Big CA ticket.

[STG]

That isnt what I said! I said you can't disqualify the officer's testimony by stating he is not qualified as a "muffler mechanic." Beating the officer on cross exam is a different story, however, that is not the story I was responding to.

But thanks for sharing your experience.

See. I knew you weren't trained as a muffler mechanic!

 

[rondog2121]

100 plus is a must appear, no writen decs. if guilty 30 day suspension large fine. depends on county. CHP vehicle speedometers are calibrated. radar and lidar tested at begining and end of shift. ur only chance is if the officer is a no show but with CHP its not likly

 

[Finaltheorem47]

You are guilty. You can go to court and explain to the judge that you were only doing 90.

As a side note, the officer puts on his lights when and where he wants you to pull over. It is not up to you to decide where to stop. The officer was likely upset because this is a tactic used by gangs and others to ambush officers.

I would suggest finding a local attorney to handle it for you.

Thanks for answering FSF, I have always wondered if I should keep going until I feel I have found a safe place to pull over or if I should pull over in traffic.

I do however would like to ask, there was a video where this cop tased someone, anyways he said that one of the reasons he felt in danger was because he was so close to the road and the person could barely push him into the oncoming traffic, but by your response, the officer (most likely) pulled the person over at that spot on purpose.

I just ask because I see people pulled over all the time in bad situations and I feel that the officers life could be in jeopardy from the oncoming traffic because of the location in which the officer pulled the person over.

 

[FordSVTFan]

I do however would like to ask, there was a video where this cop tased someone, anyways he said that one of the reasons he felt in danger was because he was so close to the road and the person could barely push him into the oncoming traffic, but by your response, the officer (most likely) pulled the person over at that spot on purpose.

The officer would direct a person out of the car and to the side of the road for both their safety. If the person is combative/non-compliant it wouldnt matter if they were close to traffic. So, I dont think the person was tasered because he was close to traffic but because he was non-compliant and likely to get one or both of them seriously injured.

 

[Finaltheorem47]

Thanks!

 

[FiaCobra]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik"]YouTube - Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1[/ame]

Fast forward to 8:20

Part 2 is even better:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE&feature=related"]YouTube - Don't Talk to Cops, Part 2[/ame]

 

[Finaltheorem47]

wow great videos, thanks for posting!

 

[MystiChrome04]

That is funny. The officer is testifying based on his education, training, and experience and does not need direct training as a "muffler mechanic" to state whether it was too loud or not. Additionally, that type of testimony falls under the lay person exception in which lay person can testify to things within their general knowledge. This is why a person can testify to the estimated speed of a car without the use of radar.

See my problem with that is this assumes there are no petty officers out there who could be irritated with someone and impose a speeding ticket when either A you were not speeding at all or B you were not going that fast. This assumes that all officers (every single one) are truthful 100% of the time and their word can be taken with no other offer of proof.

About the not pulling over right away, I am looking for the case laws now but many serious charges including felony evading (if you can even call this that) have been thrown out due to an officers conduct from someone picking a safer spot to pull over. Citizens do have the right to determine if their own safety could be in jeopardy, the officers too. Police Officers are not god, the problem is very few actually fight these types of tickets. Look up the law in your state (not sure on CA) but most have provisions in them about this type of thing. If your on an interstate with cars moving 75 MPH and there is an exit 1 mile ahead why would you pull over on the interstate. It puts both of your lives in jeopardy. Assuming you still show willingness to comply (some sort of hand gesture motioning your going to pull over ahead and reducing your speed or calling 911 and tell the operator the situation).

The thing that drives me the most crazy about this stuff is the MOST officers (and I say most, I've met and know plenty of awesome police officers) believe that because of their position, they have the right to say and do whatever they want to you. It's extremely unfortunate because this is half the reason why no one trusts law enforcement officials and why good ones end up getting killed in some instances.

 

[FordSVTFan]

See my problem with that is this assumes there are no petty officers out there who could be irritated with someone and impose a speeding ticket when either A you were not speeding at all or B you were not going that fast. This assumes that all officers (every single one) are truthful 100% of the time and their word can be taken with no other offer of proof.

So, an officer pulls over a person who has done nothing wrong just to give a ticket because they can? I guess it is possible, not probable and certainly negligible at best. Besides that, a ticket is simply an allegation and the person has the right to take it to court. At court the judge will determine the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence presented. So, if this officer is that petty it would likely come out on cross exam.

About the not pulling over right away, I am looking for the case laws now but many serious charges including felony evading (if you can even call this that) have been thrown out due to an officers conduct from someone picking a safer spot to pull over. Citizens do have the right to determine if their own safety could be in jeopardy, the officers too. Police Officers are not god, the problem is very few actually fight these types of tickets. Look up the law in your state (not sure on CA) but most have provisions in them about this type of thing. If your on an interstate with cars moving 75 MPH and there is an exit 1 mile ahead why would you pull over on the interstate. It puts both of your lives in jeopardy. Assuming you still show willingness to comply (some sort of hand gesture motioning your going to pull over ahead and reducing your speed or calling 911 and tell the operator the situation).

Showing a willingness to comply and a call to 9-1-1 changes the entire situation. It is not what was being discussed. There is a big difference between identifying yourself on a recorded line and requesting a different place to stop and just driving on until you find a place you prefer. As was mentioned earlier this is a technique gangs use to ambush police.

The thing that drives me the most crazy about this stuff is the MOST officers (and I say most, I've met and know plenty of awesome police officers) believe that because of their position, they have the right to say and do whatever they want to you. It's extremely unfortunate because this is half the reason why no one trusts law enforcement officials and why good ones end up getting killed in some instances.

Is that what MOST officers believe? How about some actual proof and not just your biased opinion. The only people who seem not to trust L.E. are those who are involved in criminal activity and those who enjoy using the roadways as their personal racetracks.

None of my neighbors (none are L.E.O.s) have a distrust of L.E.O.s. But then again none of them are in their early twenties.

 

[STG]

FordSVTFan's posts in the Donut Shop leaves the average reader wih the impression that:

1. LEOs are infallible.

2. Their equipment is infallible.

3. LEOs maintain and calibrate their speed measuring equipment religiously.

4. Roadways are always built to design specifications.

5. Traffic control devices are always located and functioning properly

6. Judges always the the word of a LEO over a citizen.

7. If you have been pulled over or arrested, the smart thing to do is plead guilty.

8. LEOs always win in court.

I beg to differ. Since first being licensed to drive at the age of sixteen, I've been ticketed 14 times for speeding. One ticket was for 1MPH over the then 55MPH highway limit, one for 45MPH in a 35, the others for a minimum of 15MPH over on freeways.

I represented myself in court on those 13 tickets. Three of them before the age of eighteen. I postponed, asked for changes of venue, subpoenaed evidence from CAL TRANS, cities and counties, etc. The arresting officer didn't show 5 times. The judge dismissed 3, with the 1 MPH over being the funniest - the court threatened the CHP officer with reassignment to a walking beat. (The CHP officer admitted his speedometer was calibrated to +-1 MPH!)

I won three times for 15 MPH over and lost twice, but had the charges reduced. The 14th ticket was for 130MPH in a 70 and I somehow managed NOT to get hauled off to jail and wound up with a $500 ticket, internet traffic school and no points.

How can this be? I'm not an attorney or a LEO. I think my experience proves many LEOs are complacent, believe that they will always win in court and some can be pretty bad on the stand.

Be polite and self-deprecating on traffic stops, learn a little about how things work, analyze the circumstances of your traffic stop and the officer's actions. It's really not that hard to have a decent chance in court, despite what a freshly-minted attorney will tell you.

 

[SIr RicCuS]

FordSVTFan's posts in the Donut Shop leaves the average reader wih the impression that:

1. LEOs are infallible.

2. Their equipment is infallible.

3. LEOs maintain and calibrate their speed measuring equipment religiously.

4. Roadways are always built to design specifications.

5. Traffic control devices are always located and functioning properly

6. Judges always the the word of a LEO over a citizen.

7. If you have been pulled over or arrested, the smart thing to do is plead guilty.

8. LEOs always win in court.

I beg to differ. Since first being licensed to drive at the age of sixteen, I've been ticketed 14 times for speeding. One ticket was for 1MPH over the then 55MPH highway limit, one for 45MPH in a 35, the others for a minimum of 15MPH over on freeways.

I represented myself in court on those 13 tickets. Three of them before the age of eighteen. I postponed, asked for changes of venue, subpoenaed evidence from CAL TRANS, cities and counties, etc. The arresting officer didn't show 5 times. The judge dismissed 3, with the 1 MPH over being the funniest - the court threatened the CHP officer with reassignment to a walking beat. (The CHP officer admitted his speedometer was calibrated to +-1 MPH!)

I won three times for 15 MPH over and lost twice, but had the charges reduced. The 14th ticket was for 130MPH in a 70 and I somehow managed NOT to get hauled off to jail and wound up with a $500 ticket, internet traffic school and no points.

How can this be? I'm not an attorney or a LEO. I think my experience proves many LEOs are complacent, believe that they will always win in court and some can be pretty bad on the stand.

Be polite and self-deprecating on traffic stops, learn a little about how things work, analyze the circumstances of your traffic stop and the officer's actions. It's really not that hard to have a decent chance in court, despite what a freshly-minted attorney will tell you.

Thanks for sharing that. A little bit of knowledge goes a long way.

Any updates from the OP about his situation?

 

[FordSVTFan]

FordSVTFan's posts in the Donut Shop leaves the average reader wih the impression that:

1. LEOs are infallible.

2. Their equipment is infallible.

3. LEOs maintain and calibrate their speed measuring equipment religiously.

4. Roadways are always built to design specifications.

5. Traffic control devices are always located and functioning properly

6. Judges always the the word of a LEO over a citizen.

7. If you have been pulled over or arrested, the smart thing to do is plead guilty.

8. LEOs always win in court.

If that is your impression it is obviously not based on actually reading my posts. Sorry you feel the need to exaggerate and post nonfactual information.

Please post examples of my comments that would lead the average reader to believe that I have declared that L.E.O.s equipment is infallable, their speed measuring equipment is religiously maintained and calibrated, roadways are always built to design specs, traffic control devices are always located and functioning properly, and the L.E.O.s always win in court.

For instance, one of my posts in this thread.

If the radar was calibrated properly there is an acceptable level of deviation and that wont get your ticket reduced. If it was not calibrated properly or the officer's operator cert. is expired the ticket should be tossed. However, that is unlikely but does occur. Sometimes officers dont bring their logs with them, yet CHP are pretty anal about it.

Wow, it is informative and tells the OP what can happen in the real world, not STG's world of make believe where he beats the systems with one hand tied behind his back. It looks at both sides of the coin. I guess you missed this one or more likely ignored it as it doesnt fit your "impression."

 

[STG]

Just trying to point out that no matter how hard you try, you are not the end-all expert on law, traffic tickets or anything else. That's my impression of you. I'm willing to bet that's the impression of most others here. You're a LEO with a new law degree holding court in your Donut Shop.

Sorry if I stepped on your Lord of the Flies toes!

How many times have you appeared in traffic court and questioned / cross examined a California Highway Patrolman?

 

[STG]

Wow, it is informative and tells the OP what can happen in the real world, not STG's world of make believe where he beats the systems with one hand tied behind his back.

Gee. You obviously don't have a good impression of me. Especially since you do not have any evidence to back up your claims. Does this fit into the category of a LEO assuming facts not in evidence? No, a LEO would never do that!

 

[FordSVTFan]

Just trying to point out that no matter how hard you try, you are not the end-all expert on law, traffic tickets or anything else. That's my impression of you. I'm willing to bet that's the impression of most others here. You're a LEO with a new law degree holding court in your Donut Shop.

Sorry if I stepped on your Lord of the Flies toes!

How many times have you appeared in traffic court and questioned / cross examined a California Highway Patrolman?

I am sure those that receive the info that doesnt match their hopes dont like the advice. I am also sure that you have a story that matches every single event that occurs on this site.

While I may be a relatively new attorney, I have quite a lot of experience in the courtroom.

Btw, where is the support of your unfounded claims?

 

[FordSVTFan]

Gee. You obviously don't have a good impression of me. Especially since you do not have any evidence to back up your claims. Does this fit into the category of a LEO assuming facts not in evidence? No, a LEO would never do that!

Of course there is evidence, it is all over SVTP. Any situation a person could ever be in you have a personal story to match where you slay the dragon.

 

[Mikeyb619]

Of course there is evidence, it is all over SVTP. Any situation a person could ever be in you have a personal story to match where you slay the dragon.

If LEO's had dragons instead of patrol cars, I'd never question the law again. haha :rolling:

OP: plead guilty to a lesser charge. At that speed it'll be a lot harder to completly "dismiss". I do agree with you on the safe area to pullover though, but I've seen varying posts about officers who prefer other things.

Some say "Thank you for your cooperation and notice to pull over somewhere safe." and result in a warning instead of a ticket and a Have a Good Day!

others say "My lights were on for a 1/4 mile, that means you should have been pulled over a 1/4 mile ago" and will result in a speeding ticket, failure to pull over, and for the icing on the cake probably wreckless or careless driving...

Judging by the chances of those happening and my luck, I'd pull over RIGHT away and if its not what the cop wanted then he should have put his lights on when he wanted you to pull over, you did nothing wrong if you pull over. But then again the only cops that are nice to me are my neighbors and my personal friends who are cops. Every other time I'm seen as the asshole kid up to no good and I hate it because I'm trying not to have the same stereotypical mindset about cops as they do about me.

 

[MystiChrome04]

.

Is that what MOST officers believe? How about some actual proof and not just your biased opinion. The only people who seem not to trust L.E. are those who are involved in criminal activity and those who enjoy using the roadways as their personal racetracks.

None of my neighbors (none are L.E.O.s) have a distrust of L.E.O.s. But then again none of them are in their early twenties.

Is that what most officers believe deep down ABSOLUTELY. Your responses and other L.E.O.'s on in this forum show my point exactly. The way you respond to people, the attitude you show a lot of times during your posts is showing the exact point I was trying to make (don't take that the wrong way I am in no way insulting you just saying I think that some officers don't even notice anymore how they are responding to common citizens)

Now this "opinion" of mine comes from multiple family members of mine being in law enforcement including my father, grandfather and cousins not to mention countless friends. So I've been around countless numbers of different officers and no not all are the way I'm describing in my earlier post that's why i said most, because a majority of them were exactly that, completely rude and had ZERO respect for the common citizen. They dismiss every person they encounter on the job like that person is completely insignificant and it rubs far to many people the wrong way.

By the way, as for trying to insult me and say the only people who complain about L.E.O.'s are people on the other side of the law, not only does this prove my point further, but my record is 100% clean with 1 traffic ticket in the last 2 years and it wasn't even in my Cobra (my wife's slow car actually).

Truth is, I just can't stand anyone abusing powers they might or might not have in any profession. I feel the same about TONS of attorney's, judges, politicians and tons others. My dislike is distributed equally to individuals who display the characteristic mentioned. :beer:

 

[harry gilbert]

What is this about the ticket being thrown out if the officer doesn't show up in court? I was given "sewer service" of a ticket in Philadelphia when I was away at college (I get a summons in the mail alleging I was caught speeding in Philadelphia while I was in Rochester, New York). I show up in court, no officer. I ask for dismissal as no witness against me. I show the judge notarized affadavits from college showing I was taking finals the day I was alleged to have been speeding in Philadelphia, and copies of time cards from after school job. Judge laughs, says no officer need be present - ticket "same as sworn testimony". Disregards affadavits and time cards. I got fined. What is this about the ticket being thrown out if the officer doesn't show up in court?

 

[STG]

Of course there is evidence, it is all over SVTP. Any situation a person could ever be in you have a personal story to match where you slay the dragon.

Does this count as a dragon? Just asking - you're the expert!

1 ticket issued by the Nevada Highway Patrol . Radar. 130MPH in a 70. Note the ticket has a promise to appear date. Note the Court Mandatory box is UNchecked. One receipt from the Goodsprings Court for $500.00 Marked T/S August 22, 2005. T/S= Traffic School Note the bail receipt is checked citation. The appearance date is August 3. The traffic school completion date is August 22. Do you know of any court that would give a defendant 19 days to complete traffic school? Could it be I never made a court appearance for 50MPH over the limit?