Red Light ticket

My wife got a red light ticket but I am pretty sure that the ticket is in error as she turned right from NB Brimley Rd to EB Danforth Rd at the intersection after stopping. The intersection is Danforth Rd and Brimley in Scarborough and this is a non-standard intersection as it is about a 45 degree angle (or more correctly a 135 degree angle) as Danforth Rd runs at an angle to most streets in Scarb.

Photo one shows at the intersection behind the zebra crosswalk and shows the speed of 31 km/h. Photo two shows the car turning right almost through the zebra crosswalk and also shows 31 km/h. Assuming that the zebra crosswalks are about 2m long then the car has travelled about 3 m. But the speed is listed as 31km/h and 31km/h = 8.6m/s. So in the 1.6s that has elapsed between the two pictures the car would have travelled 10.6m.

I wonder if the camera may have issues as the intersection is not a right angle and would it possible that the radar picked up a car in the distance?

from what you say she never even slowed at all.

good luck with that

viper1 wrote:

from what you say she never even slowed at all.

good luck with that

No - she must have slowed. If she was travelling 31km/h she would have travelled 13.8m in the 1.6s between the two elapsed photos. But you can clearly see that she only travelled about 3m. Therefore her average speed was more like 3km/h - very plausible that she was stopped when photo one was taken 0.5s after the light turned red and then accelerated to turn right. I don't know that you can even do a turn at 31km/h - this is in an SUV with a high centre of gravity. And if she was going that fast in 1.6s she would have travelled 45 feet which would have put her out of the range of the camera.

I'd suggest posting the ticket to get a better response.

I just posted the following in another thread on red light cameras. Should clarify your concerns on the speed reading:

Red light cameras only measure your speed when you first reach the stop line. Somewhat confusingly, the speed shown in the second photograph is just a repeat of the data from the first photo. It is NOT your actual speed at the time the second photo was taken. Probably make more sense to people if they simply left it blank.

From the Red Light Camera Regulation (O. Reg. 277/99):

3. (1) A photograph taken by a red light camera system may show or have superimposed on it any of the following information:

1. The date when it was taken.

2. The municipality where it was taken.

3. The time of day when it was taken.

4. The length of time that the indication was showing red before the photograph was taken.

5. The length of time that the indication was showing amber before the photograph was taken.

6. The speed at which the vehicle shown in the photograph was travelling when the first photograph in a series of photographs was taken.

Edit: Also regarding your concern regarding an erroneous radar reading, the cameras actually use sensors embedded in the ground before the stop line to measure speed.

Thanks - that helps. Why don't they also take the speed at the time of the second photo?

My instance, like a few others posted here, is a bit complicated, as it involves turning right on a red, which is legal. The only question is whether the vehicle came to a full stop or not. Can that be determined by the Red Light Cameras? If not I would argue that they shouldn't be used for instances where there was a legal right turn at a red light.

Is the ticket the same for not coming to a full stop at red light when turning red as it is for going through a red light? To me that doesn't seem right as a rolling stop is a much less dangerous offense then running a red light.

wayner wrote:

Is the ticket the same for not coming to a full stop at red light when turning red as it is for going through a red light? To me that doesn't seem right as a rolling stop is a much less dangerous offense then running a red light.

It is the same ticket because you have to come to a full stop before turning. If you want to discuss the merits of that, contact your MPP (or run for office!). Red light ticket is an absolute liability charge so the circumstances don't matter unless it was a life-or-death scenario.

Ok, thanks. It just seems strange to meet that you get the same ticket even though you may have the right of way to proceed.

wayner wrote:

Thanks - that helps. Why don't they also take the speed at the time of the second photo?

Basically because they rely on sensors in the roadway before the stop line. These sensors can only measure a vehicle passing directly over. Also, the speed a vehicle is travelling after the fact is technically irrelevant to the offence, because you either stopped or didn't.

wayner wrote:

The only question is whether the vehicle came to a full stop or not. Can that be determined by the Red Light Cameras? If not I would argue that they shouldn't be used for instances where there was a legal right turn at a red light.

The mechanics of how the camera operates is the same regardless if you're turning or proceeding straight through. It still measures your speed at the time you cross the line. In fact the cameras won't even activate if you speed is low enough (typically below 25 km/hr).

I am curious. How did this work out in court?