Red light camera ticket for turning right

Fuzzbuster

Fuzzbuster

Well-known member
I was blessed recentlywith a surprise in the mail, a red light camera ticket. I was not the driver. The ticket was for making a right turn while the light was red. It shows 3 images, one before the white line, one after making the turn and one close up of the plate. It states how long the light was red in seconds, and when the vehicle entered the intersection in seconds. The images are stamped with the time in hours and minutes but not seconds.



I have several questions;

  1. How does the reviewing officer determine how long the stop was before the turn.
  2. If you request disclosure do they provide more information other than what is on the ticket?
  3. What is the required stop time at a red light before turning?


Disclaimer;

Don't bother saying simply pay the ticket. I challenge all tickets even if they are not mine. I also don't condone running red lights.
 
I suspect Sunny has it. Most people turning right on red don't come to a stop until before the curb line (which is well after the stop line).

Afaik, they don't record video just pictures but a video would be interesting here. Afaik, the camera is triggered by speed over the stop line. If you stopped 10' short of the stop line, that could satisfy the legal requirement to stop short and you may gain enough speed prior to crossing the line to trip camera. Without dash cam, I'm not sure how you would prove this. Even if you had dash cam, I'm not sure how you get it into evidence as there is no solid time correlation like a video that was continuous through the supposed infraction and police interaction. I doubt you'd see the flash if you only had a front camera. Dashcam times notoriously drift so clock time is rarely accurate.

85k100 has the correct definition. No time. Must stop.
 
It appears 1.8 seconds elapsed from the time of the first image behind the white line to mid turn. Is that the basis for the time stopped and proceeding to turn? Therefore the officer concludes that is not enough time to stop completely and proceed? Or do they try to interpret brake lights and vehicular traffic flow for timing? Basically I am looking for the actual proof or evidence to conclude there was no complete stop. If there was video it would be simple but because it is static images it is difficult. In the first image it appears there is a full and complete stop. If you go by the vehicles travelling through the intersection it appears some time elapsed during the stop. Is this a judgement call on the officers part or backed up by an actual fact.
 
Fuzzbuster said:
It appears 1.8 seconds elapsed from the time of the first image behind the white line to mid turn. Is that the basis for the time stopped and proceeding to turn? Therefore the officer concludes that is not enough time to stop completely and proceed? Or do they try to interpret brake lights and vehicular traffic flow for timing? Basically I am looking for the actual proof or evidence to conclude there was no complete stop. If there was video it would be simple but because it is static images it is difficult. In the first image it appears there is a full and complete stop. If you go by the vehicles travelling through the intersection it appears some time elapsed during the stop. Is this a judgement call on the officers part or backed up by an actual fact.
Click to expand...
According to reddit for Toronto "All cameras will take a 15 second video when the photo is taken. It is also looked over by at least 3 people before sending out the ticket."

So the video may exist which would clear up questions. I have no idea if they will provide it as part of disclosure? Hell, it should just be a hyperlink or QR code on the ticket to get to the video (but I don't think it is, I think they are annoying about it). Triggering a full court case is stupid as maybe you look at the video and say damn, I almost stopped but not quite, here's my money. There is no reason for the cloak of obscurity if they are applying the law properly.

https://www.reddit.com/r/askTO/comments/yfomz0/got_a_red_light_camera_ticket_for_turning_right
 
In this particular case I might have said pay the ticket, you rolled the stop. But I am genuinely curious about the process. I have made a conscious effort to come to a complete stop before turning right at this particular light because of a post on gtamo a few months ago about red lights. I also conveyed that information to family members that you will get a ticket possibly even if it is yellow.
 
I am very sure not on a yellow, thought I read somwehere it was calibrated for at least 1 second after the light turns red that the cam activates.

regardless, great info.

I had no idea you could get a RL ticket for turning right. Frankly, I am suprised I havent gotten one yet.
 
If one of the pics shows your feet on the road, that could be helpful in proving that you stopped.
 
85K100 said:
If one of the pics shows your feet on the road, that could be helpful in proving that you stopped.
Click to expand...
Have you watched how most harley riders ride slowly? Feet down in an image means little. If cops have a video, watching it would make it very clear what happened and the timing. If this was about education and helping people improve their driving, that information would be automatically provided so people know where they went wrong and need to improve. If it is about fundraising on the other hand, better drivers hurt revenue so the less they know the more you make.
 
If you choose option 2 which is early resolution and the matter does not get resolved, how do you then exercise your option for trial? Do I check both option 2 and 3 when I send in the form. Only asking because in the past I have only ever checked box 3. In this case I would like to talk to the prosecutor first just to see what he has to say.
 
Fuzzbuster said:
If you choose option 2 which is early resolution and the matter does not get resolved, how do you then exercise your option for trial? Do I check both option 2 and 3 when I send in the form. Only asking because in the past I have only ever checked box 3. In this case I would like to talk to the prosecutor first just to see what he has to say.
Click to expand...
I have only done early resolution once and didn't proceed to trial. IIRC there was no requirement to reach an agreement and if no agreement was reached, I could tell prosecutor I wanted to proceed to trial during the early resolution meeting. That was decades ago.
 
Fuzzbuster said:
If you choose option 2 which is early resolution and the matter does not get resolved, how do you then exercise your option for trial? Do I check both option 2 and 3 when I send in the form. Only asking because in the past I have only ever checked box 3. In this case I would like to talk to the prosecutor first just to see what he has to say.
Click to expand...
2
 
Wow, I didn't even know you could get a ticket from a camera for a right turn. Thought only for running the red light. Thanks for the heads up.

Are all red light cameras that way or just downtown?
 
Sunday Rider said:
Wow, I didn't even know you could get a ticket from a camera for a right turn. Thought only for running the red light. Thanks for the heads up.

Are all red light cameras that way or just downtown?
Click to expand...
Pretty sure all. Legally, passing the stop bar without stopping is running the red light. Whether you go straight or right (or left like a complete moron) after is immaterial.
 
GreyGhost said:
I suspect Sunny has it. Most people turning right on red don't come to a stop until before the curb line (which is well after the stop line).

Afaik, they don't record video just pictures but a video would be interesting here. Afaik, the camera is triggered by speed over the stop line. If you stopped 10' short of the stop line, that could satisfy the legal requirement to stop short and you may gain enough speed prior to crossing the line to trip camera. Without dash cam, I'm not sure how you would prove this. Even if you had dash cam, I'm not sure how you get it into evidence as there is no solid time correlation like a video that was continuous through the supposed infraction and police interaction. I doubt you'd see the flash if you only had a front camera. Dashcam times notoriously drift so clock time is rarely accurate.

85k100 has the correct definition. No time. Must stop.
Click to expand...
I just want to point out that dashcams that have GPS modules have the possibility of having GPS synchronized time. My Viofo A119 clone does this - furthermore, you can enable this without enabling other GPS functions that would record your speed (either directly or indirectly).

As to this being forensically verifiable - well, sometimes all you need to convince a JP is a strong argument.
 
I had the understanding that they tossed out red-light-camera tickets for right turns pretty much automatically due to inability for the system to prove whether you stopped or not (due to having photos but no video).

I'd file for 2 (early resolution) and see what happens. If they toss the ticket due to not being able to prove that you didn't stop (no video) you win. If it turns up in early resolution that they have video and it shows that you stopped, you win. If they have video and it shows that you didn't stop, well, that's on you. I'm pretty sure that if early resolution doesn't result in a resolution (which means, they don't have video but refuse to toss the ticket) you can still request taking it to trial.

This is what Mississauga says, but other municipalities ought to be similar.

www.mississauga.ca

Request an early resolution meeting

Meet with a prosecutor to settle a provincial offences ticket without going to Court. Request an early resolution meeting within 15 days of receiving your ticket.
www.mississauga.ca www.mississauga.ca
 
Also, if there's video, bear in mind that you have to stop before the stop line. A stop past the stop line doesn't count as a stop. Not 100% on interpretation but this probably means having any part of your vehicle past the stop line. It's unlikely that the camera is positioned to allow this to be judged definitively, but if your front wheels are visible past the stop line, that's bad.

Most drivers get this wrong. Legally, if the stop line is in a dumb place, too far back from the junction such that you can't see what's coming, you have to do the legally-required-to-fulfill-your-obligation stop before the stop line, then pull ahead for the do-what-has-to-be-done stop. Yes, it's stupid, and it means the design of the junction is wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom