By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Instead of racing to get ahead of that vehicle trying to get on the freeway, just let up off the gas and let that vehicle in. Kinda of like that old saying, "treat people the way YOU want to be treated". But if you treat yourself like crap, then treat people the way you would want your child treated. The latter works best for me because I always want the best for my family. In order to get respect, you need to give it.
And how much time to do REALLY save by getting 1 or 2 car lengths ahead. Ummmmm ... none? .0001% faster. Did you know that the difference between going 65 mph and 75 mph only gets you to your destination 5 minutes sooner? So is it really that important to speed and risk a ticket or lives? Ummm, NO. Hurry, hurry, hurry. Hurry up to stop. I see people race to the next light and I coast to the next light, yet we are both still sitting at the light. The only thing rushing to the next light does is use up fuel and lower your miles per gallon.
Time she gained: 5 seconds. Hope she wasn't late to work. The ticket from the sheriff's department or city police after the stoplight would probably have been costly compared to her salary. Solution for dangerous, haphazard driving: leave for work a few minutes early.
My point: Most people aren't good at hurrying with other cars around. They try to push the other drivers with aggressive driving. They made bad lane picks rather than hanging back and picking their path and moving through quickly. There are people who can hurry and get somewhere ahead of the rest of the pack; they go fast when there is an opening. Then there are those who just bungle around trying to get there fast and end up being an aggressive, hostile driver.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Even then you will probably lose the battle in Court.
Good luck to all and stay safe.
jenad
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
How about putting something big and heavy immediately in front of his car. Make it something that would be easy for you to move, but a pain for him. A pile of rocks for example. Better yet, something that can not be connected to you.
Another one might be to have a friendly neighbor - one whose car would be unknown - to park across the other half of your driveway immediately in front of the offender. If the car is a junker, so much the better.
But, put yourself in their shoes. Putting the lack of a note aside, if you broke down somewhere, would you like to come back to a car with flat tires, stickers on it, etc, just because you had the misfortune of breaking down in the wrong place?
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
My wife and infant son were with me. I managed to push the car (2000 pounds - nice and light!) into a gas station/convenience store at the corner (off to the side of the building). The people running the store weren't too happy about it, but what was I supposed to do?
I called the dealer to send a tow truck the first thing the next morning (the car was still under warranty). Luckily, the place we broke down Sunday was on a bus route, and we were all able to take the bus back home, as we were new in town and didn't have any acquaintances yet.
Police will be able to identify the owner. Maybe it was stolen.
Many years ago, came home from work and found an old Volvo parked in parking area near garage and house is 200 ft from road. Did not recognize the car. First thought was a stupid burglar. Went into house anyway and all was ok. Called police, gave license number of car and description. They looked up and gave me the name of the owner and her city. I then realized this car belonged to a co-worker friend of my wife. I left for work very early that morning and did not see co-worker come to house and park car. I then kind of remembered that my wife told me the previous evening that her lady friend from work would be riding with my wife to work that day. I guess this is a lesson for guys to "really" listen when your wife is talking to you while you are watching tv or reading. Don't just nod your head.
Al, maybe you should contact the police this morning to let them know the car is there (if you have plate #) and to find out if you can get it towed promptly should it still be there when you get home. This would give them (or someone) a chance to contact the vehicle's owner or at least allow you to get it removed in a timely manner when you do get home.
Some distance in front of me I see two cars racing each other in a most hostile fashion. First one would cross the double yellow and pass, pulling back in close enough to leave paint. Then the second car would do the same thing, pulling back in as if to try to run the other car off the road.
The real scary part was that they were doing this where the road had some large dips. This ment that as the cars pulled out to pass they were blind to oncoming traffic. As luck would have it there was no oncoming traffic.
I followed them to the next stop sign where they continued their drag race down the hill. I can only wonder if I'll read about them in the paper tomorrow.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Al, glad it got figured out. qbrozen reminded me of another pet peeve. What ever happened to pushing your broke down vehicle off the road to the shoulder? I'm not talking about women and seniors. I've seen some "big-strappers" just sitting in their vehicles in the middle of the lane. Alright...if you got that Gucci suit on, I'll cut you some slack. But come on people, get out and push it to the side.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Sunday, he pulls out onto the street, wobbily dawdles across a couple lanes (he got lucky there was no traffic, as it can be busy) and then he stalls it! And yesterday I saw him pull out, lose his courage in turning onto the street, and then stop right in the middle of the turn, put his feet down, and regain his seating. No wonder motorcycle casualty rates are rising.
No, you can't even do that. At most you get a cop on the stand that reads from a Redflex marketing manual and the judge convicts you, case closed. You can't question anyone from Redflex even.
Oh really? my argument is groundless? :mad:
Actually, it is your argument which is both baseless and groundless. Nobody is operating the cameras. No one is present during the camera's operation. This isn't like a radar gun with an officer operating it. This is a camera working on full "autopilot" mode. Any testimony offerred by anyone as to the camera's operation, would be pure HEARSAY! Unless the officer is at the scene, witnessed the violation, and was operating the camera to take the photographs, all evidence submitted is 100% hearsay and inadmissable in a court of law, but our Superior Courts in CA don't care about law. You have to go up the ladder to get a decent judge.
There are a few things you don't have a right to in infraction cases, jury & attorney being the main ones!
There is a specific penal code and case law stating that in the absence of a law to the contrary, all rules applying to misdemeanor cases shall apply to infraction cases. Not only that, but the penal code makes it clear there has to be a clear and direct law to the contrary; as there is with no right to jury trial, and no right to counsel appointed by the State. There is no such law saying you don't have a right to discovery in infraction cases. The judge wwent into a whole "written too" diatribe about how with some circular roundabout argument you didn't have a DA involved, so you can't serve discovery on the DA, and hence you don't get discovery. That's about as INDIRECT of an argument as you'll ever hear or see!
It certainly shouldn't outweigh PC 19.7. In any event he ruled that discovery didn't apply and I had to do complicated supenoea's in order to "get" anything I wanted from the Police/CHP.
Not even Orange Counties corrupt justice system in Newport Beach ruled like this!!! The guy in Ventura was just plain wrong, and if I had the money and time, I would have appealed on those grounds.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Sure you can. Just ask the judge for a continuance and to supeona the records. Those records are public record.
Anyway, video is admissible in court. and what will you question? Would you ask if that is really a blue Mustang going through that red light? Good luck.
Your argument is not strong.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Someone is operating the cameras otherwise they wouldn't work.
No one is present during the camera's operation.
There doesn't have to be someone there present in order to control it.
Any testimony offerred by anyone as to the camera's operation, would be pure HEARSAY!
That wouldn't fall under the legal definition of hearsay. Hearsay is evidence based not on a witness's personal knowledge but on another's statement not made under oath. This wouldn't fall under hearsay since there is the witness's personal knowledge through the video. Or you could say that the camera is the witness.
It it were hearsay than any video evidence would be inadmissible in court.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Here's another one: Womans car starts to stall out. Light traffic. She doesn't even try to pull over, stops in the lane. Car plows into her. Totals car. Kills her 12yr old daughter.
If your car starts to crap out, people, if at all possible, get to the side of the road. You have a better chance of not getting hit by idiots on the side of the road than just stopping in the middle of it!
A couple of other suits are arguing against the tickets on due process grounds instead of conflict with an existing state law but I don't see where there's a ruling about that issue.
My wife got a speeding ticket for going 5 over one time. The photo and ticket came in the mail, but she knew she had been "flashed" by the mobile camera van.
She beat the ticket when she pointed out the 25 mph speed limit sign visible in the photo - she had been cited for going 25 in a 30 mph zone.
The guy in the van running the camera got fired (he had screwed up a bunch of tickets apparently), and the city dropped the program after a few months. :shades:
Did anyone verify that the blue mustang in the camera actually did appear on the road being vidioed? Can any witnesses corroborate the camera's story? Did anyone actually see what the camera supposedly saw.
Video is admissible, but when it is the ONLY witness, it just isn't a witness. It isn't a person. It can't be placed on the stand to speak up.
Vatican issues a "Ten Commandments of Driving"
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Its the village that its in.
Can you bring them into court?
Well they bring you into court.
Were they observing the camera's proper operation during the incident, while it was live?
They don't need to all they need to do is provide support that it is operating properly and has been calibrated per law.
Did anyone verify that the blue mustang in the camera actually did appear on the road being vidioed?
The video would be proof of that, if you think there is something wrong with the video the burden of proof would then be on you. Doctored video can be detected. In case you are not aware of it video is admissible in a court of law, even from unattended cameras.
Can any witnesses corroborate the camera's story?
Do they need to? Courts have upheld video alone as evidence enough. Many cases have been won on evidence where no living person could corroborate any evidence.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Anyway, video is admissible in court. and what will you question? Would you ask if that is really a blue Mustang going through that red light? Good luck.
Your argument is not strong.
My argument is strong and you know it. We hashed this out in the Traffic Laws & Enforcement Tactics section, where an article was posted confirming what I said.
As for what can be questioned, don't be ridiculous. Calibration frequency and accuracy can be questioned, except the court won't allow it.
Its the village that its in.
Wrong, Redflex (or some other such company) is the effective operator. Just try hauling their butts into court, it doesn't work! The city/village is the operator in name only. Redflex installs the cameras, maintains the cameras and issues the bills (again, not tickets) to motorists running red lights. The only time the city gets involved is to have a judge rubber-stamp your fine.
They don't need to all they need to do is provide support that it is operating properly and has been calibrated per law.
BUT THEY DON'T! They don't supply evidence to prove that.
Get your facts straight. :mad:
Huh? Is it a 25 MPH zone or a 30 MPH zone?
Yes the court will allow it. I actually beat a speeding ticket because there was no record of the speed gun being calibrated within the allotted time prior to the ticket being written.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
yes they do if you have it supena or file a FOIA request. Then they have to provide the information. I know that for a fact because I have done it.
Get your facts straight.
My facts are straight.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Since the employee wasn't a cop (I don't think the company employees were sworn in any way), I don't think they had any discretion about taking the photos - they'd set the van up and take photos of everyone passing for a period of time. The equipment would flag those cars going over a set speed. The operator would set the violation speed based on the area covered, and that's what the guy screwed up on in this case.
That's a long way of saying I don't think it was up to the operator to make a judgment call on whether a particular driver was going too fast for conditions.
There was a suit over the tickets because of questionable reliability and the city lost. I can't find a handy summary other than this court decision that's a bit dense.
Just after the 1997 court decision the voters threw the program out by referendum. One of the council members who supported photo-radar managed to get beyond the stink (and boy, was it contentious!) and is currency the mayor up there.
Around that same time, the city started cracking down on parking enforcement. Two sisters who help run the family gas station got a Cushman scooter and donned tutus and wings and drove around downtown putting quarters in expired meters - they called themselves the parking fairies.
Naturally they were hassled by the city for "stealing" fine money. They managed to get the law changed so that only sworn officers could issue tickets (like photo-radar, parking enforcement had been contracted out).
The state legislature just voted to name an Anchorage parking garage after one of the parking fairies who died young, in true poetic justice. (link)
that depends, what did my speedometer say? What the speed gun said? or my best guess estimate? IIRC I may have been doing 15-20 over.
To be honest I can't remember but I know the guy had me dead to right, I was speeding and most likely what the gun showed. But that is irrelevant as the there was no record of any recent calibration of the radar gun. Therefore the accuracy of the reading was in serious question and since the gun wasn't used in its intended legal manner its evidence was inadmissible in court. Since the police officer had no other proof that I was speeding the case was dropped.
Ok you edited after I hit the reply button. I was pulled over on the interstate by a state trooper. Back then they were pretty much letting people doing 10 to 15 over slide unless they were driving reckless so I know I wasn't doing under 10.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Ah, so you were pulled over by a trooper, different than a citation issued by a traffic camera. Again, read the article posted in the Traffic Laws and Enforcement tactics section, you'll see that judges haven't allowed defendants to admit information about calibration of speed cameras. The fact that you reference FOIA as a method for getting the information is further evidence that you don't have your facts straight, because FOIA only applies to federal agencies, not private companies (Redflex, who maintains and keeps records on camera accuracy and calibration).
If they allow information about the calibration of speed guns why not speed cameras?
The fact that you reference FOIA as a method for getting the information is further evidence that you don't have your facts straight, because FOIA only applies to federal agencies,
FOIA applies to any government entity, Federal, State, County and City and since it is a government entity that issues the ticket you can file FOIA requests.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I can see getting off the hook if going under 10 mph and the radar gun not being properly calibrated. But, if someone is obviously speeding (i.e 15-40mph over), I don't see how speed gun calibration would be an issue.
You took this case to court based on what? You were "hoping" they wouldn't have records of recent calibration?
I passed this car, but no sooner had I pulled ahead of him (I was still in the left lane) then this driver sped up and began to pass me (he was probably going 62-63). As this was happening, I saw, in my rearview mirror, a pair of vehicles approaching quickly in the left lane (lane I was occupying). They were about 1/4 mile back, but closing rapidly at probably 70-75. First in line was a Jeep Wrangler (off-road lights, lifted, big tires... you know the type) and a small, older convertible - Maybe a MG of some sort? - looked '80s vintage.
At this point it was obvious that I was going to hold these vehicles up for a bit since I had no intention of engaging in a speed war with the Kia just to settle back in at 60 after passing him thereby having him pass me yet again. So, I waited for the Kia to pull ahead far enough on the right for me to fall in behind.
What do you know, the Jeep's driver (late 40s / early 50s male) felt I was really inconveniencing him so he parked about 3' off my bumper - this guy's front bumper was about 8" higher than the bumper on my car and I could not see it in my mirror. The gal driving the convertible signaled and pulled into the right lane, continuing to gain on the Jeep and me. I dropped my accelerator and started slowing down, thereby increasing the speed differential between me and the Kia. This joker in the Jeep continues to ride me, getting even closer (I would not even feel comfortable parking this close to another car!), until the gal in the convertible is a little more than even with him. Then, with no warning, he *jerks* his Jeep into the right lane! I thought for sure he was going to take out that convertible, but she was on it and lurched to the shoulder (narrowly avoiding impact), gunned it, and pulled back into the lane well ahead of the Jeep.
Once they were both a comfortable distance ahead (Jeep was about 4 seconds ahead and I was at about 45mph at this point), I signaled and returned to the right lane. Perhaps to salvage the remnants of his enormous ego the driver of the Jeep felt compelled to slam on his brakes (locking up his tires) then speed away. Since I was not drafting him, it was little bother to me that he added the wear and tear to his Jeep.
Really goes to show how little someone like that is able to keep control, even though the person is trying to present an air of domination. I find it laughable now, but I was really shocked when he nearly rammed that other car off the road. Surprised me so much, actually, that I did not even note his license plate as he passed!
The most ironic part is that I only drove a total of 16 miles combined on that trip. I can go nearly 1000 miles driving an old truck with several tons of cargo, have 100s of cars pass me, and never see someone act like that. But, I leave home for a quick run to the hardware store... :P
Because (if you had read the article you would know this) cameras have been marketed and adopted as a foolproof mechanism.
FOIA applies to any government entity, Federal, State, County and City and since it is a government entity that issues the ticket you can file FOIA requests.
Sorry, it applies to the Federal Government only:
(f) For purposes of this section, the term--
(1) "agency" as defined in section 551(1) of this title includes any executive department, military department, Government corporation, Government controlled corporation, or other establishment in the executive branch of the Government (including the Executive Office of the President), or any independent regulatory agency;
Besides, they can't give you what they don't have. They do not have calibration information or maintenance records for the camera.
Well without the radar reading there was no proof of the infraction. Especially since the ticket is written based on the radar reading.
You took this case to court based on what? You were "hoping" they wouldn't have records of recent calibration?
yep, or that the officers certification had expired or that the police departments FCC license had expired. Either would have gotten the ticket thrown out. While it us rare that the FCC license is expired the other two are somewhat common.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Not interested in what the article says I am interested in what the courts say.
Sorry, it applies to the Federal Government only:
Ok something of a miscommunication here, Illinois (along with many other states) has their own FOIA that applies to all governments, state, county and local.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
This idiot has his sun visor down (its raining) and he is looking at himself in the vanity mirror :surprise: All the while doing about 30 when all the other cars (and traffic is heavy) is plowing around him at about 50-55MPH.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
You mean the type that buys those "male enhancement" pills, right?
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
I hope that Jeep flipped over while racing that convertible.