Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Photo Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Drivers contest photo enforcement, cite calibration and timing; court reduces fines and dismisses one citation
Summary
Several defendants challenged photo enforcement and yellow‑to‑red timing at Bothell Way intersections; the judge discussed video evidence and calibration records and reduced or dismissed cases based on testimony and review.
Several motorists contested photo‑enforcement or red‑light and school‑zone speed citations during the Lake Forest Park Municipal Court May 12 calendar, raising questions about camera calibration and the timing of yellow‑to‑red signals. Judge Jennifer Grant reviewed video and photographic evidence and reduced or dismissed some charges.
In a contested hearing, Jamal Hamid said he regularly drives at 20 mph in school zones while working for ride‑hail services and disputed the ticket showing 26 mph. After the judge reviewed the photo evidence and told him the calibration and maintenance records for the enforcement devices are available to the court and the public, Hamid accepted mitigation and the judge reduced a first offense to $75.
A separate contested hearing prompted lengthier discussion after a defendant identified in the docket as Burton Brueggemann showed courtroom video frames and argued his vehicle was on the stop/white line while the light changed from yellow to red. He asked the court to consider the video and said he had no prior moving violations. The judge examined photos and the video frames on screen, noted the standard of proof in infractions is a preponderance of the evidence, and said the photographs showed the vehicle straddling the lane “at a red light.” After hearing the argument, the judge said she would dismiss the charged violation for that hearing and ordered the court to pursue a separate October citation by considering a good‑cause filing and follow‑up on mailing addresses for the earlier citation.
Judge Grant explained that for photo enforcement contests the court may review officer statements, calibration and maintenance certifications, photos and video, and that the evidence commonly relied on is the video footage and the statutory presumptions attaching to registered‑owner notices. She also cautioned that repeated borderline entries on yellow can lead to multiple citations if the camera records the vehicle when the signal is red.
The court reduced several first‑offense photo‑enforcement fines to amounts in the $75–$90 range where mitigation applied and dismissed other cases when defendants swore they were not the driver on the date of violation.
No systemic changes to photo enforcement were ordered; the session resolved individual cases by mitigation, dismissal or direction to file paperwork for further review.
