In theory, I’m not opposed to the installation of red light cameras. We have some pretty dangerous intersections down in my South Seattle neighborhood, and anecdotally, I’m pretty sure drivers started erring on the side of caution when a red light camera was installed at Rainier and Orca. But I was pretty damn surprised to find a notice of infraction in my mail, as I tend to be a cautious driver.
The top photo shows my car in the foreground, edging into a cross walk at yellow light. The second photo shows a red light with the tail of my car just barely in the right hand edge of the frame, after having made a right turn. Interestingly, while the top photo clearly shows a yellow light, the text at the top indicates that the light has already been red for 0.1 seconds, suggesting some sort of timing problem with equipment.
The infraction notice states:
“The photographs and video recording taken together show that … the vehicle operator was facing a steady circular red signal when the operator failed to stop the vehicle at clearly marked stop line or other stopping point described in the ordinance.”
I haven’t been able to view the video on the web site yet, as it doesn’t seem to work on my Mac, so I’m not sure at what point the light turned from yellow to red, though legally, I’m not sure if it matters. It’s hard to believe that an officer would ever have pulled me over for taking a right on a stale yellow… but then I’m a guy whose only two previous traffic tickets in thirty years of driving were for going 61 in a 55 on the New Jersey Turnpike, and for going 38 in a 30 at 5am on an empty Rainier Ave., on the way to the airport to fly home for my father’s funeral… so shit like this tends to stick to me.
In any case, I’d love the advice of folks more expert at these issues. Is this really hard evidence of a violation? And if not, should I request a mitigation hearing or a hearing to contest the infraction? (The infraction notice does a crappy job of explaining the difference.)
UPDATE:
I finally got to see the video and it clearly shows the light yellow at the time I enter the intersection, but turning red while my car is still in it making a right turn. So from what I understand, I guess technically, that’s a violation, if only by a split second.
Again, I’m not opposed to Red Light Cameras, as I believe they’ve proven to be effective traffic safety tools, but I hope city officials understand how frustrating they can be. Drivers make judgment calls all the time, whether to stop or continue at a yellow light based on speed, road conditions, other vehicles, etc—for example, continuing through a stale yellow on an icy street can be safer than applying the breaks.
Likewise, officers make subjective calls all the time as to whether to pull a vehicle over, or issue a warning instead of a ticket. Viewing the video, I was not driving unsafely. There were no pedestrians near the crosswalk, I was driving at a safe speed (ironically, had I sped up, I would have avoided the ticket), and I didn’t interfere with the cars that had the left arrow. As I wrote previously, I doubt an officer at the scene would have pulled me over.
And that’s part of the frustration about the cameras… there’s nothing subjective about them. Being a half-second too slow just cost me $124.00, and didn’t make the streets any safer. So while I disagree with those who characterize red light cameras as cynical revenue tools, from personal experience, I certainly can empathize with the sentiment.
It’s illegal to proceed on a yellow light. But you can make the ticket go away, retain a clean driving record, and avoid higher insurance premiums by going to a “mitigation hearing” before a magistrate, at which you don’t contest the ticket (you’re essentially pleading guilty to the infraction) but you do beg for mercy based on your overall driving record and a willingness to admit the error of your ways. You’ll have to pay a fine, but if you don’t re-offend within a stated amount of time, the infraction will be wiped off your record. The magistrate, at his discretion, may require you to go to a special driving school. These were one-day affairs held on Saturdays that I referred to as “attitude adjustment seminars” back when I attended them.
Red light camera infractions are treated as parking tickets, and do not go on your record. So it’s really only the $124 fine at stake here.
The thing that irritates me (other than the money) is the infraction notice stating that “the vehicle operator was facing a steady circular red signal when the operator failed to stop.” The photos do not show that.
Goldy,
RR ploy the honest approach. However, a moving violation can only be issued to the driver and not the vehicle, whereas a parking ticket is issued to the vehicle and as the owner you have to pay.
I’m guessing you didn’t commit that infraction and it may have been one of the three people you let borrow your car that day.
All you have to do is appear in court, state that you weren’t the driver and the judge let’s you off the hook instead of going to trial.
Pretty sweet, huh?
In fact, the judge will summarily dismiss a bunch of drivers at the start of the traffic court based on this.
Don’t be a fool, Goldy. Remember the burden of proof lies on the government. The standard of that burden is no different than if this was a murder trial.
Enter a Not Guilty pleas and force the government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt you were the driver.
GBS @3,
My question is whether this is proof of an infraction, not how to get out of paying the fine if it is.
I’ll pay the fine if I’m guilty as charged. Though not happily.
A) You should be happy that your government is babysitting you and looking out for your safety. You should pay the ticket and be happy….and don’t be such a scofflaw next time.
B) You should be concerned that the unblinking camera upends our long-time principle of innocent until proven guilty and makes you, in fact, proved the unblinking machine was wrong…or that the operators that set it up were wrong.
C) You should be upset that the success of this business model (probably Redflex) includes in it the assumption that most won’t bother fighting these tickets because of the inconvenience. And the legislation that enabled it (courtesy of Redflex lobbyists by the way) also set up the system to be biased against the accused.
D) For the more extreme tinfoil hat wearers…..it’s 1984. ;)
For me..yet another reason to not visit Seattle and risk the heavy hand of government looking for the easiest, most convenient, and most impersonal way of encouraging law compliance. That and I don’t want to risk feeding money to the beast.
Matty, no one here will miss you.
What’s a “stale yellow”?
Redlight cameras are not about making the streets safe, it’s about raising revenue.
Do your civic duty and pay the fine so poor kids won’t go hungry.
Goldy,
Well, then, you’re going to have to read the RCW governing your infraction that is stated on your citation and make that determination yourself.
If the “phase R” means the light was red, then clearly you entered the intersection while the light was red.
But, there is one important piece of evidence missing from the picture – the red light you were facing.
The light for the traffic you were turning in front of appears to be red. If your light was red, shouldn’t this one be green?
@5 And rural communities are better than Seattle? Small town cops don’t write chippy tickets to tourists and city slickers to raise money for the mayor? C’mon …
@8 No, they’re about making the streets safe. Go to Lynnwood or Federal Way sometime and watch how people drive there and you’ll see why they installed cameras.
It’s always worthwhile going to court and explaining the circumstances. I guarantee the magistrate will chop the fine in half and offer to suspend the conviction if you don’t do anything bad for 6 months.
.
RCW 46.61.055(2)(a)allows you to enter the intersection on a yellow light if you make it before the light turns red. The yellow light is a warning that if you do not make it to the intersection before the light turns red, then you will violate the law and it would be best to bring your vehicle to a stop and not take the chance the light will turn red before you get to the intersection.
Although the former statute upon which the case is based differs from RCW 46.61.055, Byrnes v. Andrews,73 Wn.2d 108,110-13 (1968) explicitly states a driver who has entered the intersection on a yellow light is “rightfully within the intersection at the time the light turned red…”
I am unfamiliar with how the district and municipal courts handle diversion in Seattle/King County but I am sure there is something along the lines Roger Rabbit mentions in which case you should check the mitigation box is that is the route you wish to take. Otherwise check the contested box.
I strongly disagree with GBS’ advice on being anything but absolutely truthful when you testify under oath. However it is the government’s burden of proving you were the driver of the car in the photograph (unless there is some red light camera statute that says otherwise)and if you do not testify and there is no evidence you were driving the car (being the registered or legal owner may be enough to prove this element of the infraction)you should request the court dismiss the ticket at the end of the government’s case. Since this is an infraction and not a criminal offense, the burden of proof is the preponderance of evidence, not guilt beyond a reaonable doubt.
Good luck!
Roger,
I’m not sure you are correct that “It’s illegal to proceed on a yellow light”. There is a very specific paragraph in the RCWs addressing what constitutes illegally entering an intersection.
I had a parking violation once at Pike PLace. I did not realize I was illegally parked because it was angle parking and my slot overlapped with the NOP sign.
After a large amount of effort .. using my view camera , different perspectives et al, I went to court to contest the case, arguing that I had no reason to think that I was illegally parked.
I sat through a long series of other cases .. all of whom seem to have been arrested for carryong GVM (green veg. matter), In each case the judge would get angry at the cop and DA since the state lab was way behind on determining whether the GVM was oregano or something else.
When my time came, the judge took one look at me walking up with my poster boards of “evidence,” asked what the hell was I doing here and dismissed the case.
GBS @9,
The higher resolution photo on the website clearly shows the light facing me as yellow at the time I enter the intersection.
That said, I finally loaded Parallels and watched the video, and the light clearly turns red before I’ve completed my turn and exited the intersection, so I guess technically, it was an infraction after all, if only by a split second.
My sense is that the photos would not be enough to convict me, especially given the timing problem (they record a red light when it is clearly still yellow), but the video would.
Goldy, in re my post.
The first image seems to me to show a “walk” symbol, not a yellow signal. That could be an issue.
OTOH, I think there is a perspective issue here as it is not clear that you are edging into the cross walk. Also, the image, depending on the shutter time, can be used to derive speed and it looks like you were actually stopped. Also it looks as if your brake lights are on.
The follow on image is more worrisome as it seems to show you proceeded forward through a red light.
I don’t know the law…
but because you didn’t stop, the car across the street had to delay his/her left turn (they were in the intersection when the light changed). So, bad manners if nothing else.
That light sure does look yellow on the top pic, even though it says phase = R(red?) for a 10th of second.
Red light cameras are a revenue tool…..noting more. The fine is low enough that if you have to be at work the pain of going to court is not worth it financially.
Last parking ticket i got I came out while being writen up. The lines were not clear (almost non existent) so I made the meter maid’s life miserable by taking “evidence” pictures making sure she was in them. Methinks this was another great revenue source for the city. The fine wasn’t worth going to court over.
I also will not shop at that bicycle shop in Seattle any more. Mayor Nickels, I will take my business elsewhere, thank you.
I thought Goldy was for more local and state revenue?
Do you mean “how they USED to drive there?”
Matty @5,
My first ticket ever was for driving 61 in a 55 zone on the New Jersey Turnpike, and I was pulled over despite being far from the fastest car on the road. The truth is, I was really pulled over for driving a brightly colored rental car on Thanksgiving weekend through Carteret NJ.
Although I had moved to Seattle the year before, I still had my Pennsylvania drivers license, and you should have seen the look of disappointment on the officer’s face. PA and NY have reciprocity with NJ, and so I could just take my ticket and be on my way. But had I had a WA license, I would have been required to follow the officer into town and pay the ticket in person, plus an additional court fee.
Now that’s a small town speed trap, whose only purpose is to generate revenue.
In the first place, why are you driving? Why aren’t you walking, cycling, or using mass transit?
@24: Okay, that was funny.
Goldy, the police have a lot of discretion over whether to ticket someone who is at an intersection and turning left as the light is turning. I don’t think, if the move was otherwise safe, that you would have been ticketed in the circumstances described here. I think you should contest the fine.
Not anything official, but the PI’s 911 blog had a question about this:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seat.....151729.asp
“It isn’t illegal to be in the intersection when the light is yellow.
The yellow light is a warning light to inform drivers that the light will be turning red and to prepare to stop.
If a driver has already entered the intersection when the light changes red then they can clear the intersection.”
Fight it Goldy. I just beat one last week. Granted the ticket won’t affect your insurance, but people who pay these exacerbate the problem of police issuing ridiculous tickets.
Or better yet, start a citizen initiative to ban these cameras.
HAHAHAHA!
Goldy is always saying, “The state needs more revenue!” “We need an income tax!”
Now, when faced with the chance to give government more revenue out of his own pocket, what does he do?
HAHAHAHAHA!
Goldy @ 23
Although I had moved to Seattle the year before, I still had my Pennsylvania drivers license,
Sounds like a crime to me! At least for all those times you were driving in Washington without a valid Washington driver’s license:
RCW 46.20.021
New residents.
(1) New Washington residents must obtain a valid Washington driver’s license within thirty days from the date they become residents.
RCW 46.20.005
Driving without a license — Misdemeanor, when.
Except as expressly exempted by this chapter, it is a misdemeanor for a person to drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state without a valid driver’s license issued to Washington residents under this chapter.
Quoting from the law:
(2) Steady yellow indication
(a) Vehicle operators facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal are thereby warned that the related green movement is being terminated or that a red indication will be exhibited immediately thereafter when vehicular traffic shall not enter the intersection.
Where does this say you have to clear the intersection before the light turns red? The grammar isn’t great, but I think the “when vehicular traffic shall not enter the intersection” applies to a red not yellow indication.
I try my best to be just like I am.
I believe those RCWs are in effect for Seattle and King Co. as well.
With a picture of you entering the intersection while light is yellow, I would FIGHT it.
I got one but the picture showed red at the point of me entering the intersection so I paid, but I would have gone to a hearing if it had been yellow.
@15 I accept the correction.
@19 Is Goldy’s car the one making the left turn?
@20 So if you don’t like the mayor, you’re going to take it out on some poor bicycle shop owner?
@22 Something like that.
Go for mitigation. Not big-ass diversion, etc … just mitigation. Might save you $120 or thereabouts.
@29 He wouldn’t necessarily be a Washington resident if he was here temporarily and maintained a domicile in Pennsylvania. RCW 46.20.021 also says:
“…
(3) For the purposes of obtaining a valid driver’s license, a resident is a person who manifests an intent to live or be located in this state on more than a temporary or transient basis. Evidence of residency includes but is not limited to:
(a) Becoming a registered voter in this state; or
(b) Receiving benefits under one of the Washington public assistance programs; or
(c) Declaring residency for the purpose of obtaining a state license or tuition fees at resident rates.”
Granted, a year is a long time to be a “transient” but that’s possible if, for example, he came here on a temporary work assignment or without the intention of staying.
bicycle. like 24 said.
Goldy: “I’m for everyone else paying more to the government, except myself.”
HAHAHAHA!
Goldy’s original post says his car was in the “foreground” and his update says he was making a “right turn.”
I haven’t seen the video, but I’m guessing the oncoming car making the left turn entered the intersection on green, then had to wait for other traffic to clear the intersection and couldn’t complete the turn until after the light turned red.
If so, Goldy would have right of way over that vehicle if Goldy entered the intersection on green or yellow, regardless of whether Goldy went straight or turned.
If the light turned red before Goldy entered the intersection, he could legally turn right on red, provided he came to a stop and …
“RCW 46.61.055(3)(a) Vehicle operators planning to make such turns shall remain stopped to allow other vehicles lawfully within or approaching the intersection control area to complete their movements.”
But wait! If he was ticketed for failing to yield to the left-turning vehicle, doesn’t that ticket have to be issued by a cop? RCW 46.63.170(1)(a) says traffic safety cameras may only be used to “detect stoplight, railroad crossing, or school speed zone violations.”
Does anyone review the photos and/or videos before tickets are mailed? If not, how can the cameras tell the difference between a car running a red light, and one making a legal right-turn-on-red? If so, did someone decide to ticket Goldy because the left-turning vehicle had the right of way? Maybe it could be contested on that ground. Imagine Goldy going before a judge and saying, “Your Honor, it’s not fair to fine me for a failure to yield that I got away with because there was no cop there to write a ticket.”
@39 You should get a ticket for existing. You’re wasting oxygen.
@17
No, actually Washington isn’t a state that you need to be “clear” of the intersection when it’s red….yet anyway. You just have entered the intersection before it’s red.
Unless, WA has changed that law this year or somehow local jurisdiction is more stringent…you could get off.
@10 Dunno how this is a rural urban thing, but I thought you’d realize the urge for johnny law to write tickets to enhance local revenue is largely a myth. It gets divvied up into so many state pies and so little returns to the local level that there’s fairly little incentive for them to just write tickets.
Red light tickets though are totally different. Other than the big slice to Redflex…the remainder tends to stay local.
@6 Nobody would miss you or RR, but you’re still here. Glad to have hit a nerve though. ;)
The most insideous deal about the fines are that they do not appear on one’s driving record; with that there are three outcomes: pay the $124, and not miss a day’s work (average is probabaly about that amount take-home); take a day off and pay half in mitigation, losing out on a days wages and still paying’ or, take a day off, and still pay the whole thing…
Most people will choose the easy route, and just eat the $124 and have a nice day.
This is the best revenue generating scam the city has come up with since the mandatory impound ordinance (a la Sidran). Bullshit.
Roger Rabbit Poll
If Roger Rabbit wasn’t here …
A. [ ] I would miss him.
B. [ ] Good riddance!
Well hardy-har-har. Isn’t that nice? Too bad there’s not an RCW outlawing bald-headed sexually deprived pricks driving piece of shit Nissans on a public right of way.
‘44. Roger Rabbit spews:
Roger Rabbit Poll
If Roger Rabbit wasn’t here …
A. [ ] I would miss him.
B. [ ] Good riddance!-‘
B.
Also, adding:
C: The world is now a much better place.
D: Mark1 will piss on his grave.
This is actually pretty outrageous. It appears extremely clear that Goldy did not violate the red light law. The light is clearly YELLOW when Goldy entered the intersection zone at 07:44:01.0 in the upper picture. While the light turned RED by the time Goldy left the intersection zone at 07:44:02.7 in the lower picture, what appears to matter is the light color YELLOW at the time of entry.
Moreover, Goldy says that the light would have still be YELLOW if he had left the intersection zone half a second earlier. So this would be 07:44:02.2 when the light changed from YELLOW to RED.
Under RCW 46.63.170(1)(d), Goldy’s ticket had to be issued by a law enforcement officer (i.e. City of Seattle police officer) after reviewing the video of the incident.
So it is pretty obvious that the police officer was either a liar or incompetent. The officer’s declaration under penalty of perjury states that the light was RED when Goldy entered the intersection. Instead, the light was YELLOW — as shown on the upper frame entrance picture CHOSEN by the police officer. And if my reading of Goldy’s math is correct, the light remained YELLOW for another 1.2 seconds or so after the upper frame intersection entrance picture was taken.
In any event, the name of the City of Seattle police officer should be readily available on Goldy’s citation. Even if it just has an initial and last name, there are a number of databases on which the officer’s full name can be established.
Goldy should put all this evidence together, including the citation and the video. The police officer in question clearly made a false statement under penalty of perjury. Most likely, the timing mechanism was off, and the police officer carelessly and foolishly signed off on some obviously incorrect pictures. In any event, the police officer had a photograph clearly showing a yellow light, and signed a declaration stating that the light was red.
This information should be given the the Seattle City Attorney, King County Prosecuting Attorney, and all the public defender agencies.
That way, if the police officer who falsely cited Goldy is ever a witness in any future criminal prosecution (i.e. whenever ANYONE else is prosecuted as a result of the officer), the defense attorney will be able to impeach the credibility of the officer by showing that the officer made a false statement under penalty of perjury, stating that light was red, when it was clearly yellow.
Moreover, the prosecuting attorney, if made aware of the officer telling a false statement under oath, would be obligated to provide the defense attorney with this impeachment information in any future criminal prosecution where this police officer is a witness.
A. [X] I would miss him.
I’m opposed to the robot enforcement. It’s true people run red lights and those are the most dangerous IMO. However, there is no accuser to face. By the time the ticket arrives, the recollection is usually forgotten, traffic conditions, the car ahead or behind you.
I got a photo radar in Portland recently (3 lane road) and frankly it’s your word against theirs. I have no way to know if the radar was functioning properly, (did the officer snap two cars at the same time?) I pleaded no contest and got the fine reduced but will have to see if it shows up later on my record or insurance. I’ll take the red light camera over the radar since it shows more detail according to your post, but the photo radar is a star chamber if there ever as one.
@46 “Mark1 will piss on his grave.”
I sure hope so, because I’m gonna have my grave hotwired. Boy are you gonna get a surprise!
@47 We need a new mayor to clean up the police corruption in this town.
@49 Awwww … I didn’t know you cared! So, in these tough times, you’re trying to save money on rabbit silhouette targets?
Goldy –
The law at “appsDotleg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.055” states:
“(2) Steady yellow indication
(a) Vehicle operators facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal are thereby warned that the related green movement is being terminated or that a red indication will be exhibited immediately thereafter when vehicular traffic shall not enter the intersection…..
(3) Steady red indication
(a) Vehicle operators facing a steady circular red signal alone shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection control area and shall remain standing until an indication to proceed is shown.”
The Drivers Guide at “wwwDotdol.wa.gov/driverslicense/driverguide.pdf” states:
“A steady yellow traffic light means the traffic light is about to change to red. You must stop if it is safe to do so.”
“A steady red traffic light means stop. You must wait until the traffic light turns green and there is no crossing traffic before you may move ahead. If you are turning right, you may turn after coming to a full stop if it is safe and if there is no sign prohibiting the turn on a red light.”
So the light was Red and still momentarily showed Yellow which means you should have stopped. I have seen many drivers in a rush just ignore the Yellow and/or Red and proceed with their Right Hand turn because the intersection is empty at that moment even though your second picture does show a car in the intersection proceeding to make a left turn.
Enjoy paying your $124!!
FWIW:
Teresa says to ask Richard Pope, very nicely, to handle this for you. He has it nailed.
Contest the ticket, show the judge/commissioner/magistrate the photo with the yellow light clearly visible. At the point the yellow light is on negates the rest of the video evidence. You have super-slow-mo clearly showing you were not in violation.
If the judge/commissioner/magistrate upholds the ticket (highly unlikely according to my brilliant wife) you will have a wonderful case for appeal and there are many attorneys (Richard Pope, are you listening) in WA who would love to take this case just to, and I quote “stick it to the man”. LOL
I gotta go, when Teresa goes all rebel like that she is just too hot…..
Sure looks like you’re making a LEFT turn.
I’m not a lawyer, but I’m pretty sure that the Driver’s Guide has no weight here; the RCW defines the law. The Driver’s Guide merely teaches safe driving practices. Conceivably an officer could write a ticket for reckless driving if those practices were violated, but (a) I would be astonished to see that for something as clear-cut legal as entering an intersection on a yellow light, and (b) they ccertainly couldn’t do that based on a photo.
As far as I know, you should not have received a ticket for entering an intersection on a yellow. The last time I read the RCW’s, there are exactly two cases for not entering a light-controlled intersection:
* The light controlling your lane is red
* You cannot safely clear the intersection
All other times, including the amber light, you are free to enter the intersection if you can do so safely and go through it in a timely manner.
This is a bullshit ticket, and the exact reason that red light cameras should not be allowed in the State of Washington. They violate the State constitution which states that an officer of the law must give you a ticket in person. This is the reason it is not classified as a moving violation.
You entered the intersection on a yellow light. End of story, you drove legally.
Dan@58 wrote: “exactly two cases for not entering a light-controlled intersection … You cannot safely clear the intersection”
That’s nearly the rule. You can’t enter an intersection if there isn’t space to clear it. However, you can enter to make a left turn even if you have to wait (sometimes till the light turns red)to complete your turn.
In any case, as you note, none of this applied to Goldy.
Pay up Soldier Goldy, they need your $$$ more than ever.
I no longer spend a dime in any town that deploys Red Light Cameras.
It’s much easier to shop or barter online where sales tax free sites flourish, and where red light Camera’s have actually been banned for good (Craigslist).
I can hardly wait to see the loss of revenue to Seattle when the Tolls hit 520 and I90.
Watch the eastside shop and eat in their own towns.
Seattle will soon be the designed wasteland it was destined to be.
Having recently had a speeding camera ticket dismissed I have a little experiance about these things.
First of all, #3 GBS is only partially right. The law says the onus is on the car owner to prove he was not driving the car. This requires that the car owner furnish the name, birthdate and drivers license number of the person who was driving the car. Otherwise, the law says, the car owner is presumed to be guilty. (To my way of thinking this is turning the presumtion of innocence upside down, but that is a matter for a different discussion.)
What I did was take documentation from the auto repair shop to a mitigation hearing. My documentation showed that my car was in the shop on the morning of the ticket, along with a letter from the manager of the shop stating that the car was in the control of the shop at that time. The judge looked at my documentation and dismissed the ticket.
I suggest scheduling a mitigation hearing if you have a good case because then you don’t need to wait while the judge hears a bunch of other cases. You merely go to the courthouse a few minutes before your scheduled appointment, it will take only a few minutes and then you leave. If you don’t like the results of the hearing, you can then take it to court.
It appears from your photos, Goldy, that the stop light camera’s case is pretty weak. You can’t lose by scheduling a mitigation hearing.
It still appears to me that both the red and yellow light are on in the first frame.
Regardless of when the light changed and where you were, and what the RCW states, I don’t understand why you got a ticket. Even if the light were red, aren’t you able to make a free right at this intersection, providing you stopped and checked traffic before proceeding?