Get a Free Case Review -  Call Now (803) 471-4188
Free Consultation:
(803) 451-4000
Close

How Long Do Traffic Cameras Keep Footage of Accidents in South Carolina?

After a car accident, any evidence that can prove a negligent driver’s fault can be valuable. That includes traffic camera footage, if it exists. Unfortunately for South Carolina car accident victims, traffic cameras in our state don’t keep footage at all.

Although the South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) maintains live traffic cameras throughout the state, the agency does not store any video footage for car accident victims to access. On top of that, South Carolina does not have red-light or speed cameras, so there are typically no traffic cameras that can film, photograph, or store images of collisions. Because accessing traffic camera footage isn’t an option for South Carolina victims, your attorney will be prepared to compile other evidence that proves a negligent driver’s fault in a lawsuit for compensation.

Our attorneys are here to help South Carolina car accident victims get the justice they deserve. For a free case evaluation with the South Carolina car accident lawyers at Burriss Ridgeway Injury Lawyers, call today at (803) 451-4000.

Do SCDOT Traffic Cameras Keep Footage of Car Accidents?

After a car accident, you might have assumed that if a traffic camera was near the collision site, it might have filmed your crash. Unfortunately for car accident victims, South Carolina’s live traffic cameras don’t store video footage for any period of time.

The South Carolina Department of Transportation maintains traffic cameras throughout the state that stream live footage for drivers and SCDOT staff to view to stay updated on traffic and weather conditions. These cameras are commonly located along South Carolina’s most popular roadways, I-26, I-77, and I-95. Though these highways have the largest number of SCDOT traffic cameras, live cameras are also situated elsewhere in the state.

Unfortunately for car accident victims, the South Carolina Department of Transportation does not record any footage caught by traffic cameras. Instead, SCDOT only streams live footage. So, even if a SCDOT traffic camera did film your recent car accident, that footage will not be stored anywhere by the department itself.

Third-party websites might record live footage streamed on SCDOT’s website for interested parties to access. Unfortunately, this information may be unreliable and may not help your car accident claim. While being unable to get traffic camera footage of a crash might be upsetting, your Columbia car accident attorney will have other methods of collecting evidence to prove a negligent driver’s fault.

Do Red-Light and Speed Cameras Keep Footage of Accidents in South Carolina?

Some states allow for the use of red-light and speed cameras by local law enforcement agencies to identify and ticket negligent drivers. South Carolina is not one of these states. So, there are no red-light or speed cameras that might photograph your recent car accident or store that information for you to access in the future.

Often, red-light cameras and speed cameras are used by law enforcement agencies to deter speeding and reckless driving. These cameras work on a trigger basis when a driver runs a stoplight or passes a sensor while driving over the speed limit. Unlike traffic cameras, these cameras don’t film anything and instead take pictures, often of a negligent driver’s face and license plate. A red light or speed camera could photograph an accident if triggered at the exact right moment. For South Carolina car accident victims, that’s not possible in their state.

Because there are no devices to take these pictures in South Carolina, the photographs won’t exist and certainly won’t be stored for victims to access. While this can be disheartening, it’s important for South Carolina victims to know that red-light and speed cameras rarely capture images that could be helpful in a car accident lawsuit. Regardless, South Carolina prohibits red-light and speed cameras. Victims should understand this so they don’t rely on non-existent photographs to prove a negligent driver’s fault.

What if There isn’t Traffic Camera Footage of Your South Carolina Car Accident?

Learning that SCDOT doesn’t store traffic camera footage and that South Carolina does not allow red-light or speed cameras can be upsetting for victims in need of compelling evidence against a negligent driver. Because experienced South Carolina car accident lawyers know not to rely on traffic camera footage to win a case, your attorney will use other methods to uncover evidence against a defendant, ultimately allowing you to recover the compensation you deserve.

Private Security Cameras

Although you can’t depend on traffic cameras to capture and store footage of a South Carolina car accident, private security cameras may be more reliable. After a South Carolina car accident, stop for a moment and take a look around. Do you see security cameras located at local businesses or on private property? Does a nearby house have a doorbell camera that may have filmed your crash? If so, your Sumter car accident lawyer can reach out to the necessary business owner or homeowner to request access to potential footage. If you cannot survey the area for private security cameras because of your injuries, don’t worry. Tell your attorney exactly where an accident occurred, and they can look for private security cameras themselves.

Eyewitness Testimony

When tragedies happen, people tend to stop and pay attention. Eyewitnesses may even take out their smartphones and start snapping photographs or filming the aftermath of an accident. If there are witnesses around after a crash, get their contact information. Your South Carolina personal injury lawyer can get in touch with them in the future to request access to any photos or videos they might have taken. Simply an eyewitness’s testimony of an accident’s events can be crucial evidence in a South Carolina car accident lawsuit.

Police Reports

While police reports aren’t considered evidence in a South Carolina car accident lawsuit, they can offer necessary context and information that might otherwise be provided by traffic camera footage. Officers may note the time of day, the weather conditions, and other crucial details to paint a picture of an accident scene. Your attorney can use this information to piece together an accident’s events, even without having access to traffic camera footage.

Call Our South Carolina Attorneys After a Car Accident

If you were recently injured in a car accident in South Carolina, our attorneys can help. For a free case evaluation with the Columbia personal injury lawyers at Burriss Ridgeway Injury Lawyers, call today at (803) 451-4000.

Related Posts

Get a Free Consultation

Results

$6 Million
The Plaintiff was injured as a result of a failing component of a commercial motor vehicle that fell from the vehicle into the roadway. The Plaintiff brought claims against the owner and operator of the tractor trailer as well as the manufacturer of the vehicle.
The Plaintiff was injured as a result of a failing component of a commercial motor vehicle that fell from the vehicle into the roadway. The Plaintiff brought claims against the owner and operator of the tractor trailer as well as the manufacturer of the vehicle.
$4.1 Million
The Plaintiff was insured as a result of a refrigeration system that malfunctioned, spraying ammonia gas into the Plaintiff's face. As a result of this event, the Plaintiff sustained significant vision loss. The Plaintiff brought claims against his employer and the manufacturer of this system.
The Plaintiff was insured as a result of a refrigeration system that malfunctioned, spraying ammonia gas into the Plaintiff's face. As a result of this event, the Plaintiff sustained significant vision loss. The Plaintiff brought claims against his employer and the manufacturer of this system.
$2 Million
The Plaintiff was injured while riding his motorcycle when he collided with another vehicle. This event occurred in the city of Columbia and the Plaintiff sustained significant bodily injury resulting in extensive medical expenses and permanent injury.
The Plaintiff was injured while riding his motorcycle when he collided with another vehicle. This event occurred in the city of Columbia and the Plaintiff sustained significant bodily injury resulting in extensive medical expenses and permanent injury.
$1.8 Million
The Plaintiff was injured when he was rear-ended by a tractor trailer on Interstate 20. The Plaintiff brought claims against the owner and driver of the tractor trailer for his injuries relate to his lower back.
The Plaintiff was injured when he was rear-ended by a tractor trailer on Interstate 20. The Plaintiff brought claims against the owner and driver of the tractor trailer for his injuries relate to his lower back.
$1.5 Million
The Plaintiff sustained significant injury when she was attacked by a dog while performing repairs on a rental property. The Plaintiff was at the rental property as part of her employment with a rental management agency. She was attacked by the animal and sustained permanent nerve damage in her legs.
The Plaintiff sustained significant injury when she was attacked by a dog while performing repairs on a rental property. The Plaintiff was at the rental property as part of her employment with a rental management agency. She was attacked by the animal and sustained permanent nerve damage in her legs.
$1.3 Million
The Plaintiff was killed as a result of a collision with a logging truck that had been improperly loaded by a timber harvester. The proceeds of the settlement were funded by both the timber harvester and the owner of the logging truck.
The Plaintiff was killed as a result of a collision with a logging truck that had been improperly loaded by a timber harvester. The proceeds of the settlement were funded by both the timber harvester and the owner of the logging truck.
$1.5 Million
The Plaintiff underwent surgery to her neck as a result of injuries sustained when she was struck on the head by a piece of loading equipment at her job. The Plaintiff was employed by a national retailer and was engaged in stocking shelves when the piece of equipment failed. After settling her workers' compensation claim, the Plaintiff brought a claim against the manufacturer of this equipment.
The Plaintiff underwent surgery to her neck as a result of injuries sustained when she was struck on the head by a piece of loading equipment at her job. The Plaintiff was employed by a national retailer and was engaged in stocking shelves when the piece of equipment failed. After settling her workers' compensation claim, the Plaintiff brought a claim against the manufacturer of this equipment.
$1.1 Million
The Plaintiff brought a claim against a local medical facility for a false positive HIV reading. As a result of this false positive, the Plaintiff lived for 4½ years believing that she had the virus which leads to what she feared was an eventual AIDS diagnosis.
The Plaintiff brought a claim against a local medical facility for a false positive HIV reading. As a result of this false positive, the Plaintiff lived for 4½ years believing that she had the virus which leads to what she feared was an eventual AIDS diagnosis.
Read More

Recent Posts

Client Reviews