Judge Grant dismisses one photo ticket and reduces penalties for several drivers at 2:30 infraction calendar

Judge Grant, presiding over the 2:30 infraction calendar, dismissed one photo-enforcement ticket and reduced penalties in multiple other cases after reviewing video evidence and hearing mitigation from defendants.

The decisions affect at least four photo-enforcement cases on the afternoon calendar: a photo-speeding ticket dismissed for Louis Contreras after he swore he was not the driver; reduced fines for a red-light camera violation involving a driver identified in the record as Ms. Saba; a school-zone photo ticket for Xiao Wei reduced to $90; and a red-light camera case for Andre Johnston reduced to $90 or converted to five community-service hours. Judge Grant also announced that the case of Juniper Anzalone, who failed to appear, will be held until the next day before entering a default finding.

Judge Grant opened the calendar and said she had reviewed the city’s evidence, including the notice of infraction, photographs and video footage. In a red-light camera case where the vehicle was stopped with its rear tires beyond the stop line, Judge Grant told the defendant, “I will reduce this to $60,” citing consideration of the defendant’s financial situation and the footage showing the car partly past the line.

In the photo-speeding matter involving Louis Contreras (case 250149468), Contreras swore under penalty of perjury that he was not driving the vehicle on the date of the violation. Judge Grant said that the registered-owner presumption was rebutted by his sworn statement and dismissed the ticket: “I’m gonna dismiss this. Alright?”

In a school-zone speeding case for Xiao Wei (case 250086512), Judge Grant reviewed the recorded speed and noted it was a first offense. She reduced the penalty from $145 to $90 and said she would send an updated invoice to the defendant.

When Andre Johnston asked for mitigation after a red‑light citation, he described traffic conditions and said he was willing to perform community service. Judge Grant reviewed the video and the traffic context and said, “I will reduce this violation to $90,” adding she would “allow you to perform 5 community service hours in lieu of paying the $90” and that the hours must be completed and returned on letterhead with the case number within 60 days.

For the calendar’s missed‑appearance item, Judge Grant said the clerk mailed a notice for the 2 p.m. hearing, the defendant (Juniper Anzalone, case 250139501) did not appear by 3:17 p.m., and the judge would hold the matter until the next day; if the defendant does not appear then, the judge said, the failure‑to‑appear will stand and penalties will be imposed by default.

Judge Grant also quoted the governing statute in one red‑light discussion, identifying the Revised Code of Washington and citing RCW 46.61.055 (rules for traffic-control signals) while explaining the obligation to stop at a clearly marked stop line or, if none, before entering the crosswalk.

The court told defendants it would mail reduced invoices or forms (for community service) to the addresses on file. Several defendants confirmed they would accept the reductions or complete community service as offered. The calendar concluded after the judge indicated she would hold an FTA determination for one defendant until the following day.

Less-critical details: the judge offered an option to convert some reductions into community service hours (four or five hours in the cases discussed) and discussed deadlines (typically 30 or 60 days) for payment or completion of service. Specific due dates will be included on mailed notices or forms from the court.