Running a red light ticket (Fairfax: lawyer, school, university)

[abcd12345]

I got a ticket in mail saying I crossed a red light at Fairfax (near the regional library in University Dr & North St).

OK, I was turning right in the University Dr from the North St to the library in the red and there is a sign saying No turn on red when pedestrians are present. It was 7:30 on Sunday morning and there was no one, so I turned right (I was going at around 14 MPH and I might not have stopped or paused) and under the speed limit.

Would this be considered as running a red light. The photo also shows that I am turning right.

Any help appreciated. Thanks.

[tgbwc]

You were going 14mph when you went through the red? (I was going at around 14 MPH and I might not have stopped or paused) and under the speed limit.) Unless you were under the speed limit at zero mph, then I guess you ran the red light.

[abcd12345]

Thanks for the reply, but I was turning right (not going straight or crossing the signal) and it was "no turn on red when pedestrians are present" sign, so it was not just "no turn on red" sign (isn't it a free right turn then?).

Thanks again.

[Flamingo13]

If you are able to turn (no restrictions, etc.), you must ALWAYS STOP at the red light first.

[South Jersey Styx]

When there's a red light you have to come to a COMPLETE STOP. Look both ways (yawn) and then proceed.

You can't go rolling through a red light, either straight across OR turning red.

If it were me, I'd pay the ticket and chalk it up as a lesson learned.Good luck with everything.

[Phyxius]

You could argue about the sign but technically you ran the red light. As others have said, you have to come to a complete stop approaching a red light.

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by Phyxius

You could argue about the sign but technically you ran the red light. As others have said, you have to come to a complete stop approaching a red light.

Ok I will try one more time and take all the flack I am going to get with this advice , But country to wha the lawyers and others say here you can fight it in the following manner. First you need to know that in most states the cameras are operated by a private company( this has been prov en in many courts to be illegal ) Only a certified police officer can enforce traffic laws . next although a police officer reviews the photos, he is not the one ( in reality ) that saw you go through the Red Light, therefore your accuser is the camera. Now when you go to court for your arreignment if you know your constitutional right ( your right to face your accuser, the camera) and also your right to a "VERIFIED COMPLAINT". PLs take the time to lookup what is a Verified complaint, you will be surprised. Its a signed complaint signed by the injured party ( the camera ) and stating what its injury is , additionally it has to be signed by the injured person in front of a NOTARY with the notary seal and signature. Thats the law and the courts rules and more importantly its your Constitutional rights. And if the Judge dosen't under stand and provide you with this document then he has in fact violated your rights to due process under U.S. Title 42, 1983. Now some here have in the past stated that this title 42 action wasn't made and can not be used on a traffic ticket and they are partially right, the verified complaint is the action the courts can't provide once it has been demanded, and you must demand it at your arreignment One last question , When was the last time you were in a court and asked a camera any questions , more importantly when did you get an answer from a camera, ( a mechanical devise) . Now I will admit I am not a lawyer, I haven't been brained washed into thinking that as long as you sware in an oath to uphold the constitution of the United States Its ok to ignor the most important part , your right do due process, and to face your accuser in a legal maner. But the fact is that there are hundreds of people getting their tickets dismissed using this process by only excersizing you rights. Look at your notice , see where they want you to send the payment in most cases its to the company that operated the cameras, the cities only get a small % of the tickets. before someone ask's why then don't lawyer make millions doing this process, well the fact is that many do somthing like this to get the tickets dismissed , while others who have an unritten contract to make money for the court, after all lawyers are taught to follow the rules of the courts , are they not?.

[Bigfoot424]

Fighter. Your posts are way too hard to read. Slow down. Use spell check. Create some paragraphs. And get your facts in order as you give some pretty bad advice.

[Carlingtonian]

Originally Posted by Fighter 1

Now I will admit I am not a lawyer...

Thank God.

[Fighter 1]

Originally Posted by Bigfoot424

Fighter. Your posts are way too hard to read. Slow down. Use spell check. Create some paragraphs. And get your facts in order as you give some pretty bad advice.

Whoops !, another school teacher. I just love it when people say the post is hard to read? facts are facts !. I guess if you can't read it , then you wouldn't understand what your rights are.

Then again, maybe some people just like to argue.

Many people that have not been afraid to try this defense in court have had their cases dismissed. Yea some times like many people on this site a word gets spelled wrong , no big deal, I didn't know we were going to be graded in that area. As to bad advice ? have you tried it?

Sorry next time I will try to keep it to ONE LINERS so you can follow more easily.