Red Light Camera Ticket With a Partially Obscured Face
My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: California
I received a notice to appear by the Court of San Mateo California for a violation through Automated Traffic Enforcement camera. The video shows that the vehicle was slowed down but only made a rolling stop instead of a complete stop.
However the picture of the driver as the evidence only shows side of the face (because the driver was looking toward the left to check for any incoming vehicles). In addition, as the visor was down, the visor had blocked eyes and forehead of the driver.
Can anyone suggest in this case if I should fight the ticket as the picture not being good enough? Please provide me some suggestions.
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket With a Partially Obscured Face
The ticket at this point is written against the registered owner of the vehicle. If you want to contest the ticket on the grounds that the registered owner was not the driver, you will have to identify who the driver was. That being you, correct?
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket With a Partially Obscured Face
Quote:
Quoting
budwad
The ticket at this point is written against the registered owner of the vehicle. If you want to contest the ticket on the grounds that the registered owner was not the driver, you will have to identify who the driver was. That being you, correct?
On what basis would the owner be required to ID the driver? A judge or police officer might ask or might not ask. Usually not. First, the officer is not a prosecutor nor a party to the case nor representing such a party and therefore would arguably be practicing law improperly. The judge, although allowed to ask questions of the defendant, may or may not be inclined to do so. If the defendant has chosen not to testify, he won't get an answer anyway.
The fact that the registered owner is charged is not evidence and does not tend to show anything. Even in California, the prosecution still has the burden of proof. That means that the officer will have to testify that the person pictured is the defendant, beyond a reasonable doubt. It's not up to the defendant to say it is or is not him.
California law requires that the camera used be designed to capture a clear image of the driver's face. If the image is blurry, either the camera is incorrectly designed or it's not functioning properly. This aspect of things leads to the question of whether the camera has been correctly inspected and that other parts of CVC 21455.5 have been complied with.
Furthermore, if the face is blurry or concealed, company and/or department policy has likely been violated by the issuance of the citation. That may not be dispositive but taken together with other deficiencies may be helpful.
The rolling right turn is one of the safest code violations there is, as very few accidents are caused by them. Still, many cameras capture just this violation. Why not concentrate on thru traffic violations which are far more dangerous? Money perhaps? The placement of cameras by law must be to improve safety. Regardless of this, in many cities, more emphasis is placed on the right turn on red, which does nothing for safety but do to the higher number of violations is much more profitable. Anyway, check highwayrobbery.net on other issues regarding this violation. I've used this site on prior violations, although it's not comprehensive on all CA traffic issues.
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket With a Partially Obscured Face
When you start posting drivel like, "department policy has likely been violated by the issuance of the citation", you remind us of how little you actually know.
If the OP wants to contest the ticket, he is free to do so. He can hope that the court doesn't find him to be sufficiently identified by the portions of his face that are in the photograph.