Stoplight Camera - 3 Questions

[Entre Nous]

I not sure I exactly have all the correct info on this, but I promised I'd ask. This happened to someone I know. Really.

His girlfriend borrowed his car, ran a stoplight, and later received a ticket in the mail with a pic of her going through the light. He has been told that if he appears in court and states that he does not know who was driving the car, he will not have to pay and the ticket will be wiped off his record. I find that hard to believe.

He is also applying with a police department and is afraid of the ticket being on his record. He is even more afraid that if he gives incorrect information in court (regarding not knowing the driver) that it will keep him from getting a police job.

Unfortunately, neither he nor his girlfriend have money to pay the ticket.

My questions are:

1 - will this ticket go on his record even though he was not shown in the picture as being the driver?

2 - what will it do to him as far as his future job prospects?

3 - if he has to tell that it was her, can he give that info by phone and not have to actually go to court?

We're in CA. Thanks in advance.

[Lexis85]

I not sure I exactly have all the correct info on this, but I promised I'd ask. This happened to someone I know. Really.

His girlfriend borrowed his car, ran a stoplight, and later received a ticket in the mail with a pic of her going through the light. He has been told that if he appears in court and states that he does not know who was driving the car, he will not have to pay and the ticket will be wiped off his record. I find that hard to believe.

He is also applying with a police department and is afraid of the ticket being on his record. He is even more afraid that if he gives incorrect information in court (regarding not knowing the driver) that it will keep him from getting a police job.

Unfortunately, neither he nor his girlfriend have money to pay the ticket.

My questions are:

1 - will this ticket go on his record even though he was not shown in the picture as being the driver?

2 - what will it do to him as far as his future job prospects?

3 - if he has to tell that it was her, can he give that info by phone and not have to actually go to court?

We're in CA. Thanks in advance.

Well I dunno if it's the same there as it is here, but here, if your car gets caught going through the red light and you get a ticket with a picture, you can contest it in court, and in the end, the actual driver of the car that committed the offence will be ticketed. So, ya, he'd have to either take the ticket, or rat out his girlfriend. I'm probably not much help here, am I? Haha...well I guess I answered that last question a little bit, but I dunno how American laws work

[Lexis85]

gawd I suck at posting tonight.....

[Bing_Oh]

Your scenario gives significant insight into the attitudes of both your friend and his girlfriend. First, he's considering lying under oath in a court of law...PERJURY! One of gravest sins, and one that could destroy an officer's credability for an entire career in a jurisdiction, is perjury. So, realistically, how do you think a department would look at that in regards to a perspective law enforcement candidate? It's been said time and time again on here...the most important rule for a LE candidate is be honest. As for his girlfriend, it's pretty bad that she's willing to let him take the fall and, potentially, destroy his chances in LE over a red light ticket.

As for your questions...
1. I don't know the quality of the picture taken, so I don't know if it shows just the car or also the driver. If it shows the driver, and he has the audacity to claim under oath that he doesn't know who it is, I think he may find a very unsympathetic (and disbelieving) judge. If it just shows the car, he's going to be assumed to be the driver unless he can give contradictory information.

2. That depends on how he decides to handle it. If he takes the ticket, then it's a simple traffic infraction and not a serious thing. If his GF takes the ticket, then it has nothing to do with him. If he lies...well, see my preamble.

3. I suspect that more depends on where this is in regards to court proceedings. If it's still in a stage that's investigatory, then he may be able to give that kind of info to an officer. If it's already scheduled for court, then he'll probably have to testify.

[Entre Nous]

gawd I suck at posting tonight.....

LOL. No you don't. In fact, I just talked to a retired LAPD officer and it sounds like you're right.

I think what the guy's mainly interested in now is whether he has to go to court or if he can just call in and give her name. He sleeps during the day, so it will be awkward if he has to go to court.

[Lexis85]

LOL. No you don't. In fact, I just talked to a retired LAPD officer and it sounds like you're right.

I think what the guy's mainly interested in now is whether he has to go to court or if he can just call in and give her name. He sleeps during the day, so it will be awkward if he has to go to court.

Heh, thanks it also helps I guess that I have friends w/ the RCMP and that's what I've been told. I just didn't know about how it works in the US.

[Entre Nous]

Thanks, Bing Oh. Yeah, I was a little disappointed that he was thinking of lying, but I like to think that when it came right down to it he wouldn't have. I think it was the old principle of "if a lot of people say to do it, then it's ok".

I actually did tell him all I've learned from this site about the importance of truthfulness and integrity for police candidates, and I think he realized how wrongly he'd been thinking.

The thing is, I don't think his gf can or will ever pay the ticket, so I'm wondering what will happen when she doesn't.

Edit - It turns out that he wasn't going to lie. That's what his girlfriend was telling him to do. She will have absolutely no part in this as far as taking responsibility or paying a penny towards the ticket, or even trying to do any community service. He's glad he found this out about her now.

[Smurfette_76]

Good. In that case he should turn her in AND find another woman to date. a further LEO can't afford to a associate without that cares so little for his career.

[Frank Booth]

It all depends how the ordinance is written. However, in most places the police have the burden of proving that the person to whom the ticket was issued was driving. The standard of proof is not difficult, usually being only a "preponderance of the evidence" or "51%". I wouldn't like having to waste a day going to court because someone else who drove my car got a ticket. The court can very easily get your picture from the DMV to compare against the picture of the person they photographed driving your car. Why should you be required to testify just because someone else got a ticket? Let the civilian "photo cop" prove it was you who ran the red light. Again, it depends how the ordinance is written, but I don't think you should have to testify to help the government make a traffic ticket case against someone else with the alternative if you refuse being that YOU'RE responsible for the ticket, even thought YOU obviously didn't commit the violation.

I'm not a real big fan of photo radar or photo red light enforcement.

[Dinosaur32]

In New York the ticket goes to the vehicle based upon the license plate. Owner of the car is fined, does not matter who was driving.....but no points against his license, since no proof of who was driving. Cameras are set only to get picture of rear plate and red light in frame.

[just joe]

Ditto Dino32's response. Here the ticket goes to the car's owner and is a civil matter.

[PhilipCal]

Stop Light Camera

It all depends how the ordinance is written. However, in most places the police have the burden of proving that the person to whom the ticket was issued was driving. The standard of proof is not difficult, usually being only a "preponderance of the evidence" or "51%". I wouldn't like having to waste a day going to court because someone else who drove my car got a ticket. The court can very easily get your picture from the DMV to compare against the picture of the person they photographed driving your car. Why should you be required to testify just because someone else got a ticket? Let the civilian "photo cop" prove it was you who ran the red light. Again, it depends how the ordinance is written, but I don't think you should have to testify to help the government make a traffic ticket case against someone else with the alternative if you refuse being that YOU'RE responsible for the ticket, even thought YOU obviously didn't commit the violation.

I'm not a real big fan of photo radar or photo red light enforcement.

This post goes to the heart of the matter. Putting the actual driver behind the wheel. That requirement is at the heart of any traffic case an Officer makes. Unless Vehicle Codes/County-Municipal Ordinances are re-drafted to eliminate this requirement, I feel there'll be a problem with red light cameras.

[BikeCop501]

texas its civil, not criminal....

[MIDeputy]

Here in Michigan the State Attorney General recently wrote that "red-light camera's" contradict the state motor vehicle code and are therefore illegal.

Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox ruled last month that cameras cannot be used to ticket drivers. Only police officers who witness violations can write tickets except, a police officer may issue a citation to a person who is a driver of a motor vehicle involved in an accident when, based upon personal investigation, the officer has reasonable cause to believe that the person is responsible for a civil infraction in connection with the accident., he ruled.

Cox's ruling also stated, "It is my opinion, therefore, that an ordinance adopted by a city pursuant to its authority under the Home Rule City Act... that allows the city to issue citations for civil infractions for disobeying a traffic control signal based on the photograph or video produced by an unmanned traffic monitoring device at a location other than a railroad grade crossing conflicts with the Michigan Vehicle Code... and, thus, is invalid."

[webjeep]

EN,

Since we're in the same state I can tell you that the ticket is a civil infraction and will not go on his record as a moving violation. I am not sure if it shows on the driving transcript, but I do not believe it will. This is not to say that he should not disclose it when he applies. Essentially it is of the same nature as a parking ticket. 51% rule applies thus, if the vehicle is registered to him it can be reasonably assumed that he would be driving it, consequentially that ticket goes to him.