Solaris

the only sign present was partially obstructed and well before the stop line. I got to the stop line, looked around for any signs saying no turn on red, didn't see any, so I went. Since I work in a ghetto craphole in central NJ, the cop was giving no breaks. Usually, when it's a no turn on red intersection, there are signs on both sides of the intersection. Does just having 1 sign before the intersection meet the requirement for this?

Solaris

That's what I plan to do. Take several pics, including my point of view at the time

KamS4

NJ courts differ, but I saw that charge dropped today in NJ court.

Solaris

this is lame crap. Whether it's the law or not, there really should be signs on both sides. Since this cop didn't care much for reason and more about writing tickets in his ghetto, my explanation didn't carry any weight with him.

SLOGARO

I think there has to be a sign next to the stoplight. This was 5 years ago but I saw a ticket dropped cause the regulations stated there needed to be a sign to your right at the intersection and a sign straight ahead up the stoplight for it to be correct.

-Ant

paulroad

There are statute on traffic law in book in the library. They list the requirements/laws for the placment of traffic signs. Specifically, how close to the cross the sign must be to the intersection. There are also statutes that prohibit signs from "overlaying" each other. Find the statutes and then when you go to cart make a motion for dismissal based on the statute you found.

Solaris

as in "been there, done that"? Can you describe what your situation was? Thanks for the info

RKA

They do document stuff like this...so I would definitely do a little digging. First go back to the scene, grab pictures, and document distances and such (how far the sign was from the actual stop sign, how high up it was, fully or partially obstructed, and at what distance it was no longer obstructed, etc.). Also, if you're slowing as you approach the intersection, and the sign is unobstructed unobstructed, and then falls out of your sight as you approach the stop sign, try to record the distance traveled during which you could clearly read the sign. Some of this should match up against the NJ statutes and some of it is just supporting information showing the judge that it might be a little unreasonable to expect people to obey a sign that they could really only see for 10 feet as they approached the intersection.

por911

Do it quick before towney maintenance guys trim. Courts don't care about exacting requirements, they'll quote "substantial compliance". This roughly translates to "We don't care what the law is, we need $$$ in the coffers".
If the sign is obstructed from view, ie that you can't read it, the judge might throw it out. Enter the pic into court record. If you really want to screw them up, go to the town engineering dept. and ask for a copy of the DOT approval for the road and signage. You will quickly find that it probably does not exist(required by NJ law)due to town fraud. Be careful, asking for public documents(and the DOT road approval is a public doc)in NJ can land you in jail and or beaten by the local police. Good luck.

meisterkleef

Just by showing up to court you'll be able to plead to non-point unsafe driving (unless you've done so recently). Whatever you decide make sure you call the court at least 7 days in advance to tell them you're making an appearance otherwise you'll show up and they'll send you home and reschedule.