A&Q about Lotus
Q:
in the toyota i was clocked at 70 in a 45 zone, enough to qualify for reckless. the good natured trooper did not write for that but just issued for speeding and suggested the judge would reduce it so rather than paying I should go to court. in court the judge said "well, this is just too fast for me to throw it out, how about i reduce it to a $125 fine and 2 points?" that beat the 6 i would have had so i said "it doesn't sound as good as throwing it out, but I'll take it." he laughed and sent me on my way.
3 months later the SAME trooper pullled me over, again in the toyota, for 65 in a 55. he looked at my car and license and said "didn't i stop you just a couple onths ago?" i said yes you did. he let me go and said in a pleading voice "please slow down".
whew
A:
+ another 1 ... I used to be a cop and there are several things wrong with what you just explained. You definitely should get an attorney or fight it yourself.
First, as someone has already mentioned, in many states most traffic laws apply to public roads but not to "premises open to the public" You need to look up each statute and read the elements of the violations.
Next... at least in the state where I worked as a cop, you cannot be cited for multiple violations for the same act. In other words, if your only act was excessive speed, I could not cite you for the speed and for reckless driving, It's one or the other. However, if you were speeding and then made an illegal lane change, and then followed someone too closely ... I could cite you for each of the three violations or lump them together and pinch you for the careless or reckless driving. I could not cite you for reckless and each of the three violations. Reckless encompasses all three acts - I cannot nab you both ways for the same thing.
If you are a smart guy and do your homework, you could probably beat this wrap yourself without an attorney.
Cop sounds like a world class jerk... however, with all that being said ... 45-50 mph in a parking lot area...??? you were kind of asking for something... IMHO
A:
Ok, you deserve some sort of punishment. Bottom line you were driving recklessly.
If you want to dispute the tickets get a real lawyer, like was suggested. That’s your ONLY hope of getting anything done to reduce or eliminate the charges. You will pay less for a real lawyer than you’d pay for the insurance hit.
The first two tickets are redundant and the officer was being an a$shol3 because he can. A judge will side with an officer every time unless there’s video proof otherwise or sworn reliable witness testimony. A lawyer will argue this point for you if there is no other option.
If you didn’t see a person whom you allegedly hit, there’s no reason to take the officer’s word for it, but if you’re going to contest this you’ll need a good lawyer. No complaint from said individual, no testimony should equal no case ... but the judge won’t care. They WILL take the officer’s word over yours in this matter. There may as well have been a baby in a wheelchair you almost hit.
Reckless driving in every state carries the option of jail time if the offence is bad enough. Upon first offences jail time is extreme. The negligent charge on top of the reckless ticket is not legal. It’s one or the other, not both. Sadly the legality of this is lost in our judicial system.
Penalties and case law vary by state in regards to the tickets you’ve been issued. What state are you in?
If you do go in front of a judge be HONEST. They will toss the book at you if you lie. The judge in traffic court listens to liars all day and he’d sooner throw the book at a prick with a Lotus (view that most judges will probably take, NOT a call on the kind of person you may or may not be) than listen to a 2-minute story.
I’m not trying to be judgmental here so please don’t misunderstand my candor. I drive like an a$shol3 sometimes too. Luckily there haven’t been any law enforcement officers around to see.
A:
Nut,
I have not read all the posts, but the one thing you need to do right now is sit down and write everything you can remember.
What is clear outside? What was the temperature? What time of day?
Were there other cars on the road?
Where were you? How many lanes, etc.
Every little detail you can remember, from the second you got in your car until you left the scene.
Write down everything that was said both by your and to you?
I promise you the officer did just that. The more detailed notes you take at this very moment the better your case will be and the more ammo you will give your attorney.
Good luck!
A:
Get a lawyer.
Take up autocrossing (where you can go as fast as you want in a parking lot and anyone you hit will have signed a release form agreeing not to sue you).
A:
Originally Posted by 67veloce
Generally reckless carries "intent" negligent can be interpreted as you just didn't give a f*&%. Don't assume they overlap. Last time I'll say it -- get a lawer, you don't want this to stand as is on your record.
The culpable mental state for reckless driving is not "intent" ... it is "recklessly" Culpable mental states in order:
Intentionally
Knowingly
Recklessly
Negligently
A:
Note that the Elise hits the cam just a bit past 30 MPH in 1st gear. Then you popped it into 2nd. Your MPH may not have been 50 or whatever FWIW. He prolly heard the the zing in 1st = what caught his ear plus the car itself caught his eye.
A:
Originally Posted by Fighting For Air
First, as someone has already mentioned, in many states most traffic laws apply to public roads but not to "premises open to the public" You need to look up each statute and read the elements of the violations.
Just as another data point: the Maryland transportation code contains phrases like "private property that is used by the public" when it intends to apply to things like shopping center parking lots, townhouse developments, and so on. For example:
Originally Posted by Transportation Article 21-1120 (c)
A person may not drive a motor vehicle on any highway or on any private property that is used by the public in general in this State while the person is wearing over or in both ears earphones attached to a radio, tape player, or other audio device.
It's also mentioned in the rules for things like DUI and parking an unregistered vehicle. I don't know if there's any sort of blanket coverage, though. Since it's spelled out deep down in specific bits of the code, it may be that it's been added only to those bits over the years by bills.
Granted if I'm at the office late at night and the lot is completely empty the route to/from a parking space may involve a bit of "spirited" driving. Nothing too crazy, though -- the lot has lots of small curbs and barriers.
A:
Since it sounds like at least one of these charges is a criminal charge, don't you have the constitutional right to a trial by jury? If so, one tactic would be to show up in court on the day of your arraignment, enter a plea of 'not guilty', and request a trial by jury. My uneducated hunch is that they would have to allow this, but doing so would be incredibly expensive and time consuming for the court...thus they will seek to negotiate a fair settlement with you right there.
While the right to a trial by jury does not apply to simple moving violations, if there is a more serious charge being levied against you with *any* possibility of jail time, a jury trial is not something they can deny you. If they insist on pursuing these charges against you, exercise your rights to the fullest!
A:
reckless driving in California:
23103. (a) Any person who drives any vehicle upon a highway in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving.
(b) Any person who drives any vehicle in any offstreet parking facility, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 12500, in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving.
(c) Persons convicted of the offense of reckless driving shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not less than five days nor more than 90 days or by a fine of not less than one hundred forty-five dollars ($145) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, except as provided in Section 23104.
By your description, that cop was being an ass.
A:
"Uhhhhhh.....take my car away and take me to jail?"
You shouldn't have said that.
A:
To sum up what everyone else has pretty much said:
1. There appears to be no evidence to any of the crimes you've been charged with.
2. Your actions may not have been criminal.
3. It may be true that you are being charged with multiple counts for the same action, which isn't permitted.
4. You could probably beat this on your own, but get a lawyer just in case. It should be easy for any attorney to beat this outright. This isn't going to cost you $5,000 in attorney's fees, either. It shouldn't take more than a couple of hours of time. Even with an expensive attorney it will come out to less than the cost of the tickets.
I hate cops like that. Probably has a quota to meet before the end of the month.
A:
Nugg -- don't you live in Baltimore County? Or do I have you confused with someone else?
If so, PM me. I'm a criminal defense lawyer in Balto. Co. I am not going to represent you, but I can tell you who might help. You need the right lawyer -- a lawyer with friends (who are Judges).
Your 1st instinct to just pay the fines is 100% wrong. You'll need to go to court to get any kind of decent result.
ps. No jury trial option in Maryland for any crime with a max. penalty of less than 90 days in jail. This matter will be dealt with on a traffic docket. No State's Attorney (D.A. / prosecutor) will be involved. You might be able to work out a plea to ticket #3 only. You'll need a lawyer for that too. The officer isn't going to work with you.
pps. As for being charged with many things all related to one act -- it's routine. Look at murder cases. They charge 1st degree, 2nd degree, Manslaughter, Assault, etc. It's called "lesser included" offenses. If they can't prove the big boy - they hope to have enough evidence to convince the finder of fact (Judge or Jury) of at least the "lesser included" charges.
A:
Originally Posted by TimMullen
If you are counting on explaining it to the judge because you are innocent until proven guilty; don't. Bottom line is, the cop is always right, the victim - err citizen - is always guilty if the cop says he is.
While most judges do behave this way, not so juries. Absent videotape supporting the cop's version of events (I'm guessing that there is video but nothing incriminating), this case sounds almost impossible to pursue beyond a reasonable doubt in the eyes of a jury. But for the cop's testimony, I haven't heard any evidence of a crime whatsoever... no radar, no witnesses, no pavement marks or torn up turf, no nothin' -- heck, did the cop even pace you? Rare is the prosecutor that will want to waste his and the court's time arguing this before a panel of your peers. Any decent attorney should be able plead this out to something relatively inconsequential, and any prosecutor worth his salt knows this. On your court date, you might simply ask the judge for the opportunity to speak with a prosecutor about a jury trial before entering your plea and then nicely hash it out with the prosecutor before you commit to the expense of an attorney.
If the prosecutor won't back down and you're forced to get an attorney, get one with a reputation as an avid litigator.
My $0.02 - it's your neck. Free advice is usually worth what you pay for it.
-Chuck
A:
There are a lot of arm-chair lawyers out there....
I can tell you that I've been to court over my years for probably all of those at some time (and my father was even a reserve police officer for several years). Not a good thing but I wasn't the brightest young driver, more balls than brains. None of those are criminal charges (at least is most states) as no one was actually harmed or nothing stolen. However, *sshole or not, the officer can and did assign those tickets and it's done. Calling him names at this point solves nothing.
nugg_dawg, get yourself a GOOD lawyer. I retained one once (benefit through my job at the time) that didn't do squat for me. I may as well been in the court room by myself. Find one who you can validate through some references.
Right now, its up to you to prove those things didn't happen (or at least not in the way the officer has portrayed them). If the officer was there and said it happened, that's enough for 90% of the judges in those courts. They get hundreds of people of day saying "they didn't do it" so you won't be any different.
The part about you "almost hitting someone". When or if they ask about it, say "no one was near the car"; don't say "you didn't see anyone" as that will also help the officer's case (i.e. if you didn't see anyone then you don't know if almost hit someone). Subtle wording can help or hurt in situations like this.
Also, the ticket you listed "Driving at an unsafe speed" doesn't need a radar gun or anything. Those are the types of charges they give to people doing things like donuts or trying to drift in a parking lot. Its a judgement call by the officer.
Sometimes lessons are learned the hard way. Heaven knows I've learned way too many of them the hard way. Good luck.
A:
I've talked to my family lawyer and he recommended someone. He is very good at fighting drunk driving/suspended liscence cases and my case is nothing far from what he does. He basically said he could get the reckless and neglegent citations dropped, and maybe a moving violation with some fines. I still should expect some points, but nothing to merrit the insurance company to drop me. He commended me for not having a record, and that alone would help my cause a great deal.
For the record, I have no idea where this person was that I almost hit. The HID's have a low cutoff but they have a very wide field of view. If I would've seen a pedistrian I would have definately not driven like that. The area I was driving in is a double lane with grassy medians connecting the mall exits to the mall stores. They run the whole length of the parking lots. It's basically a long straigt.
The cop from the instant he talked to me was not a nice guy. He admitted that he had to radar on me, no video, and most important of all never got the pedistrian's info because he spent atleast 20~30 minutes writing me up. As a matter of fact, a guy walked by our way on the side of the road and I asked the officer if that was him(the pedistrian I almost ran over). The officer answered no and went on to tell me that the guy had dark shorts on and my HID's wouldn't have lit him up. This was after I demonstrated how low the cutoff was for my HID's.
The more I think about it, the more I think he was just picking on some young punk with a fast looking car. He was probably eyeing the car up when the whole time I was at the gym and made up his mind to nail me. Eventhough I did not help the matter by speeding.
Yes, I will admit I was speeding on private property. Thats why he stopped me after I left the mall parking lot.
No, I did not almost run someone over. I think the cop was trying to meet his quota for the month and I was unlucky to be "that guy". Also, I believe the cop had it out for me and/or the Elise.
In the mean time I play the waiting game. I will ignore the tickets untill the letters come from the courts and I'm going to goto trial. I want to hear the officer's acount now. Meeting with 2 potential lawyers on Monday. Hopefully, Exigent will also provide elite names as well.
I can't say enough how helpful it has been posting my situation. You guys have been a great resource. I am glad I am a member of this community.
Wish me luck!
John
A:
Listen to Exigent and get the names of lawyers he knows in the area. Attorneys who know the judges/prosecutors is half the battle.
In WA, negligent and reckless driving are misdemeanors, which are criminal. Sounds like you have gotten some good advice all around, but I'd talk to a couple of attorneys and go with the one that you feel most comfortable with.
Good Luck.
A:
I live in Baltimore city... which mall lot were you in / leaving? I don't want to run into the same guy!
I had the same reaction about the pedestrian. The more I think about what you wrote, the more I think that what happened is the cop heard the car and got morally outraged and mad at your driving. He arrived mad at your car and stormed off to his to teach you a lesson. I doubt there was a pedestrian or if there was he / she was not in the roadway. I find it too convenient the person had dark clothes on so you would not see them...
That said, its unfrtunate you made a deal about the cut offs and the HIDs. I would be saying the HIDs have a great beam attern and you could see the sidewalk and road was clear - suggesting that they are not implies you were overdiving your headlights and should be going slower at night. Also ... um are these an aftermarket kit? If so you don't want to be discussing that either... I would say its a new car with new headlights and leave it at that.
Good luck with the case - and I would talk to your fellow resident who posted earlier about steering you to the right attorney. Good luck - and save the WOT on exits for the freeway ramps
A:
Originally Posted by lucksta
While most judges do behave this way, not so juries.
I see in Maryland that reckless driving isn't sufficiently serious to entitle the defendent to trial by jury. Moot, anyway, as I gather your family attorney believes he has this hand. Good luck.
A:
Sorry, we should throw you in jail, IF you hit the 2nd cam with a cold engine while leaving a parking space.
That's the first thing that came to my mind, when I read the first posting. Surprised no one mentioned earlier. I'm always looking at the temp gage the first few minutes, just in case... Hope your E is OK.
BTW Good Luck