Red Light camera question

[sanguinis]

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

I received a notice of infraction in the mail from a photo enforcement program in my City. It was a right turn only lane and my vehicle took a free right. The vehicle slowed down but did not come to a complete stop so I guess that's why I received this. There is a pending class action law suit in my county against these light cameras and a lot of what I read seems to indicate these may not be completely legal.
One of the options on the ticket indicates I can state I was not the one driving the vehicle at the time and to give the name of the driver.
They cannot prove I was driving the vehicle; am I legally obligated to disclose the name of the person that was and if so will they be fined in my state? Thank you.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[The Occultist]

My advice: if there is a class-action suit regarding an incident you are now apart of, contact the people pursuing said class-action suit.

 

[JETX]

One of the options on the ticket indicates I can state I was not the one driving the vehicle at the time and to give the name of the driver.
They cannot prove I was driving the vehicle; am I legally obligated to disclose the name of the person

If you plan to offer this as your defense, then YES, you have to provide the full details necessary to support your defense.
It would kind of defeat the purpose of this offer if they allowed you to simply claim "I wasn't the driver and I'm not going to tell you who was driving... nah, nah!!!".

 

[AgentSmithers]

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

I received a notice of infraction in the mail from a photo enforcement program in my City. It was a right turn only lane and my vehicle took a free right. The vehicle slowed down but did not come to a complete stop so I guess that's why I received this. There is a pending class action law suit in my county against these light cameras and a lot of what I read seems to indicate these may not be completely legal.
One of the options on the ticket indicates I can state I was not the one driving the vehicle at the time and to give the name of the driver.
They cannot prove I was driving the vehicle; am I legally obligated to disclose the name of the person that was and if so will they be fined in my state? Thank you.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

In California there is no law forcing you to submit who is driving the car, Ive used that It was not me as a defense and it worked and got the ticket dismissed, If I were you get a credit card pay the bail (required when submitting a TBWD) and submit a Trial By Written Deceleration(TBWD) and submit a picture of your Photo ID and the Tickets Bogus Picture and they will refund your money when they see the two do not match, they wont even bother sending a response letter asking who it is, its a waste of time and energy for them. You'll get the money refunded in about a month to two months.

And to support this more why would a judge slam someone who has done nothing wrong for nothing disclosing who it is, What if the person simply doesn't know who the person is, Would it be right for a judge to fine someone for something like that?! NO! and they wont.

 

[Zigner]

In California there is no law forcing you to submit who is driving the car, Ive used that It was not me as a defense and it worked and got the ticket dismissed, If I were you get a credit card pay the bail (required when submitting a TBWD) and submit a Trial By Written Deceleration(TBWD) and submit a picture of your Photo ID and the Tickets Bogus Picture and they will refund your money when they see the two do not match, they wont even bother sending a response letter asking who it is, its a waste of time and energy for them. You'll get the money refunded in about a month to two months.

And to support this more why would a judge slam someone who has done nothing wrong for nothing disclosing who it is, What if the person simply doesn't know who the person is, Would it be right for a judge to fine someone for something like that?! NO! and they wont.

Of course, our OP should totally disregard this, as (s)he is in Washington!

 

[JETX]

In California there is no law forcing you to submit who is driving the car

Great post... except you failed to notice that the OP is NOT in California, making your entire post a waste of bandwidth.
Say goodbye!!

 

[demurringdude]

My advice: if there is a class-action suit regarding an incident you are now apart of, contact the people pursuing said class-action suit.

The law firm handling that class action says on it's web page for people to not contact them, they will automatically be a member of the class.

 

[demurringdude]

According to this statute...

RCW 46.63.075: Toll evasion ? Presumption.

there is a presumption that the registered owner was driving, and you can only overcome that presumption if you testify that that the vehicle was being driven by "some person other than the registered owner".

Note that you are not required by the statute to identify that other person, only to testify (or state under written oath) that it was someone other than you. Whether you can do that convincingly enough to a judge without naming the other person is another matter.

 

[demurringdude]

It would kind of defeat the purpose of this offer if they allowed you to simply claim "I wasn't the driver and I'm not going to tell you who was driving... nah, nah!!!".

The statutes don't require you to name the other driver.

 

[JETX]

The vehicle slowed down but did not come to a complete stop so I guess that's why I received this.

Hmmm... how would YOU know this... if you weren't the driver as you claim below??

One of the options on the ticket indicates I can state I was not the one driving the vehicle at the time and to give the name of the driver.

They cannot prove I was driving the vehicle

They don't have to. Read below.

RCW 46.63.170 - Automated traffic safety cameras — Definition.
(1) The use of automated traffic safety cameras for issuance of notices of infraction is subject to the following requirements:

(d) Automated traffic safety cameras may only take pictures of the vehicle and vehicle license plate and only while an infraction is occurring. The picture must not reveal the face of the driver or of passengers in the vehicle.

(e) A notice of infraction must be mailed to the registered owner of the vehicle within fourteen days of the violation, or to the renter of a vehicle within fourteen days of establishing the renter's name and address under subsection (3)(a) of this section. The law enforcement officer issuing the notice of infraction shall include with it a certificate or facsimile thereof, based upon inspection of photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images produced by an automated traffic safety camera, stating the facts supporting the notice of infraction. This certificate or facsimile is prima facie evidence of the facts contained in it and is admissible in a proceeding charging a violation under this chapter. The photographs, microphotographs, or electronic images evidencing the violation must be available for inspection and admission into evidence in a proceeding to adjudicate the liability for the infraction. A person receiving a notice of infraction based on evidence detected by an automated traffic safety camera may respond to the notice by mail.

(f) The registered owner of a vehicle is responsible for an infraction under RCW 46.63.030(1)(e) unless the registered owner overcomes the presumption in RCW 46.63.075, or, in the case of a rental car business, satisfies the conditions under subsection (3) of this section. If appropriate under the circumstances, a renter identified under subsection (3)(a) of this section is responsible for an infraction.

RCW 46.63.075 - Toll evasion — Presumption.
(1) In a traffic infraction case involving an infraction detected through the use of a photo enforcement system under RCW 46.63.160, or detected through the use of an automated traffic safety camera under RCW 46.63.170, proof that the particular vehicle described in the notice of traffic infraction was in violation of any such provision of RCW 46.63.160 or 46.63.170, together with proof that the person named in the notice of traffic infraction was at the time of the violation the registered owner of the vehicle, constitutes in evidence a prima facie presumption that the registered owner of the vehicle was the person in control of the vehicle at the point where, and for the time during which, the violation occurred.

(2) This presumption may be overcome only if the registered owner states, under oath, in a written statement to the court or in testimony before the court that the vehicle involved was, at the time, stolen or in the care, custody, or control of some person other than the registered owner.

am I legally obligated to disclose the name of the person that was

If you want to avoid liability for the ticket, yes. See above.