Post by
JAFO »
https://forums.nicoclub.com/jafo-u96379.html
Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:43 am
The actual code as written states:
(1) Identifies the system by signs that clearly indicate the system's presence and are visible to traffic approaching from all directions, OR posts signs at all major entrances to the city, including, at a minimum, freeways, bridges, and state highway routes
You may want to check the "major" entrances to the city for the correct signage. According to the code, this would be acceptible as well.
Another thing to keep in mind is the number of times you use that intersection. If it is close to your residence, don't expect any lenience as you should have been aware of it's existance for awhile now.
I have gone to court to fight a ticket before and there was a gentleman there who attempted to fight a similar charge. Basically, he did not make a complete stop at a stop sign that was right in his neighborhood. He claimed that the actual sign was covered by an adjacent tree (which it was as he had pictures of the obscured sign), however there was still a limit line and the word "STOP" painted on the street. Add that to the fact that the judge asked him how long he had been a resident at this current address (to which he replied that he had been there a long time, 20+ years, I don't quite recall). The judge then asked how long that Stop sign had been there, which was 15 or so years. Given the fact that the gentleman had lived in the area for 15 years while that stop sign was there, it was decided that he would have known about it beyond a reasonable doubt. Plus the fact that the limit line and STOP were painted on the street gave him no credible defense.
That day, I watched about 20 people before me all come into court with their arguments and all 20 of them were dismissed. I was the only one who "won" their argument (I didn't fight that I was guilty of running that red light, I just objected to the $384.00 the City was trying to charge me for it. I thought it egregious for the offense and the judge sided with me. I ended up paying about $80 bucks for it. Anyway, there is a camera and a sign on that intersection now stating the minimum fine and that it is camera enforced).
ANYWAY, if you are to go to court, I can't stress the following enough:
1. Dress properly. At the very least, wear a long sleeve button shirt, slacks and NO SNEAKERS! I couldn't tell you how many people were there in sweat pants and Raider jerseys and T-shirts. They just look like they don't give a **** and are thusly treated that way.
2. Address the judge as "your honor" or "judge" or "sir/ma'am". The answer to every question or the start of every statement should include one of these three (e.g. "Yes, your honor." or "Your honor, on the date in question...").
3. Do your research. You did well in pulling up the law, but it does state that a sign must be placed at the intersection OR at major entrances to the city. Make sure that there isn't a sign stating cameras are in effect at highway entrances. If there isn't one posted at an entrance close to where your infraction takes place, you may have a case ("Your honor, I understand the code states that a sign may be posted at major entrances to the city, however the closest sign to my residence is at an intersection 7 miles away from me. I find this to be unfair.").
3. Whatever you do, don't "throw a bunch of facts at the judge and have him get tired of me and just say what ever, case dismissed lol". This will not work in your favor. As a matter of fact, it will work against you. A judge's time is valuable. If he sees you throwing a bunch of Constitutional bull**** his way, he'll just rule against you for wasting his time. You have a pretty solid case with the vehicle code item, just stick with that and investigate the freeway entrances a bit more.
Good luck!