Red Light Camera Question

[nobb]

Hi guys. I just wanted to get your experiences with red light camera tickets and contesting them.

I got a red light ticket from the automated camera for failing to stop (icy road). HOWEVER, I did not run the intersection. I stopped maybe 1/3 into the intersection, reversed, and went back to the line. The camera still flashed and I got a ticket in the mail.

From the City of Calgary website:
http://www.calgary.ca/cps/Pages/Traffic/Speed-on-green-and-red-light-cameras.aspx

"Question: What if I stop part way into the intersection?"
"Answer: If you do not proceed through the entire intersection on a red light you will not receive an offence notice for a red light violation."

So from these grounds, it should be an easy fight to get the ticket thrown out right? The picture does clearly show my brake light on, but I am not sure if they would have video records showing that I did stop and reverse back to the stop line.

Thoughts? Anyone have a similar case?

[danno]

they do not record video. it takes two pictures. i'm not sure how to prove you didn't go threw. good luck in fighting it.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Couldn't everyone just use that defense? I think it would be difficult to prove you didn't go through the intersection.

My understanding is they get a photo of you before and inside the intersection. If the second photo is supposed to be of your car on the other side of the intersection, then I don't know how you got the ticket.

[Xtrema]

It's been awhile since I got one, isn't there a speed reading as well on the ticket/photo?

[Go4Long]

So your argument is that it's totally fine to just go part way in to the intersection on a red light and then back up?

Is this like a just the tip argument with a girl?

You entered the intersection on a red light, that's why the camera flashed, if you were driving too fast on an icy road and couldn't stop when the camera flashed then you were driving too fast for the conditions.

That being said you could probably argue it down a bit with the crown, who knows. I also thought the second picture was supposed to be you on the far side of the intersection.

[lilmira]

So I'm speeding, if I drive back to my point of origin, then my net distance traveled is zero, wait a minute........ :D

[revelations]

If the speed shown in the picture is 5-10kph, then its pretty obvious to a JP that you werent driving through and that your story of reversing is credible.

[FraserB]

Hopefully they decide to give you a ticket for going too fast for conditions after you admit to it. How can you think that the excuse for one violation is the fact you were committing another?

[nobb]

Originally posted by FraserB
Hopefully they decide to give you a ticket for going too fast for conditions after you admit to it. How can you think that the excuse for one violation is the fact you were committing another?

I was literally only <1/3 into the intersection when I stopped. Are you telling me youve never misjudged the conditions slightly and failed to stop?

Just called the traffic unit and got confirmation that this type of infraction does not count....but I still have to go to court to contest it :(

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by nobb

So from these grounds, it should be an easy fight to get the ticket thrown out right? The picture does clearly show my brake light on, but I am not sure if they would have video records showing that I did stop and reverse back to the stop line.

Thoughts? Anyone have a similar case?


It'll get tossed. When the second photo is taken, if you actually went through the light, you would be much further into the intersection, unless you were literally half way in it when you stopped and reversed.

These photo's are supposed to be screened for just such reasons, but lots of them still get sent out.

[dirtsniffer]

The speed should be low on the first picture and even lower on the second.

Ticket will probably get thrown out, just plead not guilty.

[nobb]

Just called another number that the ticket office suggested of a constaple for the unit and the ticket was thrown out over the phone...no court appearance required :clap:

For future reference, the red light tickets dont count if you didnt run the red light. Also the speed shown on the two pictures is an average and not instantaneous at each frame...so it is not representative of whether the vehicle was accelerating or braking at the time of the picture.

[dirtsniffer]

good to know. I'm surprised you didn't tell all the neigh sayers in the thread to suck it.

I know I would have.

[01RedDX]

.

[clem24]

Post the photos.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by nobb
[B]

I was literally only &lt;1/3 into the intersection when I stopped. Are you telling me youve never misjudged the conditions slightly and failed to stop?

No, never gone through a red light or into an intersection because I was not driving to conditions.

[dexlargo]

Originally posted by dirtsniffer
The speed should be low on the first picture and even lower on the second.



Originally posted by nobb
Also the speed shown on the two pictures is an average and not instantaneous at each frame...so it is not representative of whether the vehicle was accelerating or braking at the time of the picture.
My understanding is that your speed is recorded only once as you pass over the loops embedded under the roadway just prior to entering the intersection. This will be your speed at the time of the first picture being taken. Both pictures are always stamped with the same speed because there is only the one reading taken, so it's not an average.

What speed was recorded on the photos?

[lilmira]

No harm no foul, consider this a x'mas present. A lot worse than a ticket could have happened failing to stop.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by dirtsniffer
good to know. I'm surprised you didn't tell all the neigh sayers in the thread to suck it.

I know I would have.

No kidding.

City of Calgary: "If you didn't go through the entire intersection, it's not a valid ticket."

Beyond: "OMG YES IT IS A TICKET YOU PROBABLY EAT BABIES WHEN YOU'RE NOT BUSY RUNNING RED LIGHTS"

[nobb]

Originally posted by dexlargo




My understanding is that your speed is recorded only once as you pass over the loops embedded under the roadway just prior to entering the intersection. This will be your speed at the time of the first picture being taken. Both pictures are always stamped with the same speed because there is only the one reading taken, so it's not an average.

What speed was recorded on the photos?

Oops my previous comment was incorrect. You are right, they use loop sensors under the pavement to measure your speed at the time of entering the intersection.

My picture showed a speed of 20km/h...however...I also calculated that my average speed was 2 km/h between the two pictures (based on time between pictures and the distance travelled). I could use this to argue that I had stopped by the time the second picture was taken, or was decelerating quickly. Physics ftw!

[Nitro5]

Originally posted by nobb


I was literally only &lt;1/3 into the intersection when I stopped. Are you telling me youve never misjudged the conditions slightly and failed to stop?

Just called the traffic unit and got confirmation that this type of infraction does not count....but I still have to go to court to contest it :(

So if you had hit a car or pedestrian in that 1/3 you wouldn't be charged for running the red light?

[01RedDX]

.

[Mitsu3000gt]

You need to be EXTREMELY slow and late through an intersection for the other side to get a green. There is often 3-5 full seconds of delay after the light goes red before the other side gets green. If the other side gets a green when you enter the intersection, you are straight up running a solid red, well after it turned red. I think that is very uncommon except for drunks or people who are fully retarded/not paying attention.