View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

UPDATE: State high court says no stricter red-light camera rules required

Posted: June 6, 2014 1:55 p.m.
Updated: June 6, 2014 5:53 p.m.

Red Light camera at the intersection of McBean Parkway and Magic Mountain Parkway. Signal file photo

 

The California Supreme Court has ruled the red-light camera evidence against a Southern California woman, who challenged a traffic ticket based on camera photos and video, was adequately authenticated and there is no need to adopt stricter evidence rules for red-light camera violations.

Carmen Goldsmith was accused of running a red light in Inglewood in 2009 and fined $436. A police officer testified at her court hearing.

Goldsmith’s lawyer had called for testimony from the camera’s manufacturer. But in a unanimous ruling on Thursday, the Supreme Court said the officer’s testimony was sufficient.

Santa Clarita is among the cities that continues to maintain a red-light camera program.

“The city of Santa Clarita supports its red-light camera program because it improves traffic safety and reduces the most dangerous accidents at city intersections,” city spokeswoman Jessica Jackson said Friday.

Santa Clarita City Council members voted in March to extend the city’s contract with Redflex Traffic Systems Inc., the company contracted to provide the city’s red-light cameras.

The council’s vote extended the term of the city’s contract with Redflex on a month-to-month basis, during which time staff will continue to study whether the cameras are meeting the city’s goals of improving safety on roadways.

Red light cameras are set up at seven intersections throughout the city: McBean Parkway and Valencia Boulevard, McBean Parkway and Magic Mountain Parkway, McBean Parkway and Newhall Ranch Road, Newhall Ranch Road and Bouquet Canyon Road, Bouquet Canyon Road and Seco Canyon Road, Whites Canyon Road and Soledad Canyon Road, and Lyons Avenue and Orchard Village Road.

 

 

 

Comments

timothymyers02: Posted: June 6, 2014 4:01 p.m.

Be careful because representatives of the City of Santa Clarita may attempt to conflate this decision to get people to comply with red light tickets. This ruling DOES NOT change the fact that the LA Superior Court will NOT enforce a red light camera ticket UNLESS the recipient of the ticket confirms proper service by showing up to defend the ticket.


bobforte: Posted: June 7, 2014 9:22 p.m.

Correct. Just ignore it and it WILL go away.


chefgirl358: Posted: June 7, 2014 9:32 p.m.

Yep totally agree. It's been proven many times over that they're unenforceable and I have heard this straight from deputies mouths besides the fact that it's been in the real media several times.


lars1: Posted: June 7, 2014 7:00 a.m.

IGNORE THE TICKET. NOTHING WILL HAPPEN.
If you get a ticket in the mail, tear it up and throw it away.

If you respond, you are screwed.


stray: Posted: June 7, 2014 7:02 a.m.

As usual, the city council wants to keep them. They continue to play us for "stupid" and are licking their chops waiting for an uninformed citizen to pay the ticket.


lars1: Posted: June 7, 2014 7:09 a.m.

This is why LA dropped their red light cameras.

NOTE: the Board cited the lack of consequences for violators

http://lapdblog.typepad.com/lapd_blog/2011/06/notes-from-the-june-7-2011-weekly-police-commission-meeting.html

•The Department’s report, dated June 7, 2011, relative to detailed scoring leading to the selection of American Traffic Solutions, Inc., as the recommended automated photo red light enforcement program contractor, as given by Deputy Chief Michael Downing, was not approved or transmitted to the City Council. While the Department has done a good job in administering the program, the Board cited the lack of consequences for violators, the cost of the program, and the pending legislation that could further alter the revenue from the cameras as the reason to not recommend the contract renewal


17trillion: Posted: June 9, 2014 8:03 a.m.

I almost....almost....want to run a red light just so I can stick it to the man. Why am I wanting to stick it to the man so much as I get older? I thought this was a teenager or 20's thing to do. Oh well..


Unreal: Posted: June 9, 2014 9:52 a.m.

17trillion: Second childhood? Maybe because you feel you are now in a better position to fight for yourself?

I believe there are more legal challenges to the red light cameras that still will keep the courts from enforcing them.



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...