Affadavit of Nonliability -traffic Cameras

[frijoles99]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

I have a question regarding the nonlibaility affadavit given with the tickets issued by Redflex cameras. These cameras video tape footage of one allegedly breaking the law, then send the ticket to the owner of the vehicle based on dmv records. However, if the owner is not the one driving, they provide an option A- Affadavit of Non-Liability, stating the owner was not the one driving, then forcing the owner to divulge who was driving. I noticed that this specific affadavit is sent to a private company, while the other two saying guilty and not guilty are sent directly to the court. Can't you just sign an Affadavit of nonliability saying you were in another city at the time and couldn't have been the driver and send it directly to the court? Can the owner be forced to divulge the driver by the company issueing the ticket?

Thank you so much

[The Occultist]

You cannot actually be forced to provide the name of the actual driver. All you need to do is prove that it wasn't you (usually a copy of your license in comparison to the picture provided by the camera is enough).

[Zigner]

Furthermore, if the paper you received states something to the effect of Do not contact the court about this notice, then it isn't even a "real" citation. Do a Google search for red light camera defense.

[JIMinCA]

Occultist and Zigner are correct. You are the victim of California's blatat abuse of of its powers. The "snitch ticket" you recieved is merely a form of intimidation intended to get you to unknowingly waive your rights and accept the burden of prosecution which truthfully lies solely on the prosecution. Simply ignore it and wait to see if a real ticket shows up.

[frijoles99]

it's not a snitch ticket

[Zigner]

Then see the reply from The Occultist

[frijoles99]

Thanks a lot for the help, now i'm having trouble whether or not to write a demurer, an affadavit stating he's innocent, or dueing a full not guilty plea with evidence indicating he was in los angeles.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by frijoles99

Thanks a lot for the help, now i'm having trouble whether or not to write a demurer, an affadavit stating he's innocent, or dueing a full not guilty plea with evidence indicating he was in los angeles.

You are not allowed to practice law, unless you happen to be an attorney...

[frijoles99]

I'm not, i'm just trying to help him figure out how to best say, I didn't do it without pointing fingers.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by frijoles99

I'm not, i'm just trying to help him figure out how to best say, I didn't do it without pointing fingers.

Please see the enclosed copy of my driver's license. It is clear from the photo you presented that I am not the driver pictured. As such, this ticket is not valid and should be dismissed.

[JIMinCA]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Please see the enclosed copy of my driver's license. It is clear from the photo you presented that I am not the driver pictured. As such, this ticket is not valid and should be dismissed.

For the first time in history, I agree with Zigner. He is absolutely right. Do NOT make any statements beyond what you need to.

[The Occultist]

OP, you've been given the advice you need. No information needs to be shared beyond "this isn't me, here is my proof". That is the law as far as anybody is concerned. You cannot be legally compelled to share any information beyond except by your own volition. To reiterate: one cannot be held accountable for not snitching on the person who actually [allegedly] committed the violation. I am not sure why you are having any sort of confusion on this issue.