehicle and in some instances may not know who was driving the vehicle. The owner of the vehicle is forced to prove his/her innocence, often by identifying the actual diver who may be a family member, friend or employee.
Failure to promptly notify defendant
Defendants may not receive citations until several days, sometimes weeks, after the alleged violation. This makes it extremely difficult to reconstruct the circumstances involved in the supposed violation. There may be circumstances that justified exceeding the speed limit or being in a controlled intersection under a red light. There may have been confounding factors that led to a photo being taken in error. Having traversed a given intersection or roadway dozens of times over a short time frame makes it almost impossible to recall the specific events of a two-week-old trip.
No certifiable witness to the violation
A picture may be worth a thousand words, but it may take a thousand words to explain what the picture really means. Even in those instances where a photo enforcement operation is being overseen by a law enforcement officer, it is highly unlikely the officer would have any personal recollection of the supposed violation. For all practical purposes, there is no "accuser" for the defendant to confront, a Constitutional Right. Additionally, if asked, "Is that you in the Photo", you can object on the ground it is against your Constitutional Right against Self-Incrimination (5th Amendment).
There is no one that can personally testify to the circumstances of the alleged violation.
Because a camera unit was operating properly when it was set up does not mean it was operating properly when the picture was taken of any given vehicle.
System designed to inconvenience motorist
Under the guise of protecting motorist privacy, the court or private contractor handling defendant notification will not send a copy of the photo of the alleged violation to the vehicle owner. (Many of the photos do not clearly depict the driver, or the driver is not the vehicle owner.) The Vehicle owner is forced to travel to the courthouse to see the photograph, an obvious and deliberate inconvenience to discourage ticket challenges.
Simply put, justice delayed is justice denied . . .
Good luck to you, and please let us know how this matter turns out at each step of your quest for justice.
IAAL
------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."
