Crossing a Street in Disregard of the Signal

My question involves traffic court in the State of: CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES

The ticket was given to me while crossing a pedestrian xing in the middle of a block, which has a signal.

It's NOT a WALK and DON'T WALK, but instead one of the new ones that has seconds remaining, and in the sign it says you start crossing while there's a white hand showing, or while the numbers are above 8 seconds. I cross this pedxing everyday, at least 6 times a day, to go between two buildings across the street to each other, for the past 10 years at least.

Me and my coworker got the ticket together, both of us for the first time ever.

Now here's the situation, we started to cross the street exactly when the numbers were changing from the 'START CROSSING MAN' to the 'FLASHING HAND WITH NUMBERS'. Since a car bumped into me while I was legally crossing years ago, everytime I cross the street, I always look to see if a car is in movement, and this day, the street had no cars on the block, either waiting to pass or even coming, I only remember seeing an officer in his motorcicle parked hidden behind a tree, looking to bust driver's speeding or making illegal left turns, which they always do in this location. Not that it matters, but I just want to make it clear that I even knew the officer was present!

Anyway, after we crossed, he hear a police siren/horn and it was the officer driving to us to give us tickets!

This is what he wrote in the ticket:

21453DVC PED XING MID
BLK LIGHT ON RED
GRN N/B. LSTE 4.W\C

Now a days in Los Angeles, I see officers more interested in giving tickets than fighting crime. I mean, I REALLY SEE IT! I am in downtown LA and I see crime and nothing being done about it, and drivers getting tickets every 5 minutes...

and although I was legally crossing the pedxing, the officer decided to make some money for the city, and I doubt that me and my friend's word agaisn the officer will do much, however, upon reading the code, this is what it says:

"(d) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian control signal as provided in Section 21456, a pedestrian facing a steady circular red or red arrow signal shall not enter the roadway. "

But there were no steady circular red or red arrow signal for us to face, since this is a xing in the middle of the block, and when going to section 21456, it says:

"Whenever a pedestrian control signal showing the words "WALK" or "WAIT" or "DON'T WALK" or other approved symbol is in place, the signal shall indicate as follows:
(a) "WALK" or approved "Walking Person" symbol. A pedestrian facing the signal may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal, but shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that signal is first shown.
(b) Flashing or steady "DON'T WALK" or "WAIT" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol. No pedestrian shall start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed crossing shall proceed to a sidewalk or safety zone or otherwise leave the roadway while the "WAIT" or "DON'T WALK" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol is showing."

These sections don't address the kind of pedestrian signal that you find in this pedxing, and right on top of the button you press to cross the street, there's a sign like this picture:

http://www.trafficsign.us/650/reg/r10-3e.gif

I even tought that maybe the officer believed we started to cross while the flashing hand was on, but I spoke to another officer the next day, and he explained to me that you can start crossing before the timer reaches 8 seconds. If past the 8 seconds, it's jaywalking. Can you confirm this?

Is there a way to fight our tickets???
or would this be just a waste of time. The tickets are $194 each, but if we have to lose a day of work, it will cost even more. Could you please give me your opinion?

I really dislike what the Los Angeles Police are turning...

Thank you very much!

Quote:

---

other approved symbol

---

Did you miss this part? The sign clearly explained when it is and is not appropriate to cross.

Quote:

---

Quoting jgatter

---

"(d) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian control signal as provided in Section 21456, a pedestrian facing a steady circular red or red arrow signal shall not enter the roadway. "

But there were no steady circular red or red arrow signal for us to face, since this is a xing in the middle of the block, and when going to section 21456, it says:

"Whenever a pedestrian control signal showing the words "WALK" or "WAIT" or "DON'T WALK" or other approved symbol is in place, the signal shall indicate as follows:
(a) "WALK" or approved "Walking Person" symbol. A pedestrian facing the signal may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal, but shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that signal is first shown.
(b) Flashing or steady "DON'T WALK" or "WAIT" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol. No pedestrian shall start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed crossing shall proceed to a sidewalk or safety zone or otherwise leave the roadway while the "WAIT" or "DON'T WALK" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol is showing."

---

In order to prove this case, the prosecution would have to show that there's a circular red or red arrow where you were trying to cross; that you failed to obey that signal; and that intersection wasn't controlled by a crossing signal in 21456, or if it was, that you were in violation of the signal.

It sounds like you're saying that there was no circular red for you to obey, and the intersection was controlled by a crossing signal in accordance with 21456. If that's true, then you'll need to bring evidence to court to argue these points. A picture of the crosswalk, showing a crossing signal, but no circular (or arrow) traffic lights would be a good start.

Quote:

---

Quoting jgatter

---

These sections don't address the kind of pedestrian signal that you find in this pedxing, and right on top of the button you press to cross the street, there's a sign like this picture:

---

I disagree, but I don't think it matters since you weren't cited under 21456. Based upon how I read 21456, it seems like a flashing red and the number of seconds remaining are equivalent. If you enter the intersection when either is shown on the signal, then you can be cited. However, that doesn't matter in this case, and even if it did, you have witness who could testify that you entered the crosswalk before the signal started to flash.

Thank you very much for your reply.

So do you think it's worth losing a day of work, and the payment for the day for a shot at this?

Quote:

---

Quoting themadnorwegian

---

In order to prove this case, the prosecution would have to show that there's a circular red or red arrow where you were trying to cross; that you failed to obey that signal; and that intersection wasn't controlled by a crossing signal in 21456, or if it was, that you were in violation of the signal.

It sounds like you're saying that there was no circular red for you to obey, and the intersection was controlled by a crossing signal in accordance with 21456. If that's true, then you'll need to bring evidence to court to argue these points. A picture of the crosswalk, showing a crossing signal, but no circular (or arrow) traffic lights would be a good start.



I disagree, but I don't think it matters since you weren't cited under 21456. Based upon how I read 21456, it seems like a flashing red and the number of seconds remaining are equivalent. If you enter the intersection when either is shown on the signal, then you can be cited. However, that doesn't matter in this case, and even if it did, you have witness who could testify that you entered the crosswalk before the signal started to flash.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting jgatter

---

So do you think it's worth losing a day of work, and the payment for the day for a shot at this?

---

Why not take a shot for free? It's called a "trial by declaration" (TBD). You submit your side of the story in writing, the officer submits his, and the judge decides. If you lose (found guilty), you get a second shot at an in-person court trial if you want to. This is not a moving violation (no points), so worst case you're out the $194. Unless you make more at work.

Please post the location the officer put on the citation. TMN is right that you seem to have been cited for the wrong code. 21453(d) is only for crosswalks with regular traffic signals and NO pedestrian signals. If you can get a couple of photos and include them in the trial by declaration, I think you stand a decent chance at winning this without losing a day of work.

This LA court I was assigned in the ticket does not let you do TBD.

But if you all think it is worth a shot losing a day of work, which will definately affect me if I lose, I will go. I mean, the ticket is about $200! Does this officer has any idea of how many days I have to work to make that after taxes!!!

Thank you, and I would appreciate any response from you all.

Quote:

---

Quoting quirkyquark

---

Why not take a shot for free? It's called a "trial by declaration" (TBD). You submit your side of the story in writing, the officer submits his, and the judge decides. If you lose (found guilty), you get a second shot at an in-person court trial if you want to. This is not a moving violation (no points), so worst case you're out the $194. Unless you make more at work.

Please post the location the officer put on the citation. TMN is right that you seem to have been cited for the wrong code. 21453(d) is only for crosswalks with regular traffic signals and NO pedestrian signals. If you can get a couple of photos and include them in the trial by declaration, I think you stand a decent chance at winning this without losing a day of work.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting jgatter

---

This LA court I was assigned in the ticket does not let you do TBD.

---

Then the court is breaking the law! Which court is this?

Quote:

---

Quoting jgatter

---

But if you all think it is worth a shot losing a day of work, which will definately affect me if I lose, I will go. I mean, the ticket is about $200! Does this officer has any idea of how many days I have to work to make that after taxes!!!

---

The TBD is worth it in any case; your chances at trial may be poorer if the officer is present to respond in person to any arguments you may make. But you will be required to post bail before the TBD, which will be refunded if you win.

Once you get your courtesy notice, fill out this form and mail it in, certified mail/return receipt, with a bail check. They WILL have to let you do the TBD.

I will check again then. That's what I was told when I called. It's the metropolitan court.

Anyway, I never got the courtesy notice, so I guess I will have to go there and spend half a day of work just to get the information to pay it and make the TBD if they allow it, before FEB 06 2012.

When I go online, the only options are:

Pay ticket in full + $10 courtesy fee 'TO CLOSE THE CASE'
Extend the hearing date
or Schedule an arraignment

Unbelievable, it's like they make everything possible to make things so hard, that you just give up and pay!

Now I guess my only options is either spend half a day of work just to get the information to pay and do the TBD, or just pay it!

Arrrgghhhhh!!!

Just send the court a letter requesting a trial by written declaration. Use certified mail, and be sure to send it to the right court. Include your citation number on the letter. An example of how to do this can be found here.

Is the date on your notice to appear date Feb 6?

Quote:

---

Quoting jgatter

---

I will check again then. That's what I was told when I called. It's the metropolitan court.

---

You got somebody on the phone at LA Metro regarding a traffic ticket? No wonder they wanted to get rid of you asap, even if they had to lie to do it...

Quote:

---

Quoting jgatter

---

I will have to go there and spend half a day of work just to get the information to pay it and make the TBD if they allow it, before FEB 06 2012.

---

You missed this part of my advice, which TMN also seconded:

Quote:

---

Quoting quirkyquark

---

Once you get your courtesy notice, fill out this form and mail it in, certified mail/return receipt, with a bail check. They WILL have to let you do the TBD.

---

There is no need to "check" to see if they will "allow" a TBD. I've done my share of TBDs with that court, and believe me, it works out fine when you do it the right way. That's why you should USE the fillable form I linked above, it's designed so there are no misunderstandings. If you don't have your courtesy notice yet, fill out the form and mail it right away. You can also choose to get the automatic 60-day extension---that becomes the new deadline for the TBD request then.