UPDATE 10/19/2005: 9 months after the ticket, I got the appeal decision in the mail. I won!
Like many cities in California, San Francisco has been using Automated Enforcement Systems (a.k.a. “Red Light Cameras”) at many of its intersections for several years now. Although the stated purpose is (of course) for safety, the real reason is revenue. If you are the unlucky recipient of one of the citations in the mail (as yours truly recently was) then this website is for you. It explains your options and relates my experience with the San Francisco court system.
Your choices:
- The picture isn’t of you. The registered owner is who gets sent the ticket. If the picture is not of you, sign the attached affidavit saying that the picture isn’t of you. Don’t lie — you’re saying under the penalty of purjury that it’s not you in the ticket. DO NOT, however, TELL THEM WHO IS IN THE PICTURE. It’s their job to figure that out, not yours. Don’t rat out your friends and family.
- Pay it. If $371 is worth less to you than a lost morning in court, then just pay the ticket and move on. You may or may not want to do traffic school to keep the points from appearing on your license. While I’ve never done it myself, I hear the on-line version of traffic school is fairly painless.
- Trial + Traffic school. This is probably the best option for most people. Go to the clerk. Post bail (the amount of your ticket) and plead not-guilty.  Get a time for trial. SHOW UP ON TIME. When the court session starts, the clerk will allow you to have your fine reduced to only $50 if you take traffic school (with a $30 fee). For a total of $80, you’re done and the points are not added to your license. NOTE: If you’ve already done traffic school in the past 18 months, you’re not eligible to do it again. Sorry.
- Plead not-guilty. Lots of options here. You can skip the arraignment and demand your right to a speedy trial (within 45 days) by going to the clerk and posting the $371 bond. Sometimes, due to the short notice, the officer isn’t properly subpoenaed and won’t know that he/she needs to testify against you (this happened in my case). If the officer doesn’t appear to testify, your case is dismissed. Or, the officer could already be in court to testify against other people and will realize that she needs to testify against you too, and will testify anyway (yep, this happened to me).Or, you can go to your arraignment and plead not-guilty there. This gives you the chance to make pre-trial motions. This makes the process very drawn-out — expect your trial date to be many months in the future.
Pleading not-guilty
NOTE WELL: This takes a lot of time and will really try your patience. DO NOT EXPECT TO WIN. In fact, you should expect to lose. Sorry, but the trial court for traffic and other infractions in San Francisco assumes GUILT. Moreover, the red light camera systems are considered infallible and therefore beyond reproach. AGAIN, YOU WILL LOSE.
Don’t waste your time
- People often say that with traffic cases you should plead not-guilty and take your chances that the officer won’t show up. (If the officer doesn’t show up, your case is immediately dismissed.) I would agree with this strategy for all non-red light camera tickets. However, from what I can tell, the officers assisting with the red light camera prosecutions do not have normal police “beats”, and instead have a desk job, probably in the same building. This means they have a high liklihood of showing up.
- If you are planning to contend that you don’t run red lights, you are a safe driver, and you’ve never done it before, do not waste your time. (Most murderers haven’t murdered anyone before, either.) You will be found GUILTY. Your fine will be lowered to $300, but they won’t grant you traffic school. You are better off taking the $80 buy-off deal mentioned above.
- If you are planning to contend that the light was really yellow and the camera was wrong or broken, DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME. You will be found GUILTY. I promise. Don’t forget the the cameras are considered infallible by the trial court judge. Even if it was broken!
Argue the law
While the cameras themselves might be considered infallible, the city has errored in the way they are set up and operated. You should expect to LOSE at trial even if you object to the evidence on these grounds. HOWEVER, these MAY help you get your ticket overturned in appeal. That’s right, if you want any chance of winning, you will have to APPEAL. This takes a lot of time and energy. If you’re fed up and willing to put in the time it takes to appeal, then go ahead and plead not-guilty. Otherwise, don’t waste your time and take the $80 buy-out deal.
What to do:
- Buy the book Fight Your Ticket in California from Nolo Press. Make sure you get thee one specifically for California.
- Go to the Hall of Justice (850 Bryant St.) with a copy of your citation many weeks before your trial. Parking hint: You can park on 6th street after 9am. so show up at 8:59 and you’ll have all the free parking you want. Otherwise you might have to pay the garages that charge $6 for the first 1/2 hour. Go to the 5th floor, turn right at the hallway, and go to the end. This is the Police Legal department. Tell the friendly officers (really, they have always been very friendly in this office) that you want to fill out an “Informal discovery request”. They will give you a short form. Fill it out, and the City’s “Photo prosecution packet” will be sent to you. This is exactly what they will present at trial, which is always a good thing to have beforehand.
Issues:
(For a good overview of many of these issues, read Highwayrobbery.net).
- The city has not property issued warning tickets as required by 21455.5. CVC (California vehicle code) 21455.5 allows cities to put up Automated Enforcement Systems if they follow the guidelines set forth in the statue. One of the statutes is that “Prior to issuing citations under this section, a local jurisdiction utilizing an automated traffic enforcement system shall commence a program to issue only warning notices for 30 days.” While most cities (I believe San Francisco is included) took this to mean warning tickets only needed to be issued 30 days before the first camera in a city, a recent court ruling in Southern California mandated that EACH camera is succeptible to the 30-day rule. At trial, I suggest asking the prosecution’s witness (the officer) if they issued only warning tickets for the first 30 days of YOUR camera’s operation.
- CVC 21455.5 also has very strict requirement with respect to intersection signage. 21455.5(a) basically says the city has to label an AES-enabled intersection from all sides. There is one exception: if they choose not to label the intersection from all sides, then it can “posts signs at all major entrances to the city, including, at a minimum, freeways, bridges, and state highway routes.” Note that San Francisco DOES NOT post the required signs on major city entrances like bridges, freeways, and state highway routes. Instead, they choose to label major freeway exits. This is not compliant with the letter or the spirit of the law. While some AES-enforced intersections ARE labeled with signage in all direction, many are completely un-labeled meaning the city is falling back on the fact that they think they’ve labeled the “freeways, bridges, and state highway routes”. If you bring this up at trial (as I did) expect to LOSE. By bringing it up at trial, though, you can use it in your appeal.
- Interesting pre-trial motions. Present them at your arraignment. They probably won’t work, but might be useful ammunition during your appeal.
- Try to subpoena the camera’s “source code”. The camera is more than a camera. It’s a computer. You have the right to question your accuser in court. Your accuser is this computer. You should have the right to know exactly how it is programmed. If this motion is granted, you will probably never see the “source code” (it’s a trade secret) and therefore I would expect the prosecution to drop the charges. It’s worth a shot. It will probably help your case if you know how (ie have the credentials) to interpet any “source code” that you might receive.
- The camera is disallowed under California’s “Speed trap” laws. This is a very interesting one, and will take further research. CVC 40801 forbids speed traps in California. “What does this have to do with Red Light Cameras?” you might ask. Well, let me tell you. CVC 40801 says “No peace officer or other person shall use a speed trap in arresting, or participating or assisting in the arrest of, any person for any alleged violation of this code nor shall any speed trap be used in securing evidence as to the speed of any vehicle for the purpose of an arrest or prosecution under this code.” CVS 40802 says “A particular section of a highway measured as to distance and with boundaries marked, designated, or otherwise determined in order that the speed of a vehicle may be calculated by securing the time it takes the vehicle to travel the known distance.” What does this mean to you? Well, the Red Light Computer decided to take a picture of you because you were headed for the intersection at a rate of speed high enough to assume that you were going to go past the ‘stop line’. It knew this because there are coils of wire in the pavement in each lane that are a set distance apart. It calculated your speed by securing the time it takes your vehicle to travel the known distance. Sound familiar? CVC 40801 now says they can’t use this evidence to prosecute you. But they did anyway, and now you have grounds to fight it. I didn’t try this angle, but I have a feeling you’ll LOSE if you do. But I want to hear about how it went, so write to me.
I’d love to hear from you. Write to me at aren /at/ thesandersens dotcom with your experiences.
Geoff – – – Michael Beggert Room A (San Francisco – correct?). Standard reduction in exchange for a plea of guilty to $240. Some commissioners offer their rationale what most say is a mandatory minimum fine of $480. Please if anyone has experience with reductions post the information.
Ella – You did not say what city you were in. San Francisco cameras all seem to photograph the front license plate (ATS owned camera). Redflex sysytems photograph the rear plate. I doubt if the photograph could pick up it is possible that U-Haul could ID you. They are under no legal obligation to ID you. I wonder if it might be worth contacting U-Haul and seeing if they know that and what their policy might be.
I am actually in Seattle but thought maybe you could give some insight to a situation. I stopped a little late when a light turned red and crossed a little over the crosswalk. Probably a few inches. A lady took a picture of my license plate and probably the distance my car crossed over the crosswalk. Legally, can she do anything with that picture to get me fined?
Kelly….Hmmmm. Was she a pedestrian who was startled as she was crossing ahead of you? Anyway, my understanding is that an individual can cause a citation to be issued if they witness an infraction and can identify the driver. I guess if she had a photo of your plate, she could ask an officer to go the owner’s house and you could go along to ID someone at the house as the driver. This is a huge stretch. Just calling the police and giving the plate no. without ID’ing the driver is not going to cut it.
Hi,
I received a red light violation about 20 days ago, and didn’t get the letters from my post box until just now. I didn’t see a red left arrow next to a green light until the last second, but i stopped in the crosswalk. I didn’t run the whole intersection, i’m just barely over the line.
Should i contest? I’ve passed the 15 days to write in, so would it be best to just show up for a court date at this point?
Thanks for any advice.
For what its worth, here’s the video of the violation.
https://cite-web.com/citeweb3/PlayFLV.asp?vFile=/ClusterVideoWest/Sanfrancisco/Videos/2012/02/10/20120210_200348_3044_000033.flv
Andrew: I would always contest a camera ticket – even if by Trial by Written Declaration. I have time to go to court. Do you?
I looked at the link of your video and I cannot discern your car or any car “running a red light” Perhaps your citation no. and Pin No. might help view the infraction. It looks like Masonic & Fell, which seems to have a confusing number of signal lights and such.
There are a number of defenses – with no guarantees of success. The citation must be mailed in 11 days and received in 15 days….is this your situation? Have you read the posts from the last 30 days? Is your intersection among those discussed? I don’t know who can help you without more information.
Roger rlouisj@aol.com
Thanks Roger–I’m in the car on the far left in the video. I came to a stop just over the line, in the crosswalk. You are correct, this is Fell and Masonic, which certainly does have a confusing number of green lights when the left turn lane has a red light.
I have read through all the posts here. I received the ticket in the mail more than 15 days ago, about 20 now. I guess my concern is — if its too late to write in, is going to the court house to get a trial date my best bet? only option? Getting away from work mid-day is never ideal.
Andrew: Concerning this Masonic and Fell left turn lane….I think previous posts concerning this left turn violation come from Kris and Erin. I don’t think anyone has yet explored what appears to be confusing signage or light times and such. There seems to be some grounds to contest the citation but who has time for this? Also, very few post actual outcomes. What happens with a Trial by Declaration? Geoff, I believe, has an interesting post concerning one judge in SF who reduces fines to $250. There is also a link posted a week or two ago which has a lot of anecdotal information.
Concerning the 15-day limit: that refers to the time between the date of infraction and the receipt via mail of the citation by the registered owner. There is a deadline date for dealing with your citation. It should be clear on the courtesy notice. a 30-day extension is pretty easy and can be done on the phone or on line, I believe.
Hope this helps.
Hi — Thanks again. I’ve gone and submitted a CVC 40519(b) Written Not Guilty Plea in at the court house. I’ll be contesting by mail.
For anyone interested — you just have to mail in (or go to room 145 at the Sf court house) and pay your bill and submit the plea. Do the writing, not in person court appearance, if you can. I used ticketassassin’s form for this.
We’ll see how this goes.
Andrew – I was unaware that one could get a trial date by mail. Thanks for letting people know about cvc 40519(b)
Hi there,
I received an automated enforcement traffic violation in the mail yesterday for $480 arrggh! It says I failed to stop at red signal. I was coming back from the zoo with my kids driving on 19th Avenue (Park Presidio) and made a right turn onto Lake Street. I swear I remember the light being yellow as I turned into the turn, but it reads that the red was .7 sec. The red light camera data block paper they sent me along with the citation which explain the photos has some info that does not match up to the citation. First of all it has a date of 21-09-95 and has a time of 16:48. The citation has a date of 3/4/12 and a time of 4:29. I went online to view the photos and the info on there has the 3/4/12 date and a time of 4:29.
Is this sufficient info to contest this citation? If not, do you recommend that I go to Bryant Street and contest it in person and request a trial date?
If I do contest it and plead not guilty will I still have the option of attending traffic school and avoiding a point on my dmv record?
Thanks for your help.
Hello Roger,
I was visiting SF and I was driving my father’s car, who lives in SF, when I got a red light camera ticket. I do not live in SF, or have any vehicles registered at the same address as my father. The ticket came in the mail to him, but it was me. I read through several of the blogs about “It was not me driving”, but I don’t know how well it applies specifically to SF camera violations. Looking at the SFPD ticket notification, it looks like it forces you to fill-in the ACTUAL driver in the affidavit. How can my father complete the affidavit and not rat me out at the same time? In the information provided on the form it states, if the actual driver’s information is not accurate, the citation will remain in your name until the court receives the correct information. Is that statement correct, or are they just trying to scare you into giving the actual driver’s information?
Mike: First find out if there is a real citation in your father’s name. Your father may only have a fake ticket: read up on Snitch Tickets on highwayrobbery.net.
If it is a real ticket filed with the court, it is OK to send the ticket back to where it says to send and write “it’s not me” and include a copy of dad’s driver’s license photo. Or your dad can go to court and ask for a dismissal, again saying it is not me. All this can be cumbersome. This can also be done as Trial By Written Declaration. In no way, should your dad cough up your name and information. He is under no legal obligation to do so. The ticket – real or not – will have language which will intimidate your dad.
Build your confidence by reading highwayrobbery.net
CC: I don’t understand what you say about a date 21-09-95.
Have you looked at the video? Does it show you not stopping? A video is needed to convict a right turner.
If you are eligible for traffic school, it is not required to be offered if you enter a plea of Not Guilty. It is up to the judge. I don’t know about SF judges. Most judges I have seen still allow for TS but some don’t.
Good luck.
Hello Roger,
Yes, it is a real ticket with a reply by date to 850 Bryan St (ie, SF courthouse). The language used to get you to complete the affidavit and to essentially rat out the correct person seems difficult to avoid given the way they state you will remain responsible until which time have accurately completed who was the actual person driving at the time. I’m just not sure where, or in which field to write ” It is not me” and fulfill their requirement to have the violation removed from my Father’s name. Any ideas?
Hi Roger,
I’m writing because I received a right turn on red light citation for $490 in San Francisco and just received my ticket and notice of bail. I still have about 2 months until my court date. There was a video showing me turning on the red light, but it does show that I slowed down to 10mph and then turned. This was at 12pm at night on a street where there were no cars. The videos does show that I pushed on my brakes and then yielded before I turned. Also the picture of me was very blurry. I have already gone to traffic school within 18 months, but it was on a Arizona license plate in Arizona. I now have an California license. Would I still be eligible for traffic school and if not what do you think is the best way to reduce the cost of the ticket?
Here is the video:
https://www.violationinfo.com/PlayVideoOnMac.aspx?id=CACHE_KEY_VIDEOicvoy345022545zybi3qnc45
Thanks a lot for the help.
Mike: What I say is predicated on the photo of the driver is CLEARLY not your father. Sometimes the photo is unclear. It could be him or it could be you or it could be your sister. But…if it is CLEARLY not a photo of your father….
a. Call SFPD and arrange for an appt. to meet with the citing officer or someone in their camera ticket dept. Ask that person to dismiss the ticket. There will be some arm twisting for him to name the driver. Dad can ask, “Am I legally obligated to tell you?” (Answer should be no). I know one city cop will dismiss. I don’t know about SFPD. If no luck, dad should say, “I will see you in court” Plead Not Guilty and go to trial. Your father does not have to say a word. Officer will have to testify that he believes the photo on the ticket is of the same person seated at the defendant’s table.
If the photo could be that of your father, go to Plan B. So what is the answer?
-by the way, your father and many other people do not know their rights and will be unwilling to stand up to the police-
Zen….a legal type defense citing the officer’s introduction of photo evidence as hearsay is the only thing that comes to mind.
go to highwayrobbery.net to read up on the subject.
Traffic School will not lower the bail. Ask the traffic court clerk whether you are eligible. Maybe AZ computers have not communicated with Calif. computers. Do not mention recent traffic school. Maybe the courts show you eligible. The circumstance of the infraction. Low speed, late at night, safe turn will not help you as far as I know. Traffic school keeps the point off your insurance record and may mean no increase in premiums.
I haven’t seen anyone post about the red light camera at Lyon and Marina. Last Friday morning it was pouring rain and I went through the parking lot at the Exploratorium without finding parking so I had to loop around to try again. I was on Lyon, stopped at the red light and saw that it was photo enforced. There was not any signage that there is not right turn on red, so I turned right and stopped again a couple of feet later on Marina at the red light – I was sort of still on Lyon, if you can imagine that. Then the light facing Lyon flashed yellow and I was still sort of facing that light so I went ahead.
Of course, I’m terrified that I did this all wrong but I honestly still don’t know what was supposed to be the correct course of action there. When we left the Exploratorium I had to go through that intersection again! I was still unsure of what I was supposed to do there. I know there are a lot of pedestrians there, especially kids, but this is a horribly confusing traffic light situation as it is. To adda red light camera is just cruel!
Any ideas about this intersection?
Also, it seems that there are so many people who get tickets for a right turn on red. If there is no signage prohibiting it then why on earth would you get a ticket for something that is allegedly not illegal?
Monica – Did you get a ticket?
I don’t know yet – this just happened this past Friday morning.
I just called 311 (literally just hung up with them) and the lady tells me the flashing yellow for Lyon only permits you to make that right hand turn onto the itty bitty stretch of Marina. When I did this the light for Marina was still red but I went through (I’m pretty sure) because I thought the flashing yellow still pertained to me. The 311 lady says, no – I was supposed to pull ahead those couple of feet and then stop and wait again. I’m still confused though. Once you pull of Lyon you are already with your front tires into the crosswalk on Marina.
I didn’t see the camera flash but I don’t know if this matters, if the cameras still use flash in the day.
I do believe I would take the time to go to court for this one – it’s just a very confusing intersection. To have a red light camera with such extreme consequences for making a wrong decision at a place where it is so unclear how to proceed just seems unjust. MY daughter loved the Exploratorium but I don’t want to ever take her back – there’s no other way out of there except to go through this one set of lights!
Monica – did you get a ticket?
If you are the registered owner of the car, the ticket must be mailed within 11 days and received by the 15th day.
I looked at the intersection on google maps. It is confusing to say the least. If you did receive a ticket it is certainly worth contesting if you have the time.
I got a right turn on red violation at Mission and 7th, but there is no video on the public.cite-web.com site – just 3 photos with that ACS black box display overhead. I thought I saw where Roger asserted that a video is required for a right turn violation. Is this a defense?
Steve – Are you sure there is no “button” linking up to a video of the infraction? Call police dept to make sure there is no video. Ask how a still photos show you did not stop. Do all this before taking it to court. Make your case in court. Use hearsay defense. See previous posts about one of the commissioners reducing fine to $250 for a guilty plea. Review the website highwayrobbery.net. There is much to do to improve your chances. Some get good results amazingly with virtually no work and others get no relief after many hours of research and good viable defense. Good luck.
Steve – Why not call SFPD and speak to red light camera officer. a. Is there a video? b. If not, how do you intend to prosecute when still photography does not show that a STOP could have occurred…..
I’m heading over to 850 Bryant today and will ask if there is a video. Do you know if a video is required to prosecute a right-on-red ticket?
Back from 850 Bryant. Scheduled arraignment and had the window person check for video. Assured that this camera does not have video capability and none exists for my incident. How does SFPD prove a rolling right hand turn (turning is legal at that intersection) without video?
Steve…..In the first photo does it show your car at the white line? Is there a red light on the traffic signal? Is your car at a perfect standstill?
With just this one photograph could it be shown that you were committing an infraction?
Now, there is a 2nd photograph. Was it taken about one second after the first photo? Does it show the nose of your car about 25 feet past the white line? Is the signal light still red?
Is your car turning right in photo #2 or is it going straight?
If your car is going straight an infraction has occurred unless the red light was blinking and both photos seem to have been taken when the red light was illuminated. If your car was turning right, that is a permitted movement as long as your car came to full and complete stop. Who can say whether your car was moving or was stopped in photo #1.
Heya, I unfortunately mistimed the yellow at Marina & Lyon tonight and coasted through on the red. I did not see a flash from the camera although it was still daylight. Now I’m panicking that I got a red light ticket. I’m such a granny driver, I come to complete stops at stop signs, I stop on yellow … but tonight I was almost out of gas, coming home to the Marina district from the Richmond district via Doyle Drive, and I was coasting along in neutral, kinda making a game out of it, and as I approached Lyon the light was green, and I started thinking about how much gas it takes if you start up again from a complete stop…and I was distracted by that and when the light turned yellow I didn’t have enough time to react and I coasted through and it turned red, I think before I hit the intersection.
So, I read your blog carefully, but what really interests me is this $80 + traffic school idea – that would certainly be a lot cheaper than $391 for a red light ticket.
Is that still an option? And does that include the cost of traffic school? Or is that extra?
Thanks, and fingers crossed…
PS … Is this community service thing in San Francisco an option if you’re truly hard up financially? Is that the same as “Project 20?” I did Project 20 once for parking tickets, and it was kind of a bum deal. I had to pay $20 to participate, then they only wrote off $6 of tickets for every hour I worked. I ended up having to work 3 hours to write off a $75 ticket. So I worked 13 hours for $55 net. About $4.25 an hour after the fee to participate. I did have fun though – I got to work the SF Giants game during “bring your pet to the game” day, and then I got into the game for free, the first Giants game I had seen in years. Plus I’m a dog-lover so it was fun. But still….you have to be REALLY poor if you’d rather work for $4.25 an hour than pay a ticket – right now I don’t have much time, but i have even less money…so I might still be interested.
I read on another web site the phrase “Gotcha Government” and I truly believe that’s what is going on here. I do my absolute best to obey all laws at all times, but as hard as I try, I still get the occasional expired meter ticket or street cleaning ticket. It’s like a tax I’m supposed to pay for living here in San Francisco.
Did you know that the City of San Francisco absolutely relies on us to break the law in order to balance the budget? Yup, the budget includes $70 million a year for parking violations. So, if we wanted to bring the City of San Francisco to its knees, all we would have to do, collectively, is practice “civil obedience” – park legally at all times. Hee!
Not Guilty in SF: You certainly are putting a lot of energy into the fact that you might be receiving a ticket. Chill. Wait for 15 days by the mailbox to see if receive a ticket. If you are not the registered owner, alert them to do likewise and advise them to call you FIRST. Don’t do anything other than that. Email me directly if you need help talking thru the various options.
Roger rlouisj@aol.com
There is no light visible in the photos. The black box with info at the top of the screen shows that the first photo was taken .7 seconds after the light turned red. It shows my car 3 feet behind the crosswalk. No way to tell if its moving. The second photo is the car in the middle of the turn. Light has been red for 1.7 seconds, car mph is measured at 16.
Steve – I don’t think how this could stand up in court if it well presented. Once again, very few people have ever posted the outcome, in detail, on how cases are handled in court. I have seen more people with perfectly viable defenses present their testimony and evidence in such a way to confuse the judge and everybody. You have strong points. If you have time to go to court practice saying what you have to say as concisely as possible.
Hi Roger,
You have some fantastic advice here.
I got Rolling Redlight ticket(March 2012) in Redwood City @Whipple and Veterans. I didn’t realize the whole issue and thought I definitely will win :-). I went ahead and paid the fee and got TBD. Now I know better, I mostly won’t win the case, they have photo, video and the whole nine yards proof. Reading through your previous comments, is my best option to (a)Write to judge to give me a trial by court instead of TBD (b) Attend court and plead guilty (c) Take community service so I can get my money back. I am a student and that money is a big deal for me. I had a speeding ticket in December 2011 and did traffic school. Clean record for years and now two tickets in 3 months!
I will much appreciate your soonest reply.
Thanks
Becky… You most likely will receive a guilty verdict in the mail as a result of your TBD. You will have 20 or 30 days to file for a trial de novo. I don’t know if this can be done on line or by mail….better than waiting in line. Anyway, I assume you did not request community service in your TBD. I have limited knowledge of RC traffic court, but it is my understanding the regular commissioner knocks $100 off for a quick guilty plea. You are not eligible for traffic school. There is a way to lessen the pain/fine especially if you are eligible for community service…..even a way to ask for a finding of guilt to a lesser offense to keep the point off of your record.
email Roger at rlouisj@aol.com
Roger.. I haven’t submitted by TBD yet, it is due by April 9th. I went back to court office and asked the clerk if I could change it to Trial by Court instead of submitting TBD. Clerk said write a letter to judge requesting and you might get it. I was thinking of doing that instead of submitting TBD. I was concerned what will happen if judge does not approve request for Trial by court and also penalizes me because I didn’t submit TBD. Will it by default make me loose the case?
In regards to pleading guilty or not, I don’t really have a choice because they have video. However, $460 for a rolling red light is outrageous. I could at least get the $100 off and if luck is in my favor, perhaps I could get community service and as you suggested lesser offense to keep point off my record.
Becky Community Service probably is the quickest and easiest way to avoid the $460 tab. Being a student should make you eligible. You can ask for this in your TBD.
Can anybody clarify if police have more pictures that are in your traffic violation ticket I received in a mail for camera red light ticket in SF?
My niece who visited me out of country was driving a car and the picture on a ticket is very blurry.
And how can I schedule a time with the police department to see the high-resolution photos they have. Over the phone or on person?
Thank you
Senna….The police have a better quality photograph. Usually there are certain days and times each week they meet with those who wish to see the evidence. Caution. If you are claiming the ticket was issued to someone other than the driver, they will try to get you to name the driver. You are under no obligation. The cop may not dismiss the ticket unless you snitch on the driver. It depends on the cop.
Thank you for a very prompt response Roger.
Can I schedule the viewing over the phone?
I could also see photos on a web-site – is it was police has to show me??
I was visiting San Francisco and I was driving my friends car. I ran a red light and he just received the ticket in the mail. I dont want to pay 450 dollars for it. Is there any way to get out of it?
Hi, recently I was driving through SF with a friend and ran a red light. I was driving my friends car, who was in the car with me. If my friend (the owner of the vehicle) claims it is not him, does the whole process of “it isn’t me work”?
Senna – photos and video can be seen on a website. You need the pin no. and the web address. Is it on your ticket? The police may have a clearer image. I am sure you could make an appt. if you call.
Marilyn….If and when your friend gets a ticket in the mail, make sure he or she does not “nominate” you without getting some good advice. What steps are needed may hinge on just how much the picture does not resemble the vehicle’s owner and whether the citation is real or a “snitch” ticket. Google “snitch ticket highwayrobbery.net” The ticket must arrive in your friend’s mailbox within 15 days.
Albert…read my response above to Marilyn. If your friend writes your name on the back of the ticket and “nominates” you, you will probably end up with a $450 ticket. If you can get your friend to hold off until you get some good advice, you both can avoid paying and money. Your friend can just go to court and show the judge and say it is not him. He can do this by mail, too. How much does the picture on the ticket NOT look like the owner/friend??
Roger,
Thank you again.
Yes, I do have pin no. and the web address and already looked at the photos..
I should have asked more specific: does police has the same photos as on a web-site?
Or they have more photos that cannot be seen on a web-site?
Great Blog BTW. I just received a citation for running a red light. I remember it clearly, I was cut off in the intersetion by a MUNI bus turning in front of me… I had to slam on my brakes to avoid t-boning the bus . Because I basically came to a stand still in the intersection to avoid the collision, I was across the limit line when th elight was red. The bus can be seen in the photos in my lane in front of me. Any chances of arguing that I was avoiding a collision with a MUNI bus which caused me be across the limit line?
Thanks!
Senna. The police have the same photos. They are of a better quality I believe.
Shawn. Your description of the circumstance is fuzzy. How did braking propel you past the limit line? Maybe the photos or video support your use of emergency procedures. The vehicle code describes what an emergency and when you are allowed to do something other than do what the vehicle code says.