Is this a valid ticket socal pd input please
7/6/07, 08:49 PM
#22
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Hire a good lawyer. (costs more than the ticket)
Have the court file it without a finding. (no finding, no punishment)
Don't ever do it again. (court will dismiss case after time)
7/7/07, 01:01 AM
#23
TMS West Coast Correspondent
Join Date: October 14, 2004
Posts: 3,581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
option #3 hire Mr. Ticket for much less than a normal attorney and roll the dice, he has a very excellent track record.
PS hiring a lawyer isnt neccessarily more than the ticket; if you take into account expensive fines in California, then add in traffic school to take it off your record or worse a point goes on your record and already expensive cali insurance goes up even more....long run could cost a good deal more.
option #4 go in urself pleade no contest, ask for a reduction in penalty and the oportunity to take traffic school, avoid the point and pay much less.
option #5 get your one extension, go in on the last day possible after extension pleade not guilty, wave time, go in two days before the set court date and ask for another extension, by this time hope the cop has moved or been transferred, eventually go in to defend yourself and hope the officer doesnt show or if he does then defend yourself, but argue the law, NOT the circumstances. You argue the circumstances you will lose, the law you have a chance. The officer has burden of proof and must PROVE that you are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Now they will have a video of you violating the law, but this does not mean you can not win. They will need to provide a long list of evidence on the maintenance, calibration, etc of the cameras and lights and whatever else, officers clock in and out time, his/her formal training on the matter, etc etc. I dont know the specifics to this case but look it up, there is a long check list to every case that must be met and presented at the time of the hearing or else the case can and most likely will be dismissed. If the officer does not have it with them do not allow them to be permitted more time to provide such evidence, they may ask and if you do not object the judge may grant it. It is their responsibility to be ready that day not yours, you have the right to a timely and speedy trial and the right to cross examine all witness (the officer) and evidence. If that evidence is not available immediately ask to dismiss.
option #6 you can opt to fight it by written arguement, of which the officer often does not respond to this as much as they go into court. You must ask for this when you make ur plea
7/7/07, 03:43 AM
#24
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 29, 2004
Location: Spangdahlem AB Germany/ Home is Ft Worth
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can not freaking stand it when people do california rolls. The sign says STOP. It won't kill you to come to a complete stop.
7/7/07, 07:32 AM
#25
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 5, 2006
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
turning a corner going 10 to 15mph on a stick is like stopping. approaching from 30 mph and downshift to 2nd, step on a brake before I proceeded turning. I look at the picture and it looks like I briefly stepped on the brake. I did not make a complete stop but the pedestrian was clear and the other cars were clearly turning as oppose to doing u turn.
7/7/07, 07:35 AM
#26
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 5, 2006
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do you get the court to file without a finding?
option #3 hire Mr. Ticket for much less than a normal attorney and roll the dice, he has a very excellent track record.
PS hiring a lawyer isnt neccessarily more than the ticket; if you take into account expensive fines in California, then add in traffic school to take it off your record or worse a point goes on your record and already expensive cali insurance goes up even more....long run could cost a good deal more.
option #4 go in urself pleade no contest, ask for a reduction in penalty and the oportunity to take traffic school, avoid the point and pay much less.
option #5 get your one extension, go in on the last day possible after extension pleade not guilty, wave time, go in two days before the set court date and ask for another extension, by this time hope the cop has moved or been transferred, eventually go in to defend yourself and hope the officer doesnt show or if he does then defend yourself, but argue the law, NOT the circumstances. You argue the circumstances you will lose, the law you have a chance. The officer has burden of proof and must PROVE that you are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Now they will have a video of you violating the law, but this does not mean you can not win. They will need to provide a long list of evidence on the maintenance, calibration, etc of the cameras and lights and whatever else, officers clock in and out time, his/her formal training on the matter, etc etc. I dont know the specifics to this case but look it up, there is a long check list to every case that must be met and presented at the time of the hearing or else the case can and most likely will be dismissed. If the officer does not have it with them do not allow them to be permitted more time to provide such evidence, they may ask and if you do not object the judge may grant it. It is their responsibility to be ready that day not yours, you have the right to a timely and speedy trial and the right to cross examine all witness (the officer) and evidence. If that evidence is not available immediately ask to dismiss.
option #6 you can opt to fight it by written arguement, of which the officer often does not respond to this as much as they go into court. You must ask for this when you make ur plea
option #3 hire Mr. Ticket for much less than a normal attorney and roll the dice, he has a very excellent track record.
PS hiring a lawyer isnt neccessarily more than the ticket; if you take into account expensive fines in California, then add in traffic school to take it off your record or worse a point goes on your record and already expensive cali insurance goes up even more....long run could cost a good deal more.
option #4 go in urself pleade no contest, ask for a reduction in penalty and the oportunity to take traffic school, avoid the point and pay much less.
option #5 get your one extension, go in on the last day possible after extension pleade not guilty, wave time, go in two days before the set court date and ask for another extension, by this time hope the cop has moved or been transferred, eventually go in to defend yourself and hope the officer doesnt show or if he does then defend yourself, but argue the law, NOT the circumstances. You argue the circumstances you will lose, the law you have a chance. The officer has burden of proof and must PROVE that you are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Now they will have a video of you violating the law, but this does not mean you can not win. They will need to provide a long list of evidence on the maintenance, calibration, etc of the cameras and lights and whatever else, officers clock in and out time, his/her formal training on the matter, etc etc. I dont know the specifics to this case but look it up, there is a long check list to every case that must be met and presented at the time of the hearing or else the case can and most likely will be dismissed. If the officer does not have it with them do not allow them to be permitted more time to provide such evidence, they may ask and if you do not object the judge may grant it. It is their responsibility to be ready that day not yours, you have the right to a timely and speedy trial and the right to cross examine all witness (the officer) and evidence. If that evidence is not available immediately ask to dismiss.
option #6 you can opt to fight it by written arguement, of which the officer often does not respond to this as much as they go into court. You must ask for this when you make ur plea
7/7/07, 07:56 AM
#27
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: October 22, 2004
Location: Niantic CT
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, and I think this is true as a nation, drivers in general are lazy and they consider slowing down to almost a stop as the same thing as a complete stop (and pause). I was sitting outside a store on a busy city street (speed limit 25) waiting for a friend to come out, and there was a 4-way stop sign right there. I must have seen 100 cars come up to the stop sign in the few minutes I was there, and not a single one came to a complete stop - except when a police car came by with them - then everyone stopped.
So the point is, people know how to stop and know they're supposed to stop, but they're just too lazy to do it. And I have to admit that when I drove out of there, noticing what I just had seen, it took extra special effort for me to make a complete stop as well.But I will say that none of these drivers was rolling through the stop at 10-15 mph! It was more like 2-3 mph.
7/7/07, 08:36 AM
#28
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 29, 2004
Location: Spangdahlem AB Germany/ Home is Ft Worth
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
turning a corner going 10 to 15mph on a stick is like stopping. approaching from 30 mph and downshift to 2nd, step on a brake before I proceeded turning. I look at the picture and it looks like I briefly stepped on the brake. I did not make a complete stop but the pedestrian was clear and the other cars were clearly turning as oppose to doing u turn.
I hope you get fined hardcore for this.
Sheesh, even my 13 yo sister knows what a red light means.
7/7/07, 08:53 AM
#29
V6 Member
Join Date: May 29, 2006
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its all about money. I can tell you all about revenue for the city but I wont go there. Its a whole another story. I should have fish tailed on that intersection and go 80 mph and my license plate would be a blurr. 
. Then I wouldn't feel bad about paying my fine but I had my two kids with me. 10 mph turning on the intersection sheez $361. I never drive reckless.
. Then I wouldn't feel bad about paying my fine but I had my two kids with me. 10 mph turning on the intersection sheez $361. I never drive reckless.
7/7/07, 12:58 PM
#30
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 21, 2005
Location: NJ
Posts: 480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is there points for it? u'll pay double that for a lawyer my friend told me but for a picture proof ticket might be hard to fight. you can always get a consultation too. u might be able to get points removed atleast.
7/7/07, 03:11 PM
#31
TMS West Coast Correspondent
Join Date: October 14, 2004
Posts: 3,581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heres Mr. Ticket: http://www.mrtrafficticket.com/
Hes good Ive used him twice, won once the second fine was reduced and got traffic school allowed. I have several friends that have used them, all dismissals.
Mustangfreak- calm down are you telling me that you have NEVER rolled through a stop and have ALWAYS done a complete LEGAL full stop? Because a full stop is more than just your tires coming to a complete rest, there needs to be a couple second delay in between coming to a complete rest and starting to accelerate again so that the driver may assertain the safety of continuing on, or at least that is the legal way to do it. And NO ONE does that unless there is a cop present. Remember California is the state that brought the idea of turning right on red to this country to begin with so its only fair to say that Californians would be the ones to dictate how to propperly execute this manuver. The DMV handbook states that a driver "can make a right turn against a red light after you stop and yield to pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles that are close enough to be a hazard. Make the right turn only when it is safe" so now what comes into question is what is a stop? Ive already stated what the law defines a stop to be, but thats why police officers are allowed to use their discretion to an extent. The key is to be safe and make sure that the driver has yielded the right of way to all that possess it. Now 10-15mph I must say is blowing through a stop. ST06Vert are you certain you were going that fast? I am familiar with what you describe as to stopping with a stick, but after I shift into second, slow down and hit that brake I am more at a speed of like 5mph; more often then not a stop will then be defined as putting it into neutral as the safety of the turn is assertained. Which brings me to my next point about what is a stop. If you are on a motorcycle, simply slowing enough to assertain the safety is often permitted even by police. As it is more of a hassel to come to a complete stop, put your feet down, look left right left again and then go. Because by law that is what you would be required to do, to simply stop the tires from moving on a bike for even a split second is not enough to qualify as a legal stop. Cops will more often then not let you roll through while on a bike and do the same for most cars, within reason. If an officer actually pulls you over and you explain you are driving a manual they may let you go as long as you did slow enough.
True dat!
Hes good Ive used him twice, won once the second fine was reduced and got traffic school allowed. I have several friends that have used them, all dismissals.
Mustangfreak- calm down are you telling me that you have NEVER rolled through a stop and have ALWAYS done a complete LEGAL full stop? Because a full stop is more than just your tires coming to a complete rest, there needs to be a couple second delay in between coming to a complete rest and starting to accelerate again so that the driver may assertain the safety of continuing on, or at least that is the legal way to do it. And NO ONE does that unless there is a cop present. Remember California is the state that brought the idea of turning right on red to this country to begin with so its only fair to say that Californians would be the ones to dictate how to propperly execute this manuver. The DMV handbook states that a driver "can make a right turn against a red light after you stop and yield to pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles that are close enough to be a hazard. Make the right turn only when it is safe" so now what comes into question is what is a stop? Ive already stated what the law defines a stop to be, but thats why police officers are allowed to use their discretion to an extent. The key is to be safe and make sure that the driver has yielded the right of way to all that possess it. Now 10-15mph I must say is blowing through a stop. ST06Vert are you certain you were going that fast? I am familiar with what you describe as to stopping with a stick, but after I shift into second, slow down and hit that brake I am more at a speed of like 5mph; more often then not a stop will then be defined as putting it into neutral as the safety of the turn is assertained. Which brings me to my next point about what is a stop. If you are on a motorcycle, simply slowing enough to assertain the safety is often permitted even by police. As it is more of a hassel to come to a complete stop, put your feet down, look left right left again and then go. Because by law that is what you would be required to do, to simply stop the tires from moving on a bike for even a split second is not enough to qualify as a legal stop. Cops will more often then not let you roll through while on a bike and do the same for most cars, within reason. If an officer actually pulls you over and you explain you are driving a manual they may let you go as long as you did slow enough.
The California Traffic Court System extorts over a billion dollars a year from California citizens by keeping us ignorant of our rights. They confuse and intimidate us with a muddled "courtesy" notice mentioning license suspension and jail as possibilities (these are only possibilities for those who ignore the citation entirely). The courts also benefit from the inherent respect most people have for the police that keeps them from questioning the officers' often-arbitrary decision to issue a citation.
California traffic courts use the formality of the courthouse to further intimidate those brave enough to appear, scaring them into pleading guilty or accepting an assignment to attend traffic school. The court strong-arms the majority of defendants, too busy or too intimidated to appear, to surrender without a fight: we collapse like a piece of IKEA furniture and meekly mail in the protection money hoping these bullies will leave us alone. By sustaining this proctological racket, California traffic courts rake in a small fortune for state, county, and local governments. Al Capone would be proud.
Source: Ticket Assassin
California traffic courts use the formality of the courthouse to further intimidate those brave enough to appear, scaring them into pleading guilty or accepting an assignment to attend traffic school. The court strong-arms the majority of defendants, too busy or too intimidated to appear, to surrender without a fight: we collapse like a piece of IKEA furniture and meekly mail in the protection money hoping these bullies will leave us alone. By sustaining this proctological racket, California traffic courts rake in a small fortune for state, county, and local governments. Al Capone would be proud.
Source: Ticket Assassin
7/7/07, 03:26 PM
#33
Bullitt Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 5, 2006
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heres Mr. Ticket: http://www.mrtrafficticket.com/
Hes good Ive used him twice, won once the second fine was reduced and got traffic school allowed. I have several friends that have used them, all dismissals.
Mustangfreak- calm down are you telling me that you have NEVER rolled through a stop and have ALWAYS done a complete LEGAL full stop? Because a full stop is more than just your tires coming to a complete rest, there needs to be a couple second delay in between coming to a complete rest and starting to accelerate again so that the driver may assertain the safety of continuing on, or at least that is the legal way to do it. And NO ONE does that unless there is a cop present. Remember California is the state that brought the idea of turning right on red to this country to begin with so its only fair to say that Californians would be the ones to dictate how to propperly execute this manuver. The DMV handbook states that a driver "can make a right turn against a red light after you stop and yield to pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles that are close enough to be a hazard. Make the right turn only when it is safe" so now what comes into question is what is a stop? Ive already stated what the law defines a stop to be, but thats why police officers are allowed to use their discretion to an extent. The key is to be safe and make sure that the driver has yielded the right of way to all that possess it. Now 10-15mph I must say is blowing through a stop. ST06Vert are you certain you were going that fast? I am familiar with what you describe as to stopping with a stick, but after I shift into second, slow down and hit that brake I am more at a speed of like 5mph; more often then not a stop will then be defined as putting it into neutral as the safety of the turn is assertained. Which brings me to my next point about what is a stop. If you are on a motorcycle, simply slowing enough to assertain the safety is often permitted even by police. As it is more of a hassel to come to a complete stop, put your feet down, look left right left again and then go. Because by law that is what you would be required to do, to simply stop the tires from moving on a bike for even a split second is not enough to qualify as a legal stop. Cops will more often then not let you roll through while on a bike and do the same for most cars, within reason. If an officer actually pulls you over and you explain you are driving a manual they may let you go as long as you did slow enough.
True dat!
Hes good Ive used him twice, won once the second fine was reduced and got traffic school allowed. I have several friends that have used them, all dismissals.
Mustangfreak- calm down are you telling me that you have NEVER rolled through a stop and have ALWAYS done a complete LEGAL full stop? Because a full stop is more than just your tires coming to a complete rest, there needs to be a couple second delay in between coming to a complete rest and starting to accelerate again so that the driver may assertain the safety of continuing on, or at least that is the legal way to do it. And NO ONE does that unless there is a cop present. Remember California is the state that brought the idea of turning right on red to this country to begin with so its only fair to say that Californians would be the ones to dictate how to propperly execute this manuver. The DMV handbook states that a driver "can make a right turn against a red light after you stop and yield to pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles that are close enough to be a hazard. Make the right turn only when it is safe" so now what comes into question is what is a stop? Ive already stated what the law defines a stop to be, but thats why police officers are allowed to use their discretion to an extent. The key is to be safe and make sure that the driver has yielded the right of way to all that possess it. Now 10-15mph I must say is blowing through a stop. ST06Vert are you certain you were going that fast? I am familiar with what you describe as to stopping with a stick, but after I shift into second, slow down and hit that brake I am more at a speed of like 5mph; more often then not a stop will then be defined as putting it into neutral as the safety of the turn is assertained. Which brings me to my next point about what is a stop. If you are on a motorcycle, simply slowing enough to assertain the safety is often permitted even by police. As it is more of a hassel to come to a complete stop, put your feet down, look left right left again and then go. Because by law that is what you would be required to do, to simply stop the tires from moving on a bike for even a split second is not enough to qualify as a legal stop. Cops will more often then not let you roll through while on a bike and do the same for most cars, within reason. If an officer actually pulls you over and you explain you are driving a manual they may let you go as long as you did slow enough.
True dat!
7/7/07, 03:32 PM
#34
TMS West Coast Correspondent
Join Date: October 14, 2004
Posts: 3,581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and I didnt think you did go busting through the turn, thats why I asked if you were sure you were going that fast, it probably was slower than you think.
and btw my name is Richard.
7/7/07, 03:38 PM
#36
FR500 Member
Join Date: August 23, 2004
Posts: 3,153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't treat any photo-enforcement ticket as a valid ticket and treat them as such and ignore them.
I can't speak for California, but here in Arizona they have 120 days to "properly" serve you, if they can't do that, the ticket gets dismissed.
Receiving a ticket in the mail is NOT proper service.
Simple as that.
Number of photo enforcement tickets in the past 10 years: 4
Number dismissed 4
Case closed, make them work for it, like they should in the first place.
I can't speak for California, but here in Arizona they have 120 days to "properly" serve you, if they can't do that, the ticket gets dismissed.
Receiving a ticket in the mail is NOT proper service.
Simple as that.
Number of photo enforcement tickets in the past 10 years: 4
Number dismissed 4
Case closed, make them work for it, like they should in the first place.
7/7/07, 03:52 PM
#38
TMS West Coast Correspondent
Join Date: October 14, 2004
Posts: 3,581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't treat any photo-enforcement ticket as a valid ticket and treat them as such and ignore them.
I can't speak for California, but here in Arizona they have 120 days to "properly" serve you, if they can't do that, the ticket gets dismissed.
Receiving a ticket in the mail is NOT proper service.
Simple as that.
Number of photo enforcement tickets in the past 10 years: 4
Number dismissed 4
Case closed, make them work for it, like they should in the first place.
I can't speak for California, but here in Arizona they have 120 days to "properly" serve you, if they can't do that, the ticket gets dismissed.
Receiving a ticket in the mail is NOT proper service.
Simple as that.
Number of photo enforcement tickets in the past 10 years: 4
Number dismissed 4
Case closed, make them work for it, like they should in the first place.
yes these tickets only target honest people. In Cali, if you do not have a front plate you will not be given a ticket, if your face isnt clear you will not get a ticket, so tint on front windshield, visor down, put your hand in front of your face as you run a red, if you perjure yourself you will not be found guilty, all you have to do is say its not you, or if you say you never recieved it in the mail, they can not prove that you ever recieved the ticket.
cali traffic laws are very unfair, especially to those law abiding citizens and are only designed to leech money out of these honest peoples pockets.
7/7/07, 06:42 PM
#39
Cobra Member
Join Date: February 18, 2007
Location: SE PA
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uh, if you STOPPED then yeah, that's exactly what it would feel like! It's right turn on red AFTER STOP!!! WTF with all of the posts lately about trying to get out of tickets that were received legitimately? Grow up! So a freakin camera caught you instead of an officer? Is it any less illegal to do it on front of a camera? Again, just like the stupid post about the tint, IT WAS ILLEGAL AND YOU'RE ADMITTING WHAT YOU DID WAS ILLEGAL. Just be a man and deal with the consequences of your actions. I'm so tired of this phenomenon in the US lately that folks don't want to be held accountable for their actions.
Rant over. Go about your business.
7/7/07, 09:44 PM
#40
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Cases may be disposed of without the finality of a guilty or not guilty finding. A prosecutor may recommend that charges be placed on file in which case further action is indefinitely suspended. Prior to trial, a prosecutor may file a nolle prosequi of the indictment or complaint which means that, although there has been an indictment, the case will not be prosecuted. A nolle prosequi is unusual and the prosecutor must file a written explanation. In some cases, particularly those heard in district juvenile court, after the hearing the judge will determine that justice would best be served and the defendant would have the best chances of rehabilitation if the charges are continued without a finding. If the defendant keeps out of trouble for a given period, the charges are dropped. If the defendant does not fulfill the judge's conditions, the original charge will be brought back to court and a guilt finding imposed. Usually, in order for a case to be continued without a finding, the defendant must agree with the facts of the charge as detailed by the prosecution.
It has worked for me.
