[/B]What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
California
I've two red-light camera tickets from Long Beach Traffic Court, CA (left turn at tail-end of the yellow) I felt that was totally unfair for the assessed penalties (over $500 with court fee) and due to that fact I’m unemployed, I have to fight it in court. The 2 tickets are about 8 days apart and I only got one notice informing me of the second violation. I pleaded "not guilty" and the trial date is set for 11/01/11.
I found this website below rather useful and was going to use "Defect #10" as my defense (scroll all the way down on Home page to see Defect #10):
Home - Fighting Red Light Camera Tickets
It said:
At a trial, Foundation is the introductory evidence necessary to establish the admissibility of other evidence.
There was no witness to the crime. The case is based solely upon physical evidence - the photos and the data the computer recorded. But the police can't use evidence if it was gathered illegally. Vehicle Code 21455.5 (in box, below) specifies things the City must do and must not do in order to legally gather red light camera evidence.
At your red light camera ticket trial, the officer will testify first, and he is supposed to begin his testimony by "laying the foundation."[5] Without having to be reminded to do it, most officers will give a brief foundational speech (sometimes very brief) saying that they posted warning signs (Defect # 4), made announcements 30 days before starting up the system, gave warning tickets for 30 days (Defect # 6), have long enough yellows (Defects # 2 and # 3), etc.
"When it's your chance to cross-examine him, you could ask the officer if he provided public notice 30 days before firing up your camera,
issued warning tickets for the first 30 days of operation (of your camera - see Defect # 6),
had four signs (full 30" x 42") posted at your intersection at the time you were ticketed,
and has written guidelines."
... And so on and so forth - as the site presents numerous defense to these cases... ultimately to get the tickets dismissed as the evidence is in-admissible in court.
I also found more powerful arguments on other sites but...
However, when I went to traffic court yesterday to post my bail (to go to trial), the clerk said 99.9% of the defendants trying to fight these tickets loose because:
At the trial they will have the prosecutor/officer showing all the videos/pictures captured on that cameras and then the judge would ask the defendant: "Was that you in the videos/pictures?" I said: "But don't I get to cross-examine the prosecutor first?" He said: "No, they're not gonna waste time on that! You have to answer the question first. So either it's you or NOT you. If it's not you, you're gonna have to prove that it's NOT you. IF it's you, the video already captured the whole scene that you violated the law. It's that simple!"
My question is: Is that really true that I don't even have a chance to cross-examine the officer? That I have to answer that question first? What happened to the "Fair Trial” as guaranteed in our Constitution?
Thank you so much for your time.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
California
I've two red-light camera tickets from Long Beach Traffic Court, CA (left turn at tail-end of the yellow) I felt that was totally unfair for the assessed penalties (over $500 with court fee) and due to that fact I’m unemployed, I have to fight it in court. The 2 tickets are about 8 days apart and I only got one notice informing me of the second violation. I pleaded "not guilty" and the trial date is set for 11/01/11.
I found this website below rather useful and was going to use "Defect #10" as my defense (scroll all the way down on Home page to see Defect #10):
Home - Fighting Red Light Camera Tickets
It said:
At a trial, Foundation is the introductory evidence necessary to establish the admissibility of other evidence.
There was no witness to the crime. The case is based solely upon physical evidence - the photos and the data the computer recorded. But the police can't use evidence if it was gathered illegally. Vehicle Code 21455.5 (in box, below) specifies things the City must do and must not do in order to legally gather red light camera evidence.
At your red light camera ticket trial, the officer will testify first, and he is supposed to begin his testimony by "laying the foundation."[5] Without having to be reminded to do it, most officers will give a brief foundational speech (sometimes very brief) saying that they posted warning signs (Defect # 4), made announcements 30 days before starting up the system, gave warning tickets for 30 days (Defect # 6), have long enough yellows (Defects # 2 and # 3), etc.
"When it's your chance to cross-examine him, you could ask the officer if he provided public notice 30 days before firing up your camera,
issued warning tickets for the first 30 days of operation (of your camera - see Defect # 6),
had four signs (full 30" x 42") posted at your intersection at the time you were ticketed,
and has written guidelines."
... And so on and so forth - as the site presents numerous defense to these cases... ultimately to get the tickets dismissed as the evidence is in-admissible in court.
I also found more powerful arguments on other sites but...
However, when I went to traffic court yesterday to post my bail (to go to trial), the clerk said 99.9% of the defendants trying to fight these tickets loose because:
At the trial they will have the prosecutor/officer showing all the videos/pictures captured on that cameras and then the judge would ask the defendant: "Was that you in the videos/pictures?" I said: "But don't I get to cross-examine the prosecutor first?" He said: "No, they're not gonna waste time on that! You have to answer the question first. So either it's you or NOT you. If it's not you, you're gonna have to prove that it's NOT you. IF it's you, the video already captured the whole scene that you violated the law. It's that simple!"
My question is: Is that really true that I don't even have a chance to cross-examine the officer? That I have to answer that question first? What happened to the "Fair Trial” as guaranteed in our Constitution?
Thank you so much for your time.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
Last edited: