| Author | Message | ||
     Ron_luning |
For the history of this nonsense look here: http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/290 431/461617.html?1245291159 OK, so today I received a correction to my citation in the mail. The problem is that the most critical item on there, my safe speed (in the officer's determination) is completely illegible. Can anyone tell me what this says?  Here's a copy of the original citation. On it he states "unsafe speed for conditions (splitting traffic at 50-55 mph)".  So can this guy just change the citation to suit his desire to get me convicted? The only thing I think that document on top might say for my safe speed is 40 mph. Too bad traffic was moving faster than that. This is unbelievable! | ||
| Fresnobuell |
I think it says 0 MPH, meaning you had zero safe speed or you weren't going a safe speed or 0 was the safe speed. Unfortunately, you don't get these tickets thrown out cause the officer screwed up writing it. I had a bike lane violation and the genius wrote the wrong vehicle code down. They just change it...nice. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Whoops looks like you already got a taste of the change form. Sorry | ||
| Pariah |
I think it says safe speed is 10 mph... looks like he had written something instead of the one, crossed it out, then wrote the one... maybe we should vote on the safe speed, lol! | ||
| Ron_luning |
Yeah, maybe. The worst part is that this clown (and every other 4 wheeled vehicle on the road) was easily going 45+ mph. He said to me after he pulled me over that "you can't split lanes when traffic is moving 50 mph, you can only do that when it is stopped". Since then he has perhaps lost the last 3 brain cells in his head dedicated to memory and is now envisioning some scenario where traffic was stopped and I was splitting lanes at 55 mph like some daredevil. If that is what is happening, I don't know how to deal with it without calling him either a a liar or a bad police officer (who wouldn't at least take notes after writing a ticket if you know that your memory is that of a flea?). | ||
| Sparky |
Sorry man, but if you're splitting traffic faster than when it's going, say, 15 mph, IMHO you have crossed the Twilight Zone into hooligan territory. Pay the fine and move on. | ||
| Usmoto |
So does the traffic have to be stopped to lane split in CA? I thought I'd heard or read somewhere that you could be moving. I'd go to court over that one and see if you can get it thrown out. I can't make out what it says. Some times cops are wrong but folks don't challenge it because it's a cop. I've been to court, a lot in my youth, and seen where many first time offenders were dismissed without having to say a word. In my book, always show up to the court room to try and plea your case. | ||
| Thedavyboy |
He can't change the offense . looks like he changed the wording of the offense . perfectly legal . When I work court I've seen people say the cop puts down the wrong date claim it's not valid . Judges don't consider traffic violations criminal offenses but a lack of judgement and realize that cops are people to and can make a mistake when writing a summons . Dosen't change the fact you committed the violation . Court sucks , better just to pay and move on , 3 or 4 hours of my time is worth more then the price if the ticket JMO........ (Message edited by thedavyboy on June 18, 2009) | ||
| Ron_luning |
For people with no time to deal with defending themselves in court, and I mean really no time to deal with it, maybe it's not a bad route to pay a ticket. It's a big help if you have a ton of cash too. For those people that aren't super busy, or loaded with money they want to give to a state that can't manage to balance its budget, defending yourself is the only option....if you have any backbone. Highway patrol guys are close enough to being tax collectors already, and if everyone just lets them do and say whatever they want without contesting it we'll all suffer. I'm not here asking if you think I'm guilty of violating the law. I don't care what you think about that. Don't take personal offense though, you have every right to say what you want. I just don't care. | ||
| Jdugger |
A lot of times if you show up for court, the officer won't. State then has no case. Get your facts in order, be prepared to ask a series of questions of the state's witness to establish what they think happened, and be prepared with answers that show they don't know what they are talking about. Get a court date for as far out as possible, and then two weeks before that, request a further out date because you need ot travel out of state for work. The attorneys around here have the leave and work schedules for beat officers and use it accordingly. Don't be stupid -- get every piece of information you can and use it to your advantage. Then show up, and odds are the cop won't. If he does, plead your case and hope, but be prepared with logical arguments about how your actions were "safe" and the questioning I mentioned above. Request a jury trial if at all possible. Make this as expensive and cumbersome for the court/state as possible. They are the ones being idiots, you are just helping to ensure they pay the price for dragging you through the mess. | ||
| Poppinsexz |
On the presumption on innocence. I would ask that he prove guilt. He has already shown memory problems and or a willful desire to make things look worse than they really were. Bring both ticket copys to court as evidence. Yes call him a liar- not in so many words but you must show him as wrong to win. Document in writing everything, you may have memory problems later. Bring and show lack of clear lane splitting laws. Cop or not, it's still his word against yours. Make your count. just my .02 If we always give up without a fight it will turn into accepted practice, and our rights will just disappear. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Then show up, and odds are the cop won't. Guys, this is the CHP we are talking about. Their job is based on writing tickets and producing revenue for the State. Unless an act of God prevents the officer from showing up, he WILL show up. If he scheduled for vacation, the Court will reschedule your trial. The system stacks the deck greatly against us "violators." With the horrible state of finances here in California, I believe there is even more emphasis for officers to not miss court dates. | ||
| Bobup |
someone else posted this website in another thread http://www.ticketassassin.com/index.html good luck | ||
| Jdugger |
> Guys, this is the CHP we are talking about Interesting. Here in Texas when a state officer writes a ticket, it's issued in the court of the county JP the citation was issued in. That's why the "rearrange and disrupt the dates" strategy can work so well here. Now, if one of the small town cops that patrols the 100 feet of annexed highway that runs somewhat close to their town gets you, you are screwed. That cop will show because the small towns often pay/promote the cops based on how many tickets they write! Personally, I lawyer every one of mine out. It's expensive, but it makes sure they don't stick. And, that's what's really important. I'd have lost my license long ago if not for a bevy of good traffic lawyers. 99% of the time, if you bribe the judge, he/she will dismiss the case. As stated, all they want is your money. So, one other strategy is to offer to pay "a little extra" if the judge will dismiss the case, or offer probation. Most of the time they will take it. By offering a fine + $100, I got a judge in Arkansas to give me probation and restrict it to only his county for 30 days + dismiss the case! It's almost comical how crooked the whole system is. One of the major reasons I got the track membership is I find it to be cheaper overall than street riding. Monthly track fees are about the same or less than the ticket and atty fees I paid last year. What a world we live in. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Bribing the judges? How do you do about doing that? I thought about bribing the officer, but never had the guts to try it. with my luck they would take the money and still write the ticket. +1 on the track being cheaper than the street. | ||
| Jdugger |
> Bribing the judges? How do you do about doing that? "Uh, your honor, since this is my first offence and I have a clean driver record, would it please the court if I were to pay a civil fine and court costs in exchage for a probation and dismissed case?" Usually your lawyer will do this for you. Bribe, n., money paid to make a problem go away. There's probably some fancy legal term for the process I just described, but any way you look at it, it's just an old-fashioned bribe. *EVERYONE* in the system can be bought. Whether or not it's legal is simply a matter of how you approach/do it. | ||
| Ebear |
You CAN split lanes..(it's actually called"Lane Sharing") while traffic is moving in California. There are VERY FEW laws or rules that pertain to this. The "recommended" speed is "No more than 10-15mph over the vehicle you are passing. HOWEVER since there are few restrictions written they will use the "Safe Speed" argument and that is a judgement call on their part. Personally I try to stick to that since when I am driving a car and a bike roars past at a higher speed it scares me too. If you dont wait too long try "Ticket Assasin".Sometimes it works! | ||
| Metalstorm |
It get's really fun when the cop lies under oath in court  It happened to me once and I've watched it happen to others many times. In all honesty, I've seen it happen 7 or 8 times (including mine) within a 4 year span. AS far as the lane splitting goes, I'm pretty sure you can only go a certain mph faster than the flow of traffic. Within the posted speed limit of course. I can't remember the exact figure though. I think perhaps 15. So if traffic is going 20 mph in a 55 zone you can split lanes at 35 mph. Again, I can't remember the actual mph. It's been almost ten years since I discussed this with an officer. | ||
| Gregtonn |
I'm not sure if a traffic citation is considered a Civil or Criminal offense but if it's civil you could always refer to this: "Amendment 7 - Trial by Jury in Civil Cases. Ratified 12/15/1791. In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. A jury trail would cost way more than the ticket is worth and considering CA's current financial situation any judge with more than two live brain cells would drop the charges. If it's less than $20 I'd just pay it. G |
