Great citations TMN...
We should also add that simply getting photos admitted into evidence does not really dictate that they will have the desired effect. The “weight of the evidence” is up to the trier of fact to decide.
For example, I can manipulate several settings on a digital camera to somehow control the way a traffic signal or a sign might appear.
You are correct... (Now that I re-read it). But even if I change the words “limit line” in my post to “traffic signal”, along with other relevant information (underlined) it still leaves a lot to be desired, here:
now I am even more confused...
The other important point is if his version is that he saw you enter the intersection 2 to 3 seconds after the green phase for cross traffic started
, there is little need for him to declare the ability to see YOUR signal
, and I see no value to your pictures at all!
If the officer could not see which phase the light was in, how could he determine how many seconds it had been red for?
But lets stick with the presumption that he couldn't really see what indication the OP's signal was showing? Are we to assume that the other signal facing the other direction has louvers as well? and as such, the officer could not see what phase the other light is in?
Let me play both hypotheticals:
First, that he could not see either signal...
What's the point of him being there then? And what good would that do anyone? I mean I would not walk into court claiming the officer could not see what phase either direction was in and he's lying about the whole entire thing!
Second, let us assume that the officer could NOT see OPs signal but he can see the other signal:
Now, he obviously has a way to establish the 3 seconds he testified to (because with only a 0.5 second for the “all red clearance”, which means that the signal for cross traffic went into its green phase, the officer sees it do that, he looks down a couple of seconds later (2.5 to 3 seconds later) and sees OP crossing the limit line at that time!
And no, I don't feel his not being able to see the OP's signal indication is that big of an issue. Unless you can somehow familiarize yourself with the phasing of the system enough to be able to trip him up on cross examination, there should be zero issue with his testimony.
Of course, without knowing where the officer was at the time, where this intersection is and which way the OP was turning, all of this is speculation! The questions were asked... We'll wait for the OP to answer!
I stand corrected on the timing of the all red clearance phase. It can indeed start at 0.1 seconds.
But more importantly, I correct my own standing, simply because it has ZERO effect on the yellow phase -it starts AFTER yellow anyways! Even in the way they are calculated separately. So as far as this discussion is concerned, it has zero effect on the outcome or the way to get there....
Anything is possible, I guess.. Question is, what would it prove/disprove? With the officer likely testifying in a similar way as he did in his TBD, I'm guessing he will mention the “3 seconds” and if he does, even the length of the yellow signal phase is no longer relevant!
But that is something I am curious about OP... how long was the yellow phase?
Or, better yet, if you can upload the entire report, that would be great!