Good information.  Thanks for contributing.  //Jack

On 14 Dec 2002, at 22:03, Loren A. Busch wrote:

> I guess I'll have to jump in on this thread on yellow/red/green lights. The
> following info is based on my experience with a 'ran the red' ticket I
> fought and won about 20 years ago.  Other jurisdictions may be different,
> my problem was in Seattle. 1.  The ticket is normally for 'Entering the
> intersection on the red light', no on the yellow light.  In other words,
> the judge presumes that the yellow is a warning that the light will change
> to red and you had time enough to stop if you were traveling the speed
> limit. 2.  The duration of the yellow light is not set by statute, but
> according to the traffic engineers is usually set at one second per ten
> miles an hour of the speed limit: 25mph = 2.5 secs, 30 mph = 3 seconds,
> etc. 3.  The traffic engineers, and a knowledgeable judge, are familiar
> with the area as you approach an intersection that is called the 'dilemma
> zone'. That is the area that a driver traveling the speed limit must make a
> go-no-go decision when the light turns yellow.  If the driver slams on the
> brakes he may end up stopping into the intersection or get rear ended. If
> the driver continues, the light might turn red as he enters the
> intersection, and will probably still be in the intersection when the light
> turns red even though he did not 'enter the intersection on the red light'.
> 4.  In my case I was caught in the dilemma zone on wet pavement and chose
> to go through the intersection.  Both myself and the cop watched the
> cycling of the light and agreed that the yellow seemed very short, about
> 1.5 seconds.  I asked for a court date, contacted the engineering
> department.  They checked the light and found it was not adjusted to their
> normal standards.  They even provided me a letter stating that. When I got
> to court the cop very honestly testified, when asked by me, that the yellow
> seemed shorter than normal.  With that and the letter from engineering, the
> judge dismissed. Another point:  The person that started this thread
> mentioned that it would cost him more if he went to court and lost than if
> he just paid the fine.  Many jurisdictions seem to get away with this, but
> it is flat illegal, long standing US Supreme Court decisions on this:  You
> cannot put someone in additional jeopardy because he asks for a 'day in
> court'. Many jurisdictions try to get around this by assessing 'court
> costs' if you ask for a court date and lose.  This one takes a good
> attorney to beat, but some judges will listen If the losing defendant asks
> why he is being further punished for asking to be heard in court.  A city
> also cannot force you to 'post bond' in order to get a court date on a
> traffic ticket (Seattle case in the 1960's or 1970's, pursued all the way
> to the US Supreme Court and won by a lawyer now a member of the Washington
> State Supreme Court.  It was his own ticket)
>
> There is one way to reform the 'chipee' ticket problems that exist in
> virtually all jurisdictions:  Ask for a court date on EVERY ONE!
> Parking tickets and all!  If we all did this in every jurisdiction
> around the US for one month, the courts would be backlogged for years
> and the revenue flow that the 'city fathers' so depend on would drop to a
> trickle.