Breaking a red light

PokeHerKing

Hi folks,

Went through an orange light (to me) but red according to the guard that pulled me over just now. He said it was red I said orange etc, but I shut up once he said it was red. Didn't agree/disagree.

He then said "look its a 60e fine and 3 penalty points", fairly nonchalantly and then quickly followed with "look I know everyone is trying to get home and with everything going on we don't want any accidents, so just be more careful in future".

I said ok fair play, thanks a lot and that was that. Drove off thinking it was a warning but then I got to googling once I got home and now I'm thinking ill be getting the fine/points in the post.

So my question is, should he have asked for my licence or is the exchange we had enough and he can issue the fine/points off the back of it?

Cheers

JustAThought

Id guess you’ll be OK and he was just making his point and letting you know to make you stew a
bit. I’ve been pulled over once or twice in my
driving life for similar ( officer, you are
mistaken, from where I was
looking it was definately orange) Then I stewed and sat at home worrying if I was getting a court date/ unpleasant expensive letter - but they never arrived! I’d say you were in the clear. Next time look behind you before you break a red/almost red light!!

Dempo1

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Hi folks,

Went through an orange light (to me) but red according to the guard that pulled me over just now. He said it was red I said orange etc, but I shut up once he said it was red. Didn't agree/disagree.

He then said "look its a 60e fine and 3 penalty points", fairly nonchalantly and then quickly followed with "look I know everyone is trying to get home and with everything going on we don't want any accidents, so just be more careful in future".

I said ok fair play, thanks a lot and that was that. Drove off thinking it was a warning but then I got to googling once I got home and now I'm thinking ill be getting the fine/points in the post.

So my question is, should he have asked for my licence or is the exchange we had enough and he can issue the fine/points off the back of it?

Cheers

To be honest, Garda seemed quite reasonable. The fact they didn't ask for ID etc suggests it won't progress beyond a verbal advisory, that's my thinking. The license itself would have to be produced at a court summons to facilitate points only. Registered owners of vehicles can be summonsed based on car licence number but you suggest no evidential details were asked for or taken so based on this the matter won't be persued.

PokeHerKing

Cheers folks. Certainly felt like a warning/advice from the guard. A literal 2 min conversation as outlined in my OP pretty much verbatim.

But upon googling, I've come across a lot of similar encounters from people where they drove off thinking it was a warning only to get the points/fine in the post a few weeks later.

So I am wondering if legally the guard would have required my license or could he proceed to issue the fine/points based off our interaction alone?

Dempo1

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Cheers folks. Certainly felt like a warning/advice from the guard. A literal 2 min conversation as outlined in my OP pretty much verbatim.

But upon googling, I've come across a lot of similar encounters from people where they drove off thinking it was a warning only to get the points/fine in the post a few weeks later.

So I am wondering if legally the guard would have required my license or could he proceed to issue the fine/points based off our interaction alone?

The Garda would require nothing other than appearing in court and confirming encounter, it's also likely they might be video footage from patrol car but again, this scenario highly unlikely give your explanation of encounter.

Samuel T. Cogley

Just as an aside amber means stop unless unsafe to do so, so the it was amber argument may have been moot anyway.

PokeHerKing

OK cheers for the info, I'll just have to wait and see so!

hullaballoo

I am not an authority on Garda behaviour but I have heard they are reluctant to issue fines for breaking a red because there's a perception that it's easy to get into the witness box and swear the light was orange and get the case thrown out.

I do not know whether this is still the case or even if it ever was. But it does seem to me that having someone swear the light was orange should be enough to raise a reasonable doubt in a lot of cases.

Lenar3556

PokeHerKing wrote: »

OK cheers for the info, I'll just have to wait and see so!

He would need to establish who was driving, usually by asking to see your driving licence. Did he ask for, and record your name or address?

If you are also the registered owner, it is possible that he could obtain your name and address using your registration number, but unlikely he would resort to this in the set of circumstances you describe.

Lenar3556

hullaballoo wrote: »

I am not an authority on Garda behaviour but I have heard they are reluctant to issue fines for breaking a red because there's a perception that it's easy to get into the witness box and swear the light was orange and get the case thrown out.

I do not know whether this is still the case or even if it ever was. But it does seem to me that having someone swear the light was orange should be enough to raise a reasonable doubt in a lot of cases.

Given the nature of the district court, my experience is that it comes down to credibility, and in a matter like this the judge is likely to prefer the evidence of the Garda. The scenario you describe might get more mileage on appeal to the circuit.

Incidentally, claiming it was amber would not be enough to get you away, unless you could also demonstrate that it was unsafe to stop!

emeldc

Dempo1 wrote: »

The Garda would require nothing other than appearing in court and confirming encounter, it's also likely they might be video footage from patrol car but again, this scenario highly unlikely give your explanation of encounter.

And how would he prove who was driving.

irish_man

Amber means prepare to stop not step on it. Far too many people step on it unfortunately. The Garda was correct and no arguing will change their mind. Just accept you were in the wrong and apologise.

LaLa2004

Please think twice before running a red light.

On my son's walking route to school there is a T junction. Cars regularly turn left on the red while children crossing the junction have a green man. The children can't see the cars coming around the corner.

It is so dangerous.

machiavellianme

LaLa2004 wrote: »

Please think twice before running a red light.

On my son's walking route to school there is a T junction. Cars regularly turn left on the red while children crossing the junction have a green man. The children can't see the cars coming around the corner.

It is so dangerous.

The Problem is that many of the lights around Dublin (particularly DLR) are so short that only 1,maybe 2 cars get through on green now so others chance it rather than waiting again. There's been so many incidents as a result.
We need to bring in the red+orange like in the UK. Everyone is gunning to go on green (or earlier) that no one dares risk running on the red.

hullaballoo

Lenar3556 wrote: »

Given the nature of the district court, my experience is that it comes down to credibility, and in a matter like this the judge is likely to prefer the evidence of the Garda. The scenario you describe might get more mileage on appeal to the circuit.

Incidentally, claiming it was amber would not be enough to get you away, unless you could also demonstrate that it was unsafe to stop!

Not saying for a second you're wrong as I think you have significant experience in these things but what is the statutory offence of failing to stop at a red light do you know?

I'm interested to know where the definitions of what you have to do at an amber light might be!

yaboya1

I am also interested in the legal interpretation here.

I know you are supposed to stop on amber unless it is unsafe to do so. However, if you get a fine/points for specifically breaking a red light, would you have any chance in court if you could prove the light wasn't red?

For example, if the light was amber and you had ample time to stop but didn't, would the judge side with the guard as you should have stopped? Or would he/she let you off on a technicality as the light wasn't red (as that's what you're charged with)?

machiavellianme

This is why everyone needs a dash am. Avoids the whol6 he said she said....

yaboya1

machiavellianme wrote: »

This is why everyone needs a dash am. Avoids the whol6 he said she said....

Assuming there was dashcam footage available in my scenario above, do you know the answer?

I know the driver would still be in the wrong, but who would the judge side with, given the charge would be breaking a red light and the driver could prove this wasn't the case (albeit still disobeying the rules of the road )?

PokeHerKing

Lenar3556 wrote: »

He would need to establish who was driving, usually by asking to see your driving licence. Did he ask for, and record your name or address?

No didn't ask me any questions or ask me to produce my licence. I'd say the conversation was all of 60 seconds.

Lenar3556 wrote: »

If you are also the registered owner, it is possible that he could obtain your name and address using your registration number, but unlikely he would resort to this in the set of circumstances you describe.

I am the registered owner of the car.

Samuel T. Cogley

hullaballoo wrote: »

Not saying for a second you're wrong as I think you have significant experience in these things but what is the statutory offence of failing to stop at a red light do you know?

I'm interested to know where the definitions of what you have to do at an amber light might be!

ROAD TRAFFIC (TRAFFIC AND PARKING) REGULATIONS, 1997

30. (1) Where traffic sign number RTS 00I, RTS 002, RTS 003 or RTS 004 (referred to in these Regulations as traffic lights) is provided, a person shall not drive a vehicle past the traffic lights, or past traffic sign number RRM 017 [stop line] where such sign is provided in association with the traffic lights when the red lamp of the traffic light is illuminated.

(2) A driver of a vehicle approaching traffic lights in which a non-flashing amber light is illuminated, shall not drive the vehicle past the traffic lights, or past traffic sign number RRM 017 [stop line] when such sign is provided in association with the traffic lights, save when the vehicle is so close to the traffic lights that it cannot safely be stopped before passing the traffic lights or traffic sign number RRM 017.

Was that what you were looking for?

Samuel T. Cogley

Lenar3556 wrote: »

Incidentally, claiming it was amber would not be enough to get you away, unless you could also demonstrate that it was unsafe to stop!

Surely it would be incumbant on the prosecution to show that it was safe to stop?

Cordell

For how long did you see the amber light? Did you pass just after green turned to amber, or just before amber turned to red? If the latter, maybe you last saw it amber, but you actually passed on red.
Normally there should be 3 seconds of amber, and you are reasonably justified to pass maybe in the first second, onwards you actually have enough time to stop.

brian_t

Cordell wrote: »

For how long did you see the amber light? Did you pass just after green turned to amber, or just before amber turned to red? If the latter, maybe you last saw it amber, but you actually passed on red.
Normally there should be 3 seconds of amber, and you are reasonably justified to pass maybe in the first second, onwards you actually have enough time to stop.

In your rearview mirror you might see a car flying up behind you, expecting to follow you through the amber lights.

Samuel T. Cogley

brian_t wrote: »

In your rearview mirror you might see a car flying up behind you, expecting to follow you through the amber lights.

Just for the sake of legal discussion, going by the definition above, I don't think that factors in. It only seems to allow for the closeness of the line.

Beltby

brian_t wrote: »

In your rearview mirror you might see a car flying up behind you, expecting to follow you through the amber lights.

And?

If you bonnet a child, would your excuse be 'your man was flying up behind me so I couldn't stop on the amber'?

Cordell

brian_t wrote: »

In your rearview mirror you might see a car flying up behind you, expecting to follow you through the amber lights.

This is why you don't slam on the brakes, but still you need to approach the lights well prepared to stop. 3 seconds of amber is more than enough to not be surprised and if you jump the red light then it's either because you were not careful or you chose to do so. In both cases the points and fine are well deserved.

And for the OP, what the guard said is no guarantee you will not get it. This is what they do, they're not looking for a confrontation, it also happened to me, I was polite and apologized, he was polite and offered me advice to slow down, couple of weeks later the letter went through my letterbox.

PokeHerKing

Cordell wrote: »

This is why you don't slam on the brakes, but still you need to approach the lights well prepared to stop. 3 seconds of amber is more than enough to not be surprised and if you jump the red light then it's either because you were not careful or you chose to do so. In both cases the points and fine are well deserved.

And for the OP, what the guard said is no guarantee you will not get it. This is what they do, they're not looking for a confrontation, it also happened to me, I was polite and apologized, he was polite and offered me advice to slow down, couple of weeks later the letter went through my letterbox.

Yeah I'm thinking the fact he said its a 60e fine and 3 penalty points at the very start of the brief conversation was him stating his position.

Maybe he didn't ask for my licence given the whole covid situation. If he doesn't need to ask for it to issue the fine/points then I reckon I'm done.

Can't imagine he'd bother pulling me over for a friendly warning the more I think about it. But there's definitely a lot of ambiguity to the encounter which I don't think there should be when dealing with the law.

Del2005

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Hi folks,

Went through an orange light (to me) but red according to the guard that pulled me over just now. He said it was red I said orange etc, but I shut up once he said it was red. Didn't agree/disagree.

He then said "look its a 60e fine and 3 penalty points", fairly nonchalantly and then quickly followed with "look I know everyone is trying to get home and with everything going on we don't want any accidents, so just be more careful in future".

I said ok fair play, thanks a lot and that was that. Drove off thinking it was a warning but then I got to googling once I got home and now I'm thinking ill be getting the fine/points in the post.

So my question is, should he have asked for my licence or is the exchange we had enough and he can issue the fine/points off the back of it?

Cheers

I'd bring my documents to my local station and present them, if you get a receipt back with the location you were sopped then there'll be a fine in the post. I've heard of plenty of people getting stopped and the Garda saying nothing only for fine to drop through the letter box a few weeks later, which has non production of documents added.

LaLa2004 wrote: »

Please think twice before running a red light.

On my son's walking route to school there is a T junction. Cars regularly turn left on the red while children crossing the junction have a green man. The children can't see the cars coming around the corner.

It is so dangerous.

Out Tallaght way it's got so bad that it's risky to stop at reds if there's traffic behind you, worse time I counted 10 cars going through a red on the N81, and now I have to seriously consider breaking when I see an orange or red light if there's another vehicle behind me.

Cordell

If he took your details then you're going to get it.

yaboya1

yaboya1 wrote: »

I am also interested in the legal interpretation here.

I know you are supposed to stop on amber unless it is unsafe to do so. However, if you get a fine/points for specifically breaking a red light, would you have any chance in court if you could prove the light wasn't red?

For example, if the light was amber and you had ample time to stop but didn't, would the judge side with the guard as you should have stopped? Or would he/she let you off on a technicality as the light wasn't red (as that's what you're charged with)?

yaboya1 wrote: »

Assuming there was dashcam footage available in my scenario above, do you know the answer?

I know the driver would still be in the wrong, but who would the judge side with, given the charge would be breaking a red light and the driver could prove this wasn't the case (albeit still disobeying the rules of the road )?

Anyone??

Cordell

For example, if the light was amber and you had ample time to stop but didn't, would the judge side with the guard as you should have stopped?

I think it's very likely, given that between you, the judge and the guard the latter is the most qualified to appreciate that it was safe to stop.

VANG1

It is always amazing to me how the dawdling drivers half asleep taking off slowly can suddenly speed up once the lights go orange !!!

yaboya1

Cordell wrote: »

I think it's very likely, given that between you, the judge and the guard the latter is the most qualified to appreciate that it was safe to stop.

Is that a yes to the question? Nobody is saying the guard isn't the most qualified to make that judgement, but that's not the charge.
The driver would be disobeying the rules of the road, however if the charge was 'breaking a red light', would the judge side with the guard or acquit the driver on a technicality?

PokeHerKing

Del2005 wrote: »

I'd bring my documents to my local station and present them, if you get a receipt back with the location you were sopped then there'll be a fine in the post. I've heard of plenty of people getting stopped and the Garda saying nothing only for fine to drop through the letter box a few weeks later, which has non production of documents

Do you mean present myself/licence to my local station and say nothing about the incident other than I was stopped and asked to present my docs to my local station and see if they know what its for?

What if they query where and why I was stopped before doing anything with the docs, do I plead the 5th? Or have I misinterpreted your post?

PokeHerKing

Cordell wrote: »

If he took your details then you're going to get it.

He took no details off me personally but my reg is in plain view...

Del2005

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Do you mean present myself/licence to my local station and say nothing about the incident other than I was stopped and asked to present my docs to my local station and see if they know what its for?

What if they query where and why I was stopped before doing anything with the docs, do I plead the 5th? Or have I misinterpreted your post?

Tell the truth you where stopped by a Garda and you weren't sure if you had to present your documents or not, they won't care what for they just put the info into PULSE.

Del2005

yaboya1 wrote: »

Anyone??

If you have dash cam footage you'd better be sure that you couldn't stop safely and that you weren't speeding, they won't let you off if you drove through amber if you could have stopped.

yaboya1

Del2005 wrote: »

If you have dash cam footage you'd better be sure that you couldn't stop safely and that you weren't speeding, they won't let you off if you drove through amber if you could have stopped.

That's my hypothetical question.
If the charge is breaking a red light, would you lose if you decided to go to court knowing you hadn't broken a red light, but also knowing that you had enough time to stop safely?

So you'd be innocent of the charge of breaking a red light.

Would the judge side with the guard in that case given you breached the rules of the road or would he/she let you off on a technicality as you would not be guilty of the charge presented?

Samuel T. Cogley

yaboya1 wrote: »

That's my hypothetical question.
If the charge is breaking a red light, would you lose if you decided to go to court knowing you hadn't broken a red light, but also knowing that you had enough time to stop safely?

So you'd be innocent of the charge of breaking a red light.

Would the judge side with the guard in that case given you breached the rules of the road or would he/she let you off on a technicality as you would not be guilty of the charge presented?

It's not specifically a red light, it's failure to obey lights in general.

kravmaga

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Hi folks,

Went through an orange light (to me) but red according to the guard that pulled me over just now. He said it was red I said orange etc, but I shut up once he said it was red. Didn't agree/disagree.

He then said "look its a 60e fine and 3 penalty points", fairly nonchalantly and then quickly followed with "look I know everyone is trying to get home and with everything going on we don't want any accidents, so just be more careful in future".

I said ok fair play, thanks a lot and that was that. Drove off thinking it was a warning but then I got to googling once I got home and now I'm thinking ill be getting the fine/points in the post.

So my question is, should he have asked for my licence or is the exchange we had enough and he can issue the fine/points off the back of it?

Cheers

You got away with it, if he asked you to produce your driving licence and you saw his black pocket book come out then you would be in trouble.

If he was Garda Traffic division he/she would have done you btw.

Count yourself lucky this time, that said, say if the cars on the opposite light took off the min the green light came on, could have been a nasty accident.

I presume you were heavy on the foot going through on the amber/ red light? Amber light= prepare to stop. Red light= stop. Green=proceed with caution.

kravmaga

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Do you mean present myself/licence to my local station and say nothing about the incident other than I was stopped and asked to present my docs to my local station and see if they know what its for?

What if they query where and why I was stopped before doing anything with the docs, do I plead the 5th? Or have I misinterpreted your post?

Dont produce your licence or any other documentation if you were not asked to do so by the Garda at the traffic stop.

They only ask to produce if you do not have your licence on you.

The Garda also usually asks what station are you going to produce at? If the Garda did not ask you this then dont go to your local station or any station.

Leave as is.

PhilOssophy

in Ireland, stopping if safe to do so on amber would probably result in you being rear-ended!

seagull

I've certainly been in the situation of approaching a light as it turned amber, checking the mirror ahead of braking, and realising there was no way the car behind would stop, as they were busy accelerating. It would have been safe to stop if the driver behind wasn't a tosspot, but not safe to stop with his driving.

Potential-Monke

How fast do ye people be going that the person behind ye is an issue? 50kmph is not that fast, it has a braking distance of 14m. In city traffic, you shouldn't even be doing that. It's why I don't drive it on in Dublin, I'm fully aware that people are accustomed to breaking lights, but if I'm not moving that fast to begin with, it won't give the tosser behind me a chance to accelerate up my hole.

Anyway, the offence isn't breaking a red/amber lights, it's an offence contrary to those regulations, as seen here in Road Traffic Act, 2002

Part IV, Section 2:

"21 Offence consisting of contravention of article 30
Failure by vehicle to obey traffic lights or to halt at traffic sign adjacent to such lights
(Points: )2
(Points after failed appeal: ) 5"

Note: I'm not sure if further amendments have changed any of this, but it looks right from when I was still a Garda. I think something might have changed the 2 to 3 at some stage, but not 100% on that (based on the speeding changing from 2 to 3 points a while back).

End of the day, in a city, you shouldn't be caught out by the light changing from green to amber. You should have more than plenty of time to stop once that happens. If not, you're either right next to the lights or speeding (imo). It's another reason I hate Dublin.

And even if someone does rear-end you, unless they had a dash cam showing you reversing into them (or witnesses not in either car), there's no excuse for rear ending someone. Granted, pain in the hole to have to deal with, but the days of not calling your insurance company are gone (unless there's no damage or very little and you're not bothered). I'd imagine someone last minute accelerating to beat a light won't be leaving small damage to the car in front, so an insurance job anyway.

(I also pity the fool who does rear end me. Mercedes dealers are not cheap, even for a 10/11 year old Merc!)

seagull

Potential-Monke wrote: »

How fast do ye people be going that the person behind ye is an issue?

Anything from 5 - 60. I've had it in rush hour traffic where you could get about 3 cars through the intersection per change, except the car behind would decide that it should be 5. Try stopping, and he'd be in the back of your car.

Samuel T. Cogley

Oh **** the light has gone green, was looking at the phone / picking my nose. I'll just leisurely let the old hand brake off there... oh feck I'm in the wrong gear, oh silly me, ah there we go now accelerate slower than rolling molasses up a sand hill. Seems to be at least one at every fecking light change I'm ever sat at and sometimes it's not even me.

Effects

machiavellianme wrote: »

The Problem is that many of the lights around Dublin (particularly DLR) are so short that only 1,maybe 2 cars get through on green now so others chance it rather than waiting again.

No, the problem isn't red lights. The problem is people who think it's ok to break red lights.

Potential-Monke

seagull wrote: »

Anything from 5 - 60. I've had it in rush hour traffic where you could get about 3 cars through the intersection per change, except the car behind would decide that it should be 5. Try stopping, and he'd be in the back of your car.

But my point stands, if the car in front isn't going fast, the car behind surely can't accelerate into the back of you. That's just my thinking anyway. And as I said, in a city centre, no one should be flying, it shouldn't even be possible to hit the speed limit, especially in city centre Dublin. I actually don't know how it's possible, the last day I had to drive through there, aside from the outer roads, the city centre roads were so busy I barely moved at all, let alone have a chance to rear end someone.