Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
Here's the situation. I just received a red light camera ticket. It was issued to me. Only thing is I was not the driver in the photo. It was my financee and he's not a registered owner. The photo is pretty clear that it was a male driving the car, and it could not be me because I'm a female. I also do not want to identify him to the court.
On another site it was recommended by that site that in my situation, I should try to do a 'trial by declaration'. And since I don't think I could do well in front of the judge (stage fright), I believe that's the best way. I was thinking about providing the red light picture as well as a colored copy of my driver's license, so the judge can clearly see that I wasn't driving.
Only thing is, how do I word the letter so I don't have the judge asking me who was the person driving? I want to show the pictures, but does that mean I'm testifying? So if I'm testifying he can directly ask me about the person driving?
Also, what does this sentence mean in the "trial by declaration"? "I know that I have the right not to be compelled to be a witness against myself. I understand and agree that by making any statement, I am giving up and waiving that right and privilege."
I just want to do this correctly.
I also saw another post suggesting to fill out a affidavit. But I don't see that in my citation. What is that?
Thanks in advance for your guys' help.
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
My understanding is that they cannot amke you identify the driver but you do not want to go to court and have to refuse to tell the judge. Usually they attach an affidavit with the citation that you can send in denying that you are the driver. Talk to the clerk of court.
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
They did not attach a affidavit w/ my citation. All I see is a slip saying "Identify the driver". It just has a section for me to write down all the information about the driver and it doesn't have anything about me just marking that I was not the driver.
Should I just send in a simple letter saying that I was not the driver? Or should I do a "trial by declaration"? For a trial by declaration, I just don't want to word it in a way that if I have to do a trial by novo, they can use it against me and question me about the driver. I just want to show pictures, but not actually testify. Is that possible?
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
I have no idea which way would be best. Call and ask the clerk.
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
Thanks for your help. Does anyone have any other ideas?
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
I am not sure if this is right but I think you need to send in that letter with a photoID like ur license and you are not required to say who it actually is even though it asks for them and they word it kinda tricky.
At least to the best of my knowledge that is how I think it works in AZ
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
So... I've seen this post on at least two other forums. I'd like to know what the OP intends to do with this very simple situation.
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
Update
Red Light Photo Ticket in California, But I Am Not The Driver
I just received back clerk’s certificate of mailing from the Superior court of CA, LA
With a decision and notice of decision attached (trial by written declaration-vehicle code §40902).
The judge found me NOT GUILTY.
Here is what I did.
I filled for trial by written declaration.
On the second page of the form TR-205 under statement of facts I wrote.
“Identity, Wrong defendant”
Nothing more nothing less.
I provided the court with two attachments
1. The original ticket picturing my son driving my car.
2. A color copy of my driver’s license.
I circle the face of my son and draw an arrow to the date of my birth on my diver license
and another arrow pointing to the ticket that was indicating that the driver was 60 years old. My son ihe looks like 18 years old.
I did not provide the info that my son is a twin; I was planning to use it at the trial de novo.
An additional point that could have been used is that the ticket was not signed by an original signature, only the name of the officer was printed P. Delaney as declarant and his ID No. I am suspecting that no human has reviewed the ticket.
Do not waist your time by calling the court trying to explain that is not you.
Ignore the affidavit.
Just file by written declaration and be ready to go to full court if it does not work for you.
John
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
Do as John F did. I'm in the same situation. Both my Dad and I are registered owners of the vehicle. I just got the same citation yesterday, only it was issued to my Dad, even though I was the one driving the car. I plan on having him write in the affadavit stating that he was not driving the car along with a copy of his license. Im not 100% sure this will work, as I am also a registered owner of the vehicle, but I doubt my Dad will state that it was me driving, do you think this will get dismissed or will they come after me?
Re: Red Light Camera Ticket In California, But Not The Driver
Quote:
Quoting
Matticus
Do as John F did. I'm in the same situation. Both my Dad and I are registered owners of the vehicle. I just got the same citation yesterday, only it was issued to my Dad, even though I was the one driving the car. I plan on having him write in the affadavit stating that he was not driving the car along with a copy of his license. Im not 100% sure this will work, as I am also a registered owner of the vehicle, but I doubt my Dad will state that it was me driving, do you think this will get dismissed or will they come after me?
I am aware that this post is nearly three months old, however....I have a strong interest in the outcome of Matticus' case -I have a situation with a red light camera violation and am, frankly, in dire need of creative but not dishonest solutions.
MATTICUS, what was the outcome of your case ?