Links/Resources - Red Light Cameras & Photo Radar

highwayrobbery.net is a free-of-charge public service. Please start by reading the What's Hot box on the Home page.

http://www.dot.ca.gov
The California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) website includes an electronic edition of their Traffic Manual - in fact, it is the online edition that is the official version of the manual.
The Traffic Manual is the source of the controversial "Yellow Change Interval" table. For more information about the table, see CalTrans, continued.

Congressman Dick Armey's Report:
"The Red Light Running Crisis - Is It Intentional"

Retired Congressman Dick Armey's official website contained a big section about red light cameras, including the above-entitled 20-page position paper, and links to official studies, reports, and other documents. It was last updated in late 2002.
Armey's Site (Replica)

is updated daily and is the place to look for recent articles, court decisions, and up-to-date studies about automated enforcement. The site mentions Snitch Tickets, but not prominently; to find the single article, you must either search for "fake ticket," or search for "California" then scroll through seventeen "California" index pages, to the bottom of the last page.
For the studies, click on Key Documents, then Statistics.

The book Fight Your Ticket by Attorney David W. Brown (Nolo Press, book store price $29.99 - also available instantly as an E-book for $25.49, at nolo.com) is an old friend, and an important book, even though the editors who re-package it every two years have allowed the contents to become very out-of-date.
Over the years, my friends and I have used FYT, very successfully, to deal with our radar speeding tickets, but I am disappointed to report, though, that FYT is less than adequate on red light camera tickets. The 12th Edition, which came out in September 2007 and is 419 pages long, devotes only 2 pages to red light cameras - not even a paragraph more than the 10th Edition of 2003. Nor does it warn motorists about Snitch Tickets. Despite all that, get a copy of the California 10th, 11th or 12th Edition (available at every book store and public library - it may be behind the reference desk with the other Nolo Press books) and read at least the two red light camera ticket pages (11/32 and 11/33 in the 10th Edition, 11/34 and 11/35 in the 11th Edition, 254 - 255 in the 12th Edition).
(I strongly advise you not to use an edition before the 10th.)
FYT is also the best guide available to the general traffic court procedures that are the same for all kinds of tickets, not just red light camera tickets.
More of my concerns, including ones specific to the book's discussion of traffic school, are detailed on a separate page. Also I have included some useful index entries - ones that you will not find in the the book's index.

National Motorists Association

The NMA is an auto club that actually stands up for motorists.
Their website proclaims, "We are the organization largely responsible for the repeal of the 55-mph national speed limit... "
The website of the NMA contains a wealth of information about traffic law across the USA, and many links. NMA's info on red light cameras is not easy to find, though. Click on the "NMA Issues" button to get to it. (Also hard to find - because it requires clicking on that non-intuitive "Issues..." button and then, once you have selected the Ticket Cameras page, choosing the right link ("Is Your Camera Ticket a Fake") amongst the 30+ links on the Ticket Cameras page - is the NMA's warning about California Snitch Tickets.)

Much of the NMA's detailed info on how to fight a red light camera ticket is "limited access," but non-NMA members can get access for 24 hours, instantly, for $5.95. Or, you can join, for $35. The NMA and the books Fight Your Ticket (above), The CalAware Guide (below), and Smile for the Speed Camera (below), are the only paid products or services endorsed by highwayrobbery.net .
The NMA also operates the Speed Trap Exchange - see the bottom of this page for a link.

is a free-of-charge website which goes into great detail about the general procedures for fighting a traffic ticket, including questions the author suggests that you ask in court. (The editor of highwayrobbery.net recommends that like a good lawyer, you not ask any question that you don't already know the answer to! So, you will still need to do your own research.) The site includes two pages about red light cameras, which can be accessed directly at:

The site warns motorists about Snitch Tickets.

S W I T R S
Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System
for
ACCIDENT STATISTICS AND REPORTS

SWITRS reports are provided to ordinary citizens at very low cost, by the Information Services Unit of the CHP. If you want a custom report for an intersection in your neighborhood, call them. They are very helpful, and respond quickly to requests for reports. For more information, and examples of reports, see Set # 12 of Culver City Documents, Set # 3 of Hawthorne Documents, and Set # 10 of Costa Mesa Documents.

Contacting the City

To find the website for "your" city, type "City of _________" into a Google search.

Contacting the Legislature

To contact your State legislator, see the Action page of this website.

Contacting the Court

In every county there is a website for the courts. It will contain the names of the judges, some extra phone numbers you may be able to use, and the Local Court Rules. To get the URL, use this link, or type the name of the court into a Google search. Example: "Los Angeles County Court." The URL's for the courts of some of the larger counties are below.

http://www.alameda.courts.ca.gov
List of judges: http://www.alameda.courts.ca.gov/courts/news/2007/judicial%20assignments%202007.pdf

http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org
List of judges: http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/judicialofficers/

http://www.occourts.org
List of judges: http://www.occourts.org/cfdocs/officers.cfm

http://www.riverside.courts.ca.gov/
List of judges: http://www.riverside.courts.ca.gov/judrost.pdf

http://www.sdcourt.ca.gov
List of judges: http://www.sdcourt.ca.gov/portal/page?_pageid=53,128359&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL

http://www.saccourt.com
List of judges: http://www.saccourt.com/geninfo/overview/judicial.asp

http://www.sbcounty.gov/courts/flash.asp
List of judges: http://www.sbcounty.gov/courts/pdfs/misc/schedAssign.pdf

http://www.sfgov.org/site/courts_index.asp
List of judges: http://www.sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/courts/sftc-judges-roster-alpha-pub.pdf

http://www.sanmateocourt.org/
List of judges: http://www.sanmateocourt.org/director.php?filename=./generalinfo/directory.php

Fight Your Ticket
David Brown's book Fight Your Ticket is in Section 1, above.

Looking Up California Codes & Rules of Court
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html
Official State of California site (click on link above) allows you to look up any section of the Vehicle Code or other California code, such as the Public Records Act (Govt. Code 6250) or the rules for peremptory challenges (Code of Civil Procedures 170.6). (If you are putting the code section # in the "keywords" box, leave off any numbers after the decimal point!)
To look up the Rules of Court, go to: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/rules/
And be sure to read about West's Annotated Codes, below.

West's Annotated California Codes
The State site (above) contains only the text of the codes. If you would like to see information on how a particular Code section has been applied ("case law"), go to any large public library, or the small law library found in many courthouses, and look at the same code section in West's Annotated California Codes (WACC) - a large set of dark blue books. The librarian will show you how to use it. If you find a case mentioned in WACC and you want to read the whole court decision, write down the case citation (example: People v. Williams, 28 Cal.4th 408) and get it using FindLaw.com (see below). (The West's books are not re-issued every year, so be sure to check the updates in the "pocket part" that will be tucked into the back cover.)
WACC is available on the Internet, but only to those who pay West for a monthly subscription.

"Tracking" Bills in the California Legislature
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/bilinfo.html
Official State of California site allows you to "track" bills in the legislature - both current ones, and old bills, 1993 and later.
(See the Hot Legislation section on my Action page for more information about camera bills under consideration during the legislature's current session.)
The State's official site sometimes has a day or two of "lag" so may not have very recent amendments to bills, or warn you of meetings/votes that sometimes are held with notice given only the day (or evening) before. For the crucial up-to-the-minute info, you will need to use the telephone.

California Ballot Propositions Database
http://www.uchastings.edu/library/Research%20Databases/research_databases_main.htm
Has information about all statewide ballot propositions including Prop. 8 of 1982 ("Truth in Evidence") and Prop. 115 - full text, ballot arguments, the vote tally.
(Note: After you click on "search," nothing will come up until you click "display search results.")

Case Law at FindLaw

http://www.findlaw.com
Has the complete text of State and Federal court cases, and much more. It is free, but you will need to register, set up a password, and accept cookies.
To look up a State court case:
On FindLaw's opening page, click the tab: "For Legal Professionals"
On the next page, find the tab "Research the Law" and click: "Cases and Codes"
On the next page, scroll down to "US State Laws" and click: "California"
On the next page, find the big heading "California" and click: "Cal. Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Decisions, Since 1934"

L A W Y E R S

Use this Bar Association site to look-up info about any California lawyer. I also recommend doing a Google on their name.

This book tells you how to get access to public information, whether that information is contained in hidden government documents, or coming from a government meeting that should be open to the public, but isn't.
This book is a secret weapon !
It is The CalAware Guide to Journalism Law in California, by Terry Francke, General Counsel of Californians Aware (www.CalAware.org , (916) 487-7000).
The title may be misleading. It might cause you to assume that all the Guide contains is instructions for journalists on how to cover city council and other government meetings. It does cover that subject, in great depth, but it also has a whole chapter on the California Public Records Act, which is the State law that allows you extensive access to government documents (if you know your rights, and how to ask for access - also see highwayrobbery.net's Getting Records page).

From the Guide's "Detailed Table of Contents," here are some of the questions covered.

DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1

ACCESS TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT

• What is the California Public Records Act?
• Does the CPRA apply to federal records?

Making the Access Request

• Does the CPRA apply to all important records in state and local government?
• Must I have a “need to know” in order to have access to records under the CPRA?
• Must I make my CPRA access request in writing?
• Must I identify myself in making an access request?
• Must I reveal my purpose in making an access request?
• How well must I describe what I’m looking for?
• Can I require the agency to compile a list or report?
• Must the agency help me make an effective request?
• What can I be charged a fee for: Inspection? Copying?
• How soon must my request get a response?

Exemptions from Disclosure

• Does an exemption from disclosure mean that the agency cannot provide me with access?
• May the agency provide public access selectively - to certain favored persons but not me?
• If part of a record is exempt, may all of it be withheld?
• Are draft documents exempt from disclosure as such?
• Are litigation-related records exempt permanently?
• What kind of information can be withheld to protect personal privacy?
• Are the exact earnings of named government workers public or private?
• Are records of complaints and discipline against public employees exempt from disclosure?
• What about access to police and sheriff’s officers’ personnel records?
• Which law enforcement information is exempt from disclosure?
• If someone was robbed and raped, for example, does the fact of the rape allow withholding of the person’s name as the victim of a robbery?
• Must I sign something or provide proof that I am a journalist in order to get access to law enforcement information?
• Are the CPRA exemptions the only legal bases for withholding information?
• Can a record be withheld if it is not made expressly confidential by some statute?
• What is the deliberative process privilege?

Every journalist should have a copy of the Guide next to his computer. The best journalists do, but the Weekly Bugle reporter covering the machinations of your local city council may not have even heard of it. You may want to suggest that he or she get a copy. Or, you could give him or her a copy!
Every councilmember and school board member should be handed a copy on the day they're sworn into office. The public information table at their meetings should have a copy for the public to read.
Every public library should have a few copies of this book. Most don't have any. If you want to make a contribution (inexpensively, and tax-deductibly) to open government (a.k.a. "Sunshine") in your town, buy your library a copy or two of this book. If you do that, let me know what library it is in, and I will publish the address here.
Every high school and college government/political science instructor should have a copy.
Every City Clerk should have a copy on their public counter, and another on their own desk.
The Guide is over 300 pages of well-written, solid information (not even one cute cartoon). The Table of Contents is organized in Q&A format (see sample, above), and there is a table of cases in the back. Also included are the full language of the CPRA, the Brown Act and the Bagley-Keane Act, as well as perforated pages with request forms and other useful tools. It is available in some college bookstores and public libraries, or can be ordered direct from CalAware at (916) 487-7000 or at http://www.CalAware.org . The direct-order cost is $22.50 per copy, including postage and tax, with a discount available on 10 or more copies. And, if you would like to join Californians Aware, you don't have to be a journalist. Individual members of the public are welcomed.

FAQ # 1: During trials in Culver City, the Commissioner keeps (kept) the TV set (used to display the photos) turned so that the public can't see the screen. Are the courts in other towns doing the same?

Answer: At Inglewood and Hawthorne trials, the photos are displayed on a big movie screen, or monitors, visible to everyone. Viewers of this website can help to answer this question about other towns. Let me know whether the photos were visible to the public, or not. See also Set # 3 of Culver City Documents.

FAQ # 2: It's not me pictured on the ticket. Am I required to disclose the identity of the person in the photo?

Answer: No! Why not? See the "It's Not Me" section at the top of the Your Ticket page.

FAQ # 3: If I take Community Service, how many hours will I have to do? And, can I take traffic school too?

Answer: Some judges will allow Community Service only if you are a full-time student or are on disability. Others have no set rules as to who qualifies, but will try to discourage you from taking it - probably because their experience has been that many people won't do the hours required. Most judges require 51 hours, but it can be as low as 16 hours, depending upon who is your judge. See the Feb. 7, Feb. 18 and Sept. 4, 2003 entries in the Culver City chronology on the Camera Towns page. And yes, many judges will let you take both community service and traffic school.

FAQ # 4: In the picture, it looks like my brake lights were on. That proves I stopped, doesn't it?

Answer: Not necessarily. Reflection of the camera's flash can make your brake lights look "on." Look at your third stoplight - it's probably not on. Or, if your ticket was for a right or left turn, you may have been braking to slow down for the corner.

In many towns, the cameras take a 12-second-long video of the incident - and in most of those towns, that video is up on a website so that you can look at it. Go to the site and have a look. If they have video, but it's not online, there's two ways to get a look at it. You could file a Discovery, to get a copy sent to you. (See FAQ # 5, below, for info about Discovery.) Or, you could make an appointment to go look at it at the police department. I do not recommend the latter method, as the police may take the opportunity to twist your arm, hard. If the video shows you made a full stop, or very close to one, ask the officer to dismiss your ticket.
If the video seems to show that you did not stop, but you don't believe it - or if there was no video - here is an alternate way to determine if you stopped, or not. If the ticket is for a right turn and is from a RedFlex camera, it will have a black "data strip" along the top edge of the before-and-after photos. The numbers in the data strip should enable you to tell how much time elapsed between the 'before' and the 'after' photos. ( You may have to subtract the time in the 'before' photo from the time in the 'after' photo. If you are having trouble figuring out which numbers are which, have a look at the big "How to Read Your Late Time" box in Defect # 7 on the Home page. And, if the white-on-black numbers are too faint to read, put the ticket up on a window, so that the light from outdoors comes through the paper. ) Once you know the elapsed time, do the following easy experiment. Get a stopwatch and go to a corner that is similar to the one your ticket is from. Make a full stop, then start the stopwatch, hit the gas, and time how long it takes you to get the same distance around the corner as was shown in the 'after' photo. If the time it takes you is roughly equal to, or smaller than, the elapsed time calculated from your ticket, maybe you made a full stop, or very close to one!
Also see FAQs # 27 and # 30.

FAQ # 5: I've pled not guilty, am going to trial and want to get some of the City's documents or records. How do I do that?

FAQ # 6: Engineers who have studied red light running - those who do not stand to gain financially from the use of red light cameras - suggest that cities try alternatives to cameras before installing cameras. What are these alternatives?

Answer: Two alternatives are lengthening the yellow, and improving pavement markings. A detailed discussion is here.

FAQ # 7: I have seen small optical devices, a couple inches tall, high up on signal arms around town. Are they some kind of red light camera?

Answer: There are more and more devices mounted on poles around town, for all kinds of purposes. Plus, there is no standardized look to red light camera equipment, as there are at least four companies competing in the field.
The device you saw could be an Opticom receiver, which picks up the white strobe flashes from emergency vehicles and then changes the signal to halt cross traffic. Opticoms have been around for more than 40 years, and most cities have them. On major routes through town, you will find Opticom receivers at every intersection.
Or, if what you saw looked more like a camera, and it was pointed downward at a steep angle (or almost straight down), it might be there - in place of loops in the pavement - to detect cars and control the signal cycle, or to measure the speed of cars to trigger a (separate) red light camera.
Red light camera systems can be recognized by their bulk. They will have multiple devices, either in a single large cabinet or in separate, smaller enclosures. Most red light camera systems, but not all, will also have a flash unit with a large silver reflector. Some may use "non-visible" (to humans) infrared light, provided by multiple light-emitting diodes (LED's), for camera light.

RedFlex Cam with a Visible-Light Flash RedFlex Cam with a Non-visible (LED) Flash Close-up of LED Non-visible Flash

Another way to tell if a city has red light cameras is to Google the name of the city ("City of ____") plus the words red light camera. If the city has red light cameras or if the city council has discussed having them, Google will bring up newspaper articles.
If you're still not sure of what the device is, you could call the police department, or the public works department, and ask them.

FAQ # 8: If you enter an intersection when the light is yellow, how far across the intersection do you have to be, when the light turns red, to NOT receive a ticket?

Answer: If the front bumper of your car is over the limit line (or first line of the crosswalk) before the light goes red, it's legal for you to proceed on through. (California Veh. Code Sec. 21453(a).) See also FAQ # 32.

FAQ # 9: I entered an intersection tonight when the light was yellow and as I went through I saw a flash from the camera. Now I'm worried about receiving a ticket. How long before I can relax when I go to my mailbox?

Answer: The camera could have been flashing a car just behind you. If it was you they were flashing, they have only 15 calendar days to send the ticket to you. California Vehicle Code Section. 40518 says:

40518. (a) "Whenever a written notice to appear has been issued by a peace officer or by a qualified employee of a law enforcement agency on a form approved by the Judicial Council for an alleged violation of Section 22451, or, based on an alleged violation of Section 21453, 21455, or 22101 recorded by an automated enforcement system pursuant to Section 21455.5 or 22451, and delivered by mail within 15 days of the alleged violation to the current address of the registered owner of the vehicle on file with the department, with a certificate of mailing obtained as evidence of service, an exact and legible duplicate copy of the notice when filed with the magistrate shall constitute a complaint to which the defendant may enter a plea. Preparation and delivery of a notice to appear pursuant to this section is not an arrest."

If you are the registered owner of the car and you have reliable mail service, you can relax if a ticket is not in your mailbox by about 2-1/2 weeks from now. But if you find that you can't relax, are still worried that there might be a ticket out there, you could phone the Superior Court for the town where the camera is and ask the phone clerk if there is a ticket in your name. Just keep in mind that some courts are overloaded with these tickets, and so may not have your ticket entered into their computer until a month (or more) after the date of the violation.

If you are not the registered owner: The 15-day requirement applies only to the first mailing of the ticket, which is usually to the registered owner of the car. If he or she gave your name to the police, who then re-issued the ticket to you, the 15-day requirement does not apply.

If you did get a ticket in the mail, be sure to read Defect # 8 on the Home Page.

Answer: There's a number of them, with one partial settlement so far - but they're not a quick answer to the problem. See the information in the News section, below.

FAQ # 11: What about GPS-based warning devices? Or license plate covers, sprays, removing the front license plate, or even wearing a mask, so the camera can't get a clear photo of your plates or your face?

Answer: There is a controversy as to whether reflective sprays (illegal in California beginning Jan. 1, 2008, with a $1000 fine, under Assembly Bill 801) or covers (already illegal under CVC 5201(f)) can actually blur the photos, as claimed by their marketers. I would trust, and publish here, the results of a test conducted by a non-commercial organization having good technical credentials - but it is unlikely that Consumer Reports will ever do such a test. I haven't made any attempt to conduct a test, either. However, I can report that in my 5+ years of operating this website, I have never had someone tell me that they got a ticket despite using a spray or a cover.

A number of manufacturers are marketing GPS-based devices designed to warn you when you're approaching an intersection known to be equipped with a camera. I haven't tested one yet, but can imagine that the effectiveness of the units will depend heavily upon the manufacturer maintaining a very up-to-date data base of intersection coordinates - and users remembering to make a monthly download of the updates. If these units become popular, some states will probably ban the use of them.

Most newer camera systems take pictures of both ends of the car, so unbolting the front plate won't make a difference.

A fundamental problem with all the protective measures above is that the average person who gets a red light camera ticket is not a speeder or aggressive driver, but is older, drives at moderate speeds or with "the flow" and has a clean driving record, so has never thought he would get a camera ticket -- thus making it unlikely that he would purchase and install protective measures "just in case."

If you decide to wear a mask, be sure it doesn't cover your eyes or restrict your peripheral vision. That's unsafe, and illegal, too.

If you would like to read more about sprays and warning devices, try the "Photo Enforcement" forum in the "Other Enforcement and Countermeasures" Section at RadarDetector.net.

FAQ # 12: Is it true that a ticket never gets mailed to you in the first place if the picture of the driver is unclear?

Answer: This varies from city to city. In one local city I've seen lots of tickets where you can't tell if the image behind the windshield is a person's head, or a small evergreen shrub. And most people who get one of those, plead guilty and pay it! Either because they don't know that there has to be a picture of your face, or because they're afraid that if they go to court (assuming they can afford to post the $340 bail) and fight the ticket and lose, they'll be denied traffic school - which happens about 20% of the time in that city.
See Defect # 1 on the Home page, the Snitch Ticket section on the Your Ticket page, and the class action information in the News section, below.

Answer: In Feb. 2008 a bill to legalize them was introduced in the legislature. For info on how to help stop it, see the Hot Legislation section on the Action page. And in the meantime, there are some speed cameras already working (illegally) in California. There's a little discussion in the Humor section, below, and in the Los Angeles, MRCA, and San Jose sections on the Camera Towns page. There's a book about speed cameras, in the Speeding Ticket section, below.

FAQ # 14: I need traffic school but attended less than 18 months ago. What do I do?

Answer: You may be able to get Second Offender traffic school (see the Editorial below, and the Handling Your Ticket section on the Your Ticket page).

FAQ # 15: Why is the fine so high in California ?

Answer: When defendants raise that question in court, the judges explain that the State legislature set the fine so high (current top fine is approx. $400) in order to strongly deter drivers from running red lights. They also usually quote figures, provided by the local police, which say that accidents here are down 10 - 20% as the result of the cameras. But on the east coast, where the fines are just $50 to $75 (and the tickets do not carry a "point"), the police there have been publishing similar accident reduction figures. Evidently, at least on the east coast, a much smaller penalty has been equally effective in getting drivers to behave. Draw your own conclusion as to why, absent a greater deterrence value, California's penalty needs to be so many times harsher.

A signal control box in Tampa, Florida (which does not have red light cameras).
In Summer 2005, seventeen traffic signal control boxes were decorated in
various themes, as part of a City-run public art project.
The Treasure Chest design was sponsored by Sterling Payment Technologies, LLC.

Answer: Using Culver City and its fine of $340 (as of 2004) as an example, the City is allocated $149.94 or $151.74 (the latter figure applies if the defendant has elected to attend traffic school), out of which it pays its vendor, RedFlex, $40 per conviction, leaving $109.94 or $111.74 for the City. (In 2002 the City's share, after paying RedFlex, was $79.38.) In addition to the per-conviction payment, Culver City also pays RedFlex a monthly fee of $2347.10 for each functioning camera. The remaining $190.06 or $188.26 from each ticket goes to the State, the county, and the court system.
Note: Effective Jan. 1, 2005, the fine in LA County went up $10, so the new Culver City fine is $350. And the legislature is trying to raise fines even further - In 2005 they passed SB 57, but the governor vetoed it. (Details about SB 57 are in the Hot Legislation section on the Action page.)
Another example: The City of Costa Mesa has a very different deal with its vendor, Nestor. The vendor is paid the greater of (a) 69.5% (as of the 2002 signing of the contract, $97.50) of the fine amount allocated to the City ($137.69 at time of signing) for each ticket paid, or (b) $3336.75 monthly per camera. For more details, see Set # 8 of Costa Mesa Documents.
If you would like a more official answer, you can look at this very complex state publication.

Answer: Sorry, that hasn't happened - yet. On June 12, 2004 an LA Times story about the Costa Mesa refunds (see Costa Mesa section on the Cameras Page) mistakenly stated that there had been 2000 refunds in Culver City. The correct city where the refunds happened (actually 3018 of them) was East LA (see the East LA section on the Camera Towns page). The Times supplied their story to AP, so the incorrect story will appear in hundreds of papers worldwide, and should be a very persistent rumor.
See also FAQ # 26.

FAQ # 18: A friend pointed out to me that an article about my City states that the company operating the cameras is paid per ticket, and from what I know California lawmakers made that illegal on Jan. 1, 2004. Seems too unbelievable that such information would slip past the City. If the writer is correct, lots of tickets are going to be dismissed.

Answer: There's a loophole in the law. Reporters never seem to catch it, but cities that are operating under a contract that they signed prior to Jan. 1, 2004 may continue to pay the camera company on a per-ticket basis. They're grandfathered. The presence of the loophole caused a gold rush in late December 2003 - cities were signing contracts like crazy (and some made disadvantageous deals). See Subsection 'B' of Defect # 10 on the Home page, and the discussion of AB 1022 on the Action page.

FAQ # 19: Have red light cameras really increased the incidence of rear-enders? And is the claim that cameras decrease serious accidents valid?

Answer: It is now generally accepted that cameras do increase rear-enders. But I am a guy who has to "see it for himself." So I have begun to review 10 years of accident reports at about 20 red light camera intersections in California. Per the reports for Newport / 17th in Costa Mesa (the only intersection I have finished reviewing so far - see the Costa Mesa section on the Cameras Page), it has seen a near-doubling of rear-enders since the camera went in (my count of rear-enders there appears in the third paragraph of the letter in Set # 10 of Costa Mesa Documents).

A recent university study addressed the claimed decrease of serious accidents. It is at: http://www.ncat.edu/~traninst/Burkey%20Obeng%20Final%20Report%202002.pdf

FAQ # 20: I am looking at the photo they sent me and I don't believe the signal really is red. It looks orange!

Answer: I have noticed that the red signal light often looks very orange (or yellow) on the photos that are printed on the tickets. It happens more often in cities that use video-based ticketing (as opposed to the older 35mm "wet film" cameras). So how can you tell if it is a red, or a yellow, that you are looking at?
Most often, you can tell by the position of the light on the "backboard," the rectangle of flat black metal that surrounds most lights. If the light is near the top (or above the center) of the rectangle, it's a red. If it's in the middle, it's a yellow.
If you can't see the edges of the backboard because there is something dark in the background behind it, you may be able to use a nearby object as a reference point. For example, in the photos below, the red arrow is just above the top edge of the square white sign, and the yellow is well below that top edge. (It may be necessary to go out to the intersection, stand near where the camera is, and see what lines-up; you may want to take a small stepladder with you - but don't block the red light camera's lens with your head as you could be accused of obstructing justice.)

I used my own camera to take these photos (above) of the signal at eastbound Jefferson / Overland in Culver City; as a result, the backboard stands-out from the dark trees much more than it does on a real ticket, and the colors are truer. Here (below) is my attempt to simulate what these same photos would look like on a real ticket mailed to a motorist.

But sometimes you may be right - it really IS yellow. Look at this photo.

(For more information about the lamps, and this photo, see Defect # 7. And, for scientific information about the wavelengths of traffic light lamps - including a comparison of incandescent vs. LED, see this page.)

FAQ # 21: I heard that two men were convicted of perjury on a red light camera ticket.

Answer: That's true. During a Long Beach, California red light camera ticket trial in December 2003 the driver told the traffic court commissioner hearing the case that there had been some teenage carjackers chasing him, and that's why he ran the light. He brought along a friend who testified he had been a passenger in the car. He confirmed the driver's story. Unfortunately for the driver and "passenger," the video of the violation showed that there was no one in the passenger seat of the violator's car. The commissioner, believing he had been lied to, referred the case to the district attorney's office for criminal prosecution. In Oct. 2004, after a one-day trial where the commissioner testified against them, both men were convicted of felony perjury and were sentenced to 120 days (driver) and 90 days (passenger) in jail.

FAQ # 22: [From an Internet post -] You know, one beautiful thing about cameras, they don't care if you're an off-duty cop, (or) anything like that, everyone is equal under the law.

Answer: The post-er suggests that the cameras are democratic, that they don't "profile" - or play favorites - that they give out tickets equally to all, including the police, rich white guys, and the mayor. I think his statement is unsupportable. No city that I know of issues a ticket to 100% of the people photographed. There is a selection process, done by humans. We would hope that those technicians and officers would throw out only the photos that are too blurry, but what is to stop them from throwing out the photo of the mayor's car?

An April 2008 Orange County Register article pointed out that in California there are nearly one million private vehicles having "confidential" license plate numbers that are protected from easy or efficient look up, thus are effectively invisible to agencies attempting to process parking, toll, and red light camera violations.

On the east coast, the camera tickets do not require a close up photo of the driver. But here on the west coast, there has to be a good photo of the driver, and that photo provides additional potential for profiling. While I am not suggesting that either of the following cities profiles, their statistics demonstrate the potential to do so. For example, in 2004 San Francisco photographed 29,335 cars but issued only 7943 tickets. Los Angeles, in 2003, photographed 8678 cars but issued 3981 tickets. [The figures are from the Camera Towns page.]

Perhaps the Legislature foresaw the possibility of profiling or favoritism when they wrote the CVC 21455.5 requirement that cities shall develop "uniform guidelines for screening and issuing violations." See Defect # 10 - A on the Home page for more about guidelines.

Answer: The terms are not interchangeable. Read about them in the big green Terminology box on the Your Ticket page.

Answer: I don't think much of the speed trap defense - that they measured your speed over some loops or were using radar - against a red light camera ticket. I have never seen the simplistic "the camera uses loops, or a radar, therefore it is a speed trap" defense work, on any red light ticket. When judges hear that defense they say that they don't need the (possibly illegally-obtained) speed reading to convict you, and will ignore your speed, because they have a photo (or a video) showing your car behind the limit line when the light was red. "Truth in Evidence" (see section on this website) allows them to do such things.
In the landmark San Diego case People vs. John Allen, the judge explained why he would not accept the speed trap defense. Read that May 29, 2001 ruling here.
The speed trap defense is pushed by other Web advisors, and I realize that no matter what I say, you may decide to throw "speed trap" into your defense along with whatever other defenses you have. But please consider that the judge has probably heard the "canned" speed trap defense from many other defendants before you, and may have developed a knee-jerk reaction when he hears the familiar wording (or sees it in a TBD). So, if you are going to use this defense, and have picked-up the text somewhere on the Internet, at least change the wording some.
There is a portion of the "Speed Trap" law that could work, on a red light camera ticket. If you feel that the Posted Speed on the street where you were cited is way too low, read Defect # 3 on the Home page.
And, if you got a speeding ticket, and radar was used, you definitely want to look at the Speed Trap law. See the Speeding Ticket section near the bottom of this page.

FAQ # 25: What if I had to run the signal, because of a tailgater, road-rager, sirens, medical emergency, etcetera?

Answer: This is a legitimate defense, but doesn't work very often. It is called a "necessity defense." Vehicle Code Section 21462 says, "The driver of any vehicle... shall obey... any official traffic signal... unless otherwise directed by a police or traffic officer or when it is necessary for the purpose of avoiding a collision or in case of other emergency...."
A lot of people tell the judge that there was a siren behind them. Because they have heard it so much, the judges won't take anyone's word for it. I suggest that you try to get proof. See if the emergency vehicle or the tailgater is visible in the still photos or video of the violation. Or try to figure out what city's fire department would have been on that street (could be an ambulance from a neighboring city, heading to a hospital or regional trauma center), contact that fire department and ask for records of runs. Sometimes the color of the fire trucks will help you figure out what city they were from. Get a printout, or a letter from them. You will have a far better chance of winning than someone who brings no documentation with them.
I have seen just a few cases where a necessity defense was successful.
1. There was a police chase, and the defendant had proof (Culver City, 11-14-02).
2. A woman was being followed from a mall by people with whom she had had words (Culver City, 12-5-02).
3. The engine was sputtering / about to quit, immediately after visit to nearby car dealer's repair facility (Hawthorne, 12-14-04).
There is a discussion about necessity defense, at http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=34826 .
A famous case (although the defendant lost) is People v. Ausen, 40 Cal.App.2d Supp. 831.

FAQ # 26: I paid my ticket months ago and now I have heard that they are throwing them out.

Answer: The court is probably dismissing current tickets, either at arraignment, or at trial. Only rarely do they reach back into time and voluntarily (without you asking for it) reverse old tickets that have already been paid off. (Well-documented examples: 3018 East LA tickets in 2003, 569 Costa Mesa tickets and 613 Bakersfield tickets in 2004, and 3000 Union City tickets in 2005.)
But you could try to re-open your case, make the same argument that is getting the current tickets dismissed, and get your money back. There's a catch, though. It is harder to re-open a case once it's been closed for more than six months. Your case would have closed on the date that you turned in the traffic school certificate (or, if you did not attend TS, the date you finished paying your fine). If it has been more than six months since then, I don't even know what the re-opening process is. I just know that it is more complex. But if it has been less than six months, you make the request by filling-out a one-page form ("Bail Forfeiture Set Aside Motion to Re-open Case"), at the clerk's window.
Some more info about re-opening is on the Bakersfield Documents page, Set # 7. Note that this simple process would not apply to a case where you went to trial and were found guilty.

FAQ # 27: ( Two frequent questions about right turns! )

Question A: I got a ticket for a right turn, but there was no sign there saying I couldn't turn.

Question B: I went back to where I got my ticket and lots of cars weren't getting flashed when they cruised through the red light. Why me?

Answer A: There is no requirement to post signs at right turns saying, "Stop Before Turning," "Stop Here on Red" or something like that. See Sign Requirements (at the bottom of that page) for more details.

Answer B: To my knowledge, the red light camera makers have not devised a good way (reliable, cheap, not too technical for a judge to understand) to measure a right-turning car's speed right at the limit line. So, the camera computer doesn't know for sure if you stopped, or were doing 1 mph, or 2, or 5, and as a result has to use other information in order to make its decision to flash you, or not. What most systems do is measure your speed at a measuring point about 10 or 15 feet before the limit line, and use that speed to predict whether it is going to be physically possible for you to stop in the short amount of road remaining. More than likely, the cars that aren't getting flashed at "your" intersection are the ones that are going slower at that measuring point. Someone who cruises up slowly may not trigger the camera, even though they never come to a full stop, and might even cross the limit line at the same speed you were doing when you were ticketed.

Also, have a look at FAQs # 4 and # 30.

FAQ # 28: Can I lose my "right to a speedy trial" if I enter my not guilty plea by mail, phone, Internet, or at the clerks' window?

Answer: CVC Section 40519, the statute which permits pleading by mail, says, "Any person using this procedure shall be deemed to have waived the right to be tried within the statutory period." In Fight Your Ticket, David Brown says, "In avoiding a separate court date for arraignment, you give up your right to insist on a trial within 45 days afterward." So, my recommendation is that if you want to be 100% sure of retaining your right to speedy trial, you should enter your not guilty plea in front of a judge.

FAQ # 29: If I fight my case, won't I lose the right to attend traffic school?

Answer: Defendants who go to trial and lose can still ask for traffic school (either kind), although the granting of it after trial is at the discretion of the judge.

If the phone attendants at the courthouse or the central phone bank are telling callers that there is no traffic school after trial, call back, ask for the Senior Court Manager, and complain.
If at the beginning of the trial session the bailiff in the courtroom is telling defendants that there is no traffic school after trial, or discussing traffic school in any other way that you feel is arm-twisting or coercive, complain at the bailiff's office in the courthouse. Bailiffs should not be doing the judge's dirty work!
If at the beginning of the trial session your judge announces to everyone that there is no traffic school after trial, or indicates that while there is a chance of getting it, the chance is very, very small, do a Challenge. See the Editorial below (in box) for details.

FAQ # 30: Tonight, as I was looking for a particular business, I drove past the line on a red light camera intersection where the light was red. I stopped before the back tires went over the line and backed up but the lights all went off. I'm wondering if I'll still get a ticket and if there's a way to fight it since I didn't actually go through the intersection.

Answer: Technically it is a violation. Legally, it does not matter that you didn't intend to run the light, as "specific intent" is not required. But if the pictures show that you stopped and backed up, maybe the cop who decides which tickets get mailed out (and which ones don't) will give you a break. If he does mail you a ticket, you could phone him and see if you can convince him to withdraw it. (Before you phone him, make sure that it is not a Snitch Ticket - see the Your Ticket page.) If talking to the cop doesn't work, you could plead not guilty, go to trial, and see if the judge will give you a break.

FAQ # 31: I wanted to try to request an extension and searched online, as well as called the automated phone service - but I couldn't find my citation number. It didn't pop up! I even searched thru my driver's license, and an old ticket only came up.
Do you think that I am in the clear - that they have no record of my ticket? And that I don't have to pay for this?

Answer: I can think of two possibilities.
1. It could be a Snitch (Fake) Ticket, as described on my Your Ticket page.
2. The court could be backlogged, due to the influx of so many new (automated) tickets, and simply hasn't had a chance to get it into their computer. At least one court (see the Bakersfield Documents page, Set # 4) has publicly admitted being swamped. But the courts always seem to catch up, so I don't recommend ignoring the ticket.

You could try phoning one of the live operators, see if they can find your ticket. Or, though I haven't personally tried it, I suppose you could mail them a request for the extension. Just be sure to do it by certified mail, return receipt requested.

FAQ # 32: In the first picture (on the ticket) my front bumper is right at the limit line. Because of the angle the picture is taken from, it's possible that my bumper may have been over the limit line. So why did they ticket me?

Answer: The cameras are set up to always take the first photo with the car close to the limit line, without regard to how long the signal had been red. So, the photo you see could have been taken when the signal had been red for 0.1 second, or even 4.0 seconds. You can't tell from the photo how late you were. Most cities indicate, somewhere on the ticket, your Late Time. But a few choose not to, even though their system is capable of doing so and may have done so in the past. In those cities, you won't be able to tell how late you were unless you contact the police (they sometimes insist that you come in to view the photos), OR file a discovery which would force them to send the information to you.
See also FAQ # 8, and the big purple "How to Read Your Late Time" box in Defect # 7 on the Home page.

FAQ # 33: They have a picture of my license plates - isn't that enough to prove it was me, and convict me?

Answer: No, not in California! In this state they have to have a picture of your face. They have to convince the judge that YOU personally did the crime. Someone else could have been driving your car. See Defect # 1 on the Home page.

Answer: They are -
ACS (Affiliated Computer Services, acs-inc.com, listed on the NYSE as ACS), purchased the systems started by Lockheed. The red light camera section of their website is at http://138.69.165.3/sls/prodserv/ts.html. ACS is also discussed in Defect # 5 on the Home page.
ATS (American Traffic Solutions) is headquartered in Scottsdale, AZ (as is RedFlex).
Nestor Traffic Systems (nestor.com), of Providence, RI, acquired TranSol in Aug. 2005.
RedFlex, of Scottsdale, AZ, ( redflex.com ) is listed on Australian stock exchange as RDF. A recent Investor Briefing is here.
TranSol (Transportation Solutions) was acquired by Nestor in Aug. 2005.

Answer: Be on guard near "regional draws" such as CostCo's, other "big box" stores, auto malls, community colleges, and race tracks, between the freeway offramp and the draw - or along the route you will use when leaving the draw. The cameras will often be on right turns.

FAQ # 36: Will the officer who signed my ticket be the one who appears at my trial?

Answer: Not necessarily. It doesn't have to be the same officer.

From a ruling in the famous case that shut down San Diego's first red light camera system:
"Penal Code Section 960 provides that "no accusatory pleading is insufficient, nor can the trial, judgment, or other proceedings thereon be affected by reason of a defect or imperfection in matter of form which does not prejudice a substantial right of the defendant upon the merits." This section saves the defects relating to Penal Code section 959.1. The information presented at trial remains the same whether the accusatory pleading is sworn or not. The defendant has the opportunity at trial to respond to the evidence, and the police officer who testifies may not be the same police officer who reviewed the citation. In effect, the police officer who testifies at trial is testifying as an expert witness and interprets the factual data which is evidenced by the photographs and the digital information imposed on the photograph. Therefore, there is no prejudice to a substantial right of the defendants on the merits and any defect and failure to comply with Penal Code section 959.1 does not justify dismissal."
From Section III(C) of the Aug. 15, 2001 ruling in People vs. John Allen.

Links/Ref/FAQ Page:
- 5 -
Letters / Editorials / News / Class Actions
(Including Materials about California, Arizona, Delaware, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington DC, Washington State)

On Feb. 17 and 18, 2004, KNBC-4 Los Angeles broadcast a two-part investigation of red light cameras. They used footage from the Culver City court. A re-write of the investigation (not an actual transcript) is on the KNBC site at http://www.nbc4.tv/news/2857617/detail.html.
The investigation disclosed a wide variation between cities as to the proportion of pictures taken that actually end up as tickets sent to drivers' homes:
Beverly Hills - 20%
West Hollywood - 50%
Culver City - 85%.

A Note from a Local Citizen

Email received Mar. 18, 2003:
Great website! I have lived in Culver City for seven years and it's a mini police state. The density of photo-lights must be around ten times surrounding communities. Every major route into the city has one or more photo lights; why don't they just put up tollgates?
I think our traffic law enforcement by live officers is also 10x more intense than in Los Angeles. Citizen preferences for less or more law enforcement never come up in elections here, implicitly or explicitly, so basically not even the local electorate gets to choose our level of law enforcement, and clearly visitors from other municipalities face taxation without representation.
I got one [Culver City] photo ticket that showed me 0.1 second into the red, but when you really looked at the traffic light in the photo, the yellow was still on. I went to trial but the ticket was dismissed at the beginning of the session so I never got to argue my case. I suspect that questionable tickets are mailed out in hopes that the recipient won't recognize the deficiencies and will simply pay up. But surprisingly I triggered the camera at [a Culver City intersection] without ever receiving a ticket. In that instance traffic was fast and heavy and the light went yellow at the worst possible moment for me. I didn't dare stop behind the intersection for fear of being rear ended, so I ended up a considerable ways into the intersection. Without the camera I would have proceeded and cleared the intersection, but in this case I did not proceed in order to make it clear that I had never intended to run the light. The fact that the car behind me ended up straddling the crosswalk may have been persuasive to the person reviewing evidence, but that was pure luck. I had no way of knowing that the car behind me would actually have trouble stopping, just a hunch that he might.
I suspect automated traffic lights are only one symptom of more fundamental problems with vehicle code enforcement which are probably rooted in its potential to subsidize careers and generate revenue.
I think your suggestion that people avoid shopping in Culver City is right on target. It's only sensible to stay away from a town that basically balances its budget on the backs of unfortunate motorists, and there's an excellent chance things will change when the business establishment gets hit in the pocketbook.
[ ] = Edit to protect identity of correspondent.

Info about Arizona camera tickets can be found in the Speeding Ticket section on this page (below) and in the Mesa section on the Camera Towns page.

In Dec. 2005 the Minnesota ACLU filed suit about the Minneapolis red light camera system. In April 2007 the Minnesota Supreme Court found that the City's system was illegal. There remains the question of refunds for motorists who paid the fines. See this article.

As of early 2008, Cincinnati residents are gathering signatures on a referendum to stop the cameras. See their website.

Some Texas cities are using an imaginary limit line for their photo enforcement, with the result that many innocent motorists are getting tickets. Read about it in this article: Texas Offenses Require Imagination.

Although Judge Mathews is in Baltimore, his report should be mandatory reading for judges, mayors and police chiefs nationwide.

Baltimore Motorists Caught By Red Light Cameras

Baltimore City To Add 60 Additional Cameras
A May 2003 report by WBAL-TV11

Baltimore City has red light cameras at 47 intersections -- that's more than any other jurisdiction in Maryland. WBAL-TV 11 NEWS I-Team reporter Mindy Basara reported that some motorists are questioning whether the cameras are used to prevent accidents, or whether they're for profit.

And red light cameras irritate Baltimore City traffic court Judge Keith Mathews, too. Mathews said he has a problem with what's called the grace period -- the time from which the light turns red to when the camera fires. The grace period in Baltimore City is one-tenth of a second. So quick, Matthews said, it's catching people who don't intentionally run the light, Basara reported. "Other jurisdictions -- New York City [and] San Francisco -- have grace periods on the average of three-tenths of a second," Mathews said.

[This is an excerpt. Balance of article above is available at:
http://www.thewbalchannel.com/travelgetaways/2189015/detail.html ]

More News from Baltimore

According to this article, at an intersection where a 50-mph expressway ends, Baltimore has a camera with just a 3-second yellow. It will be interesting to find out how many tickets that camera has been generating.
This article found by a reader of this website.
This is an excerpt. The full article can be purchased at: http://www.sunspot.net/search/bal-archive-1990.htmlstory.

Bethesda's Million Dollar Camera

On June 12, 2003, CBS Evening News aired a report about a Bethesda Maryland camera that earned $1 million in 14 months because it had a 3.0 second yellow while all other (non-camera) signals on the same street were set at 4.0.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/12/eveningnews/main558431.shtml

Political Persua$ion in Pennsylvania

Here are three of the Philadelphia Daily News most recent pieces about ACS, its campaign contributions, and the competition to operate red light cameras in Philly and the State of Pennsylvania.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - the main pages - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
HOME / DEFECTS	CAMERA TOWNS	YOUR TICKET	ACTION	LINKS / REF / FAQ	SITE INDEX

AAA News Release 10/2/02

AAA News Release
10/2/02