Red Light Camera Ticket in Van Nuys, CA: - I WON MY CASE!

[keechee1]

Follow-up to my other post: Red Light Camera Ticket in Van Nuys, CA.

I won my case and was found not guilty! Trial held August 25th in Van Nuys.

No more theorizing, no more what ifs, no more guessing.

I beat the red light camera ticket by being prepared, logical, and presenting evidence which caused reasonable doubt.

The point I want to make since I went through this ordeal and won is this:

1. Never use a Pro Tem judge. They are useless. Get a real judge to try your case, which is what I did. I declined the Pro Tem judge for my trial and while waiting to get reassigned to another court, I watched this one in action. Utterly useless (disinterested) - could not care less to the testimony being presented. Found everyone guilty. The judge I was assigned to was fair and just, and helpful as he saw me struggle presenting my case without the aid of a lawyer, although he came pretty close to throwing my father out, who sat in the spectator section providing moral support, and who would grunt or groan or shake his head yes or no when he heard the officer say something I should challenge or focus on.

2. If you get a red light camera ticket, fight it, fight it, fight it! Disregard all the negative advice you read about on these posts. If you have the time and determination, fight the ticket. While waiting to be reassigned, and just before trial was to start, about 8 red light camera tickets were dismissed by the officer who represented the city/camera company. I ran out and asked a few of the accused why their ticket was dismissed and they said their face was blocked by the mirror - he showed me. The point I want to make here is these weasel sheriff department officers who speak on behalf of the ACS vendor and city (it was a Metro ticket from a busway camera), will do everything in their powers to get you to pay, until the absolute last second before the trial is to start. I found it disgusting they would wait knowing they did not have enough evidence to stand up during a trial hoping the accused would cave in and pay up. Never give in - always fight the ticket as you have nothing to lose! These people will try to grind you down and make you give in. If your face is blocked or you have reasonable evidence to present, fight the ticket. Do not be a sucker!

3. Take photo's, cite examples, and prepare a written script to keep your thoughts focused and on track. Do not be afraid to speak up or challenge what the officer is saying. Get educated on what you can and cannot do. My dad spent a lot of his time doing the background work on all of this for me. Collectively, if he were to charge for his time, he spent about $2,000 [for his time] doing all the research and preparation, and helping me learn and prepare. To him and I, it was well worth it for this $480 ticket and to deal with a system [red light camera program] designed to fleece the public. Again, it was well worth it!

4. Have multiple avenues to quote and use in your defense. Do not just have one line of defense. I cited Khaled - denied; California Vs. Bohl - denied [unpublished], etc. In other words, I kept presenting items until something would stick.

I beat my ticket because the busway intersection on White Oak @ Busway in Van Nuys is right next to another intersection. This is a poorly designed intersection in that the first signal (monitored by the camera) is about 2 to 3 car lengths in front of another signal. The photos I took showed the first signals yellow light, with the signal for the 2nd intersection green (directly in back of this one). The judge felt this was confusing, and based on my testimony that the light was yellow when the camera went off, since I was there and the officer was not, I was found NOT GUILTY!

Again, no theory but reality here. I beat a system which is designed to wear you down,stacked against you, where you are guilty until proven innocent - don't kid yourself!

 

[I_Got_Banned]

Follow-up to my other post: Red Light Camera Ticket in Van Nuys, CA.

I won my case and was found not guilty! Trial held August 25th in Van Nuys.

No more theorizing, no more what ifs, no more guessing.

I beat the red light camera ticket by being prepared, logical, and presenting evidence which caused reasonable doubt.

The point I want to make since I went through this ordeal and won is this:

1. Never use a Pro Tem judge. They are useless. Get a real judge to try your case, which is what I did. I declined the Pro Tem judge for my trial and while waiting to get reassigned to another court, I watched this one in action. Utterly useless (disinterested) - could not care less to the testimony being presented. Found everyone guilty. The judge I was assigned to was fair and just, and helpful as he saw me struggle presenting my case without the aid of a lawyer, although he came pretty close to throwing my father out, who sat in the spectator section providing moral support, and who would grunt or groan or shake his head yes or no when he heard the officer say something I should challenge or focus on.

2. If you get a red light camera ticket, fight it, fight it, fight it! Disregard all the negative advice you read about on these posts. If you have the time and determination, fight the ticket. While waiting to be reassigned, and just before trial was to start, about 8 red light camera tickets were dismissed by the officer who represented the city/camera company. I ran out and asked a few of the accused why their ticket was dismissed and they said their face was blocked by the mirror - he showed me. The point I want to make here is these weasel sheriff department officers who speak on behalf of the ACS vendor and city (it was a Metro ticket from a busway camera), will do everything in their powers to get you to pay, until the absolute last second before the trial is to start. I found it disgusting they would wait knowing they did not have enough evidence to stand up during a trial hoping the accused would cave in and pay up. Never give in - always fight the ticket as you have nothing to lose! These people will try to grind you down and make you give in. If your face is blocked or you have reasonable evidence to present, fight the ticket. Do not be a sucker!

3. Take photo's, cite examples, and prepare a written script to keep your thoughts focused and on track. Do not be afraid to speak up or challenge what the officer is saying. Get educated on what you can and cannot do. My dad spent a lot of his time doing the background work on all of this for me. Collectively, if he were to charge for his time, he spent about $2,000 [for his time] doing all the research and preparation, and helping me learn and prepare. To him and I, it was well worth it for this $480 ticket and to deal with a system [red light camera program] designed to fleece the public. Again, it was well worth it!

4. Have multiple avenues to quote and use in your defense. Do not just have one line of defense. I cited Khaled - denied; California Vs. Bohl - denied [unpublished], etc. In other words, I kept presenting items until something would stick.

I beat my ticket because the busway intersection on White Oak @ Busway in Van Nuys is right next to another intersection. This is a poorly designed intersection in that the first signal (monitored by the camera) is about 2 to 3 car lengths in front of another signal. The photos I took showed the first signals yellow light, with the signal for the 2nd intersection green (directly in back of this one). The judge felt this was confusing, and based on my testimony that the light was yellow when the camera went off, since I was there and the officer was not, I was found NOT GUILTY!

Again, no theory but reality here. I beat a system which is designed to wear you down,stacked against you, where you are guilty until proven innocent - don't kid yourself!

Simmer down for a minute here... The system is not "stacked against you"; for one the rights that the system offers you in this country fills it past the rim with loopholes, and compared to a legal justice system anywhere else in the world, you have no idea what "stacked against you" means. If it were stacked against you, it would be devoid of the sympathy that you received and instead, you would have been running home along with Daddy, to cry over Mommy's shoulder about how "its not fair, its not, its not..."!

Lets put things in proper perspective... For starters "poor intersection design" is not, by any means, a result, or an element of the legal justice system. Yes both worlds are related and do co-mingle when it comes to traffic design and traffic violations, but neither the court, nor law enforcement had anything to do with how that intersection was laid out. The fact that the Metro's Orange Line was added as an after thought, would suggest that the engineers had a number of huge obstacle to overcome to bring that project to reality, with a few "design issues" being a close second to "construction costs"! As a result, a combination of those factors contributed to an intersection where two traffic lights were installed as you describe.

You should also understand that just because you were found "not guilty" does not mean you are "innocent". Fact of the matter is, and by your own statement and admission, you did run the red light which means you did commit the infraction you were cited for, and not one single defense that you presented worked to prove your innocence or refute the state's version of the story, that being that "you ran the red light". You didn't prove that the charge was unwarranted, you didn't win the case based on insufficient evidence, and the multiple avenues which you utilized ALL failed to prove your "innocence".

Knowing how likely you knew that you'll be back here bragging, you should have utilized the one defense that you had... That being that the yellow phase was set up based on a different speed limit, therefore it does not meet the requirements that would make for a valid citation, and at that point, the judge would have had to dismissed "on merit" and not out of the goodness of his heart! So you didn't earn your "not guilty" verdict and you didn't really "win your case". You simply took the more than generous, sympathy filled "not guilty" - a gimmee - and ran with it, only to end up here to bitch complain and brag all at the same time!

The standard of proof here is "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" and in the grand scheme of how these things run, if you were to take the "sympathy" factor out of the equation, you'd still be here complaining about a system that is "stacked against you" -and you'd be wrong about it then too-. In this case, you were found "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt"; and from a legal stand point, the case could have ended there. However, the judge decided to take that "sympathy" component usually present in cases like this one, and increased its share to a level where your "guilty finding" was set aside only to give rise to a "not guilty" verdict.

Should it matter or make a difference if the end result is the same? Not by any stretch... But to go from "I am too freaked out to talk to a judge"... to being as coc.ky as you have shown, to stand on your soap box and only to chastise and persecute the same system that afforded you the break you received; that's a slap in the face of the same judge that you thought was "fair and just"!!! You oughta be ashamed of yourself!!!

Oh, and gt over yourself... You're not the only person who's won a case in traffic court... Plenty have achieved that long before you came along!

 

[CourtClerk]

Not to mention... they aren't even enforcing red light cameras in the City of Los Angeles anymore (this includes Van Nuys) - for all kinds of reasons which include why you could have won your case.

But congratulations. You're happier than my child was when he won his first t-ball trophy.

 

[demurringdude]

. I beat a system which is designed to wear you down,stacked against you, where you are guilty until proven innocent

Well done Keechee1. You did your research, you threw it all out there, and one piece of it got the judges attention. You saved yourself $550, and I congratulate you. Not quite sure how you pulled it off, but nice work.

Your comment about the 8 cases being dismissed at the last minute is interesting. They are supposed to review all these tickets before they are issued, but clearly they don't. What a racket.

 

[keechee1]

Red Light Camera Ticket in Van Nuys, CA: I WON MY CASE!

My lengthy response is to "I Got Banned Comments" on my win. I could not use all his quotes with my replies because the response was too long - refer to his original comments.

I_Got_Banned - Dealing with this ticket was a miserable, time consuming ordeal and not a stroll in the park. Of course our legal system is the greatest in the world - I am not making comparisons with other countries so let's stay focused on the good ole USA. Stacked against me as used here, was the constant focus on pay the ticket by the courts or designated agencies, take traffic school, multiple long drives to the courthouse to be able to talk to someone, etc. You should know the pursuit of fighting a ticket is a laborious, time consuming process to deal with and overcome, as opposed to a simple phone call or snap of the fingers, hence the usage of the phrase Stacked Against You.

Regarding the presumed sympathy I received. The judge, actually Commissioner [Division 115 - Van Nuys Courthouse], observed me squirming and struggling to read my "script", notes and 7 handout exhibits, so he most likely did give me a break - so what! Why can't the system allow me to have someone sitting next to me, as my advocate, keeping silent and not saying a word, yet able to slip me a note to help me maintain my focus or catch something I may have missed because I am nervous as hell. Stacked Against me used in this example prevents me from having help, short of paying a lawyer to assist me. Pity the individual who stutters, gets lost in thought, or is unable to be a good public speaker.

What you seem to forget or keep overlooking or mocking me on is that I am not a Harvard Law School graduate or retired Supreme Court Judge. I'm just a regular 22 year old who never was in a court room before this. The extent of my knowledge and development started with my first post on this website in June, several months ago. From that first post to now much has happened to make me a better informed individual. Truth be told, your comments were very thought provoking and put me to work so I thank you for that - very constructive feedback, insights, arguments, etc. - thank you.

However, I am not perfect or all knowing or a seasoned professional. I will admit I had a very hard time defending myself and speaking up for these very reasons. Should I be mocked or looked down upon for trying? I don't think so. So again back to my point, not being able to have silent or some assistance, in my opinion, stacks the process against me not for me.

Okay, so your point is what that I should suffer because of someone else’s design issues or construction cost concerns? The fact of the matter is, because this was one of my defense items, it was successful in being cited as a confusing intersection, impacting my response time or knowing where exactly to stop - absolutely contributing factors no matter what you think.

Faded lettering saying Wait Here, along with faded Keep Clear lettering in the busway intersection, coupled with 2 signal lights for each of these separate intersections almost directly behind the other, with a Stop Here sign blocked by trees. These are contributing elements which can not be ignored or overlooked. I'll say it again, these are contributing elements which can not be ignored or overlooked. If my red or late time was 0.14 hundreds of a second, not the 0.2 tenths the prosecution claims [which they rounded up to by the way instead of down - they call it 'truncated' - another rotten issue I noticed- erroneous rounding up], then its because of my reaction time being impaired by where do I stop. Of course, this does not take into account the other defense points - accuracy of the equipment, no forward facing photos showing an actual red light, no video, etc.

I always thought not guilty meant innocent of the charges presented against me, regardless of the defense route taken or evidence used. I never admitted my guilt to running the red light so not sure exactly where you are getting this from, and find it surprising that you are leaping to saying I did run the light and did commit the infraction - please, you are jumping to erroneous comments. I have repeatedly questioned/disputed the timing, accuracy, methodology, etc. During trial I indicated no forward facing photo, showing an actual red light - one was never shown or provided.

What this all boiled down to was technology saying I did something wrong, when I have repeatedly said otherwise. So, being found not guilty is validation to me as an individual, that I was correct in maintaining my innocence of this charge. You can put whatever spin you want on this, but at the end of the day, I left that courtroom with no weight on my shoulders. Of course, I would have preferred to win by proving the technology was flawed, or the evidence being hearsay, or being unable to confront my accusers, or no actual front facing photo showing a red light or a video. But I didn't. So, one of my other truthful strategies was used and worked.

I tried multiple approaches, and this approach was one of them [35 MPH sign on ticket should have been 40 MPH due to signage change, and related yellow time 3.9 versus 3.6 seconds]. For whatever reason - poor presentation, not convincing enough, etc., etc., did not get cited/used by the judge. In thinking about this further, He decided to use the intersection design reason to resolve my case, possibly because there would be numerous appeals by others who were cited for this because of the wrong sign speed limit posted on the ticket. The sign was changed years ago - in 2009, yet the information flaw showed up on my March 2011 ticket. [NOTE TO READERS - IF YOU GOT A RED LIGHT CAMERA TICKET AT WHITE OAK @ BUSWAY IN VAN NUYS - USE THIS WRONG 35/40 MPH SIGN DEFENSE].

On your other point on not earning my verdict or winning my case. I would have to disagree with you - I did win my case and did earn my not guilty verdict by going through about 30 minutes of something I have never done before - alone. Try as hard as you like to diminish and minimize my victory, which, based on your tone and response you appear to be trying to do, one of my multiple defense points was accepted and cited. Whether it was based on the judge’s sympathy or sadness for me, my bad breath, his running late for dinner - who knows, the fact remains - one of my reasons presented was used. To me this is an earned victory and not a welfare handout gimmee.

You and I will never know for sure what went through the judge’s mind, based on his collective assessment of the 5 reasons or so I presented, except for what he said on record, and that's good enough for me.

Regarding red light camera tickets. How many people who go to trial and fight these tickets [either with and without using a lawyer] win? 50%? 25%? 10%? 1%? I think it’s the lower percentage. Is it because they are all liars and are all guilty? Maybe yes, maybe no. Is the low win percentage due to a system that is stacked against you, presenting all kinds of ways to grind you down and wear you out? I think so. Again - not comparing to other 3rd world countries - just here. I think the general population would agree, and have no answers as this is not the forum on a solution.

Yes, the end result is that I won fair and square using truth coupled with a reasonable judge. As mentioned previously, I have learned mucho from my first post to right now. I do not mean to be swaggering and if I came across that way, I can be humble and will apologize.

The judge who tried my case (Dennis E. Mulcahy - Division 115, Van Nuys Courthouse) was fair and just, and not because I received a favorable outcome. He listened, paid attention, asked questions and appeared interested in what I had to say. As I mentioned previously, I elected to not have a Pro Tem judge try my case [something else I learned on these posts]. So, while waiting to get reassigned, I sat and observed the Pro Tem in action. He found everyone guilty and couldn't care less about the reasons given - a true hanging judge if ever there was one. My other point is before the trial started, 8 cases were dismissed since the whole session was red light camera ticket day at the Division 109 courtroom in Van Nuys. When I asked the actual persons and found out why their cases were dismissed (faces were blocked/obscured by mirror), I thought what creeps these cops were to wait until the absolute last second to dismiss these cases in the hopes these people would get cold feet, pay up, and not continue with their cases because the judge would most likely dismiss them.

This is what I thought really sucked. But then, these very same cops are involved with the red light camera program because when I went to review the evidence against me at the sheriff’s office, the same ones were present in the courtroom. So I have to wonder, is their employment tied in to supporting the red light camera program by testifying? And if so, why not let every ticket (including blocked and obscured tickets) be sent out for payment. If the recipient does not challenge and just pays up like a good little sheep, good for the system. That's what sucks. Again, this is real not theory, I saw this occur and asked the people accused about it.

Try as hard as you like to diminish and minimize my victory, I know I'm not the only one to win in traffic court. But I won my case, my way, using my evidence and examples. For someone who knew nothing, with the help of his dad, to now knowing quite a bit, that says something. Thank you for all your hard edged examples, feedback, etc. You were very instrumental in making me work harder to overcome those items which were obstacles.

For the other folks who expressed their positive comments on my win - thank you very much for recognizing my achievement.

 

[dubiousraves]

You won!

Congratulations on your win. It's an inspiration to me because I'm in almost the exact same situation. I was caught by a red light camera at the intersection of Woodman and the Busway -- a VERY confusion intersection because of two traffic lights in close proximity. I plan to fight the ticket on these grounds, just as you did.

One question: When you passed on the pro tem judge, did you get assigned to another judge for a trial the same day? Or did you get put on a different trial some time after that? This is an important question for me because I am currently living out of the country and will have to time my trial in a specific week.

Thanks, and congrats again! You did a good thing.

-- Dave

 

[TheGeekess]

Congratulations on your win. It's an inspiration to me because I'm in almost the exact same situation. I was caught by a red light camera at the intersection of Woodman and the Busway -- a VERY confusion intersection because of two traffic lights in close proximity. I plan to fight the ticket on these grounds, just as you did.

One question: When you passed on the pro tem judge, did you get assigned to another judge for a trial the same day? Or did you get put on a different trial some time after that? This is an important question for me because I am currently living out of the country and will have to time my trial in a specific week.

Thanks, and congrats again! You did a good thing.

-- Dave

OP has not been back in OVER a YEAR. Please don't necropost. If you have a question, start your own thread.