With Option 3 you still have the leverage of forcing them to put on a full trial and use court time. Thus you can make a plea deal.
With Option 2 you have plead guilty and have no leverage. You will probably end up with the same fine as Option 1, but will have also wasted time attending court.
Your understanding is correct - Not guilty Trial.Peterg wrote:option 1 is not guilty/trial ..... So I,m assuming you're suggesting pleading not guilty even though this is photo evidence, and negotiate a lower fine at time of trial?
It's a free country and even though they have the photo evidence the goverment must still properly convict you at trial. Hence the use of plea deals to ensure the system doesn't choke itself on trials.
However you may have a lucky break if your options are as you describe them, your ticket may not be valid.
Refer to this discussion for more details:
On another note, sometimes (if the driver is tall enough) they can see the head of the driver. A funny story in the family is that a perpetually immature inlaw sibling of mine got one of these red-light camera bills in the mail and tried to blame it on a younger sibling. That is, until it was made abundantly clear by the big mop of 80s hair-band style (bright red) hair behind the wheel that it was her. Really, the term "lip over the nose" was made for her, as she sulked the rest of the day that she was caught, LOL. We had so much fun teasing her. She didn't pay, and I think she might've got her license suspended for it (or maybe it was another one of her million infractions, I don't know exactly) but she was caught for driving with a suspended license, too. Lol, twit.
Ditto for photo radar... although Arizona found a way to solve that problem. They have speed cameras set up on freeways in Phoenix, which take high-resolution snapshots of both the vehicle AND the driver, so then the driver gets charged.Marquisse wrote:There is something so fundamentally wrong with charging $325 when you really don't know who was behind it.
That falls into the Nelson Munce "HA HA!" category.Marquisse wrote:Really, the term "lip over the nose" was made for her, as she sulked the rest of the day that she was caught, LOL.
http://www.OntarioTicket.com OR http://www.OHTA.ca
Not so...red lights are absolute liability offences. If it is heavy rain, snow etc...you are REQUIRED to adjust your driving speed so that you can stop.The evidence is indisputable from the photos, but there are extenuating circumstances such as weather conditions (heavy rain).
So many people blame the roads, if the roads are bad..slow down!