Red light does not always mean stop

Sgt_Pepper_2

Short but complaint amber phase on a slippery road. Going through on red is no defence. As you said you drive to the conditions.

Joe_Horner

If the amber was compliant. It almost certainly was, but that video is ambiguous enough to suggest it wasn't. As I said, that's why evidential video has to be of a certain standard (especially in criminal cases) and I don't believe this would be.

Incidentally, on the chevrons the definition of "necessary" is moot because, to be in the position he was, the OP had ignored a "right turn only" arrow in the lane he approaced the chevron in

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Brackenbury+Street,+Preston&hl=en&ll=53.768862,-2.705984&spn=0.000322,0.000862&sll=53.768678,-2.706242&sspn=0.002575,0.006899&oq=Bracken+Street,+preston&t=h&gl=uk&hnear=Brackenbury+St,+Preston,+United+Kingdom&z=20

TrickyWicky

Round here you're lucky to see a working red light! I've just had to report a junction that has numerous dead red lights on it. There are so many that its dangerous now.

Sgt_Pepper_2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

If the amber was compliant. It almost certainly was, but that video is ambiguous enough to suggest it wasn't. As I said, that's why evidential video has to be of a certain standard (especially in criminal cases) and I don't believe this would be.

Incidentally, on the chevrons the definition of "necessary" is moot because, to be in the position he was, the OP had ignored a "right turn only" arrow in the lane he approaced the chevron in

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Brackenbury+Street,+Preston&hl=en&ll=53.768862,-2.705984&spn=0.000322,0.000862&sll=53.768678,-2.706242&sspn=0.002575,0.006899&oq=Bracken+Street,+preston&t=h&gl=uk&hnear=Brackenbury+St,+Preston,+United+Kingdom&z=20

The quality is ok

Joe_Horner

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

The quality is ok

Ok for a civil dispute about a parking bump, but probably not for a criminal prosecution, especially without a police or similar witness to back it up. When did those ambers light up? You know, the ones that are exactly the same colour as the greens and reds in those vids?

Which will be why the Op has been advised that prosecution is unlikely but they'll contact the Rk and have a word - it's about all they can do on the strength of that footage!

sharpy2010

derrick wrote: »

Don't see why you are baffled, I have a dashboard camera for those events where it may be needed,I do not report everything to the police, but these 3 idiots had plenty of time to stop. but did not want to loose those 40 seconds at a red light, in fact the van in the second video I caught up to at the next set of lights, then when he sped off again I caught him up at a set of lights 2 miles down the road, no gain, but I bet he though he had.

.

I've got a feeling that the OP is what most normal people would describe as a weirdo.

Sgt_Pepper_2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Ok for a civil dispute about a parking bump, but probably not for a criminal prosecution, especially without a police or similar witness to back it up. When did those ambers light up? You know, the ones that are exactly the same colour as the greens and reds in those vids?

Which will be why the Op has been advised that prosecution is unlikely but they'll contact the Rk and have a word - it's about all they can do on the strength of that footage!

Video of lesser quality than that has been used in criminal prosecutions. Unless you're some sort of expert and are going to tell up it hasn't.

Joe_Horner

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

Video of lesser quality than that has been used in criminal prosecutions. Unless you're some sort of expert and are going to tell up it hasn't.

Not over something as minor as a traffic light offence as far as I know? And not without expert analysis in this case to address the following points (at least):

Video 1: Wrong date / time, no readable registrations at all, no clear light timings but appears to be amber for as short as 1 second.

Video 2: No readable registration, poor angle / perspective (especially with the fish-eye effect on the lens) to judge when the car passes the lights, no clear timing of the lights because of the poor colour resolution. You can't tell as the OP completes his turn whether the lights are on green or amber and you can only just see the change to red around 14 seconds, with the car passing the line between 15 and 16 seconds - quite possibly too close to stop safely if the amber was short (which you can't tell).

Both: What provenance have they got? Have they been tampered with - easy enough, I'll do you a version later where they go through on amber if you like?

Those were spotted on a couple of quick views with no real interest except for a forum discussion - I'm sure more problems could be identified if needed. Some of these issues might be resolved by having the original file rather than the youtube version but lots of wriggle room for a defence lawyer to establish reasonable doubt and little for a prosecutor to counter it, at least without running up disproportionate costs.

fivetide

If you come along the road to a green traffic light there is only one colour it is going to go next.

Anyone driving properly should be ready to stop when the inevitable happens.

5t.

derrick

I will answer some of the queries in this post.

The police have the whole footage of both videos, the camera records in 10 minute loops, I am pretty certain they will have had a look at all of the footage to see if I am culpable of anything, but they have said nothing.

You do not need to have the lights in colour, (how do colour blind people manage?), everyone knows that the top light is red, the centre light is amber and the bottom light is green.

Driving over chevrons with broken edge lines is not illegal, most drivers turning right do the same at that junction, (as you can see the van driver doing so), due to the inside lane “backing up”

When making that right turn, it is very rare to be able to make the next set of lights on green, as the sequencing of the lights nearly always means you will hit the lights in question on red. I have just run the second video again on my computer, and I can see the amber light as I am half way through my R/H turn, (11 seconds into the clip), meaning the van was not even at the bus stop when the amber light was on and had not reached the arrows when it went red, (14 seconds, confirming the 3 second "rule"), and also that as someone said earlier all three of the vehicles went through on red, but I could only get the vans registration on video


No, I do not hog the outside lane of a motorway.

When viewed on a computer screen directly from the video camera you can easily see the light changes, the amber light is on as the van passes the bus shelter.

I explained about the date/time stamp in the first video and the traffic constable,(lets stop elevating their status to officers, most of the police are constables), did not seem fussed about it.

Yep, maybe should not have used the horn.

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

Perhaps Derek can post some legislation to back it up?

Back what up?

photome wrote: »

Shocking driving from the OP, I hope someone was following him with a dashcam and reporting him

I fail to see any shocking driving by me!

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

Have you seen the Audi one?

The Audi changes lane as he does, Derek is straight on the horn and u'd edits the clip as he does him up the near side.

Maybe you should have your eyes checked, the Audi brakes, I change lanes, the Audi changes lanes in front of me and brakes for no reason as there is nothing in front of him.

neilmcl wrote: »

Driving over broken chevrons is perfectly within the law when turning right. Incidentally OP what camera are you using?

Camera similar,(if not exact), to this one ,problem is with it re the fish eye is that it shows when played back like the objects are further away than they actually are, i.e if I stop 6 feet behind someone, it appears on the camera as if I am about 10 feet away.

baza52 wrote: »

I like the video of the back of his computer best

The video for the back of my computer was in relation to a techie question I asked on here and I needed to show the connections on the rear of the computer.

Joe_Horner wrote: »

If the drivers in the first video had been driving at a sensible speed for the conditions before the lights started to change, the chances are that they could have stopped anyway.

They where driving slower than me as the lights changed to amber, I was passing the Ford driver, when the lights changed to amber he floored it, the second one, well what more can be said, I had easily stopped at the lights with normal braking.

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Incidentally, on the chevrons the definition of "necessary" is moot because, to be in the position he was, the OP had ignored a "right turn only" arrow in the lane he approaced the chevron in

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=Brackenbury+Street,+Preston&hl=en&ll=53.768862,-2.705984&spn=0.000322,0.000862&sll=53.768678,-2.706242&sspn=0.002575,0.006899&oq=Bracken+Street,+preston&t=h&gl=uk&hnear=Brackenbury+St,+Preston,+United+Kingdom&z=20

Arrows on the road are advisory not mandatory.

The registrations of both vehicles are readable in both videos at different positions in the videos,the police have identified these from those videos,(I said this in my OP).

.