cop error?
RichD
You are stopped for running a stop sign. The officer writes
the citation, but plugs in the wrong vehicle code; he writes
the number for illegal left turn, instead of stop sign violation.
You think "this is my lucky day!" You go to court, request
a trial. You and the cop testify, the judge dismisses the
charge of illegal turn.
To your chagrin, the cop then immediately writes a citation
for the failure to stop, based on his recollection of the
event. Is that kosher? Can you object? How would it
play out?
--
Rich
richard
Most likely the judge would dismiss the new ticket as well.
I'm not all that sure about this, but let's say a cop sees you fail to
stop at a stop sign, but he's busy. But two days later he comes to
your house and hands you the ticket.
I believe there is a time limit on traffic citations as to when the
citation would become invalid. The cop just can't write the citation
when it's convenient for him.
Cujo DeSockpuppet
> That is what's supposed to happen. A clerical error by the
> cop does not mean another ticket can't be issued later.
>
> Raymond Karczewski from Oregon was stopped in Shasta County,
> CA, in 1995, for running a red light. He decided that the
> chapter and verse of the Cal vehicle code, as referenced in
> the Summons, did not exist. Ray leapt to the conclusion
> that he did not have to respond to the summons. A default
> judgment against him was issued, along with a bench warrant.
>
> In 1999, the Oregon DMV revoked Ray's ODL over the Ca
> ticket. He continued driving anyway, and driving poorly.
> When he was stopped for Failure to Dim, he was convicted of
> driving with a suspended license. Ray parlayed this into 7
> felony convictions, spent months in jail, was voted Usenet
> Kook of the Month and Kook of the Year, and to this day he
> is still a wanted man in California.
>
> You really don't want to tread this path.
The Ballad of Ray and Anita
(with apologies to john & yoko)
we went on a trip down to shasta
fifteen red lights all in a line
the ticketing cop
said, why didn't you stop
i said, i'm christ, and i will not pay the fine
christ, this crime was so easy
i think i'll go on a spree
till I got a notice
from the ODMV
anita drove me round for a while
but seven feathers beckoned afar
i ran off with the rent
when it was all spent
i cast my brites upon the deputy's car
christ, this oughta be easy
cause all the trouble i'm in
was caused by my evil
fictitious, juristic twin
the judge was not amused with my lien
the DA did not answer my Claim
the jurors all said,
we think he's fucked in the head
a hammy sandwich they would equally blame
christ, you know it ain't easy
it's harder than you would think
to get booted out of
the josephine county clink
saving up your poasting for a rainy day
living on public charity
last night the wife said
raymie, when you're dead
the only thing you leave behind is your spam -- THINK!
caught up in the great chicken caper
kathy did not see it my way
she said, haven't your heard
you've been upstaged by a bird
and on my site she slapped a DMCA
christ, i came here to lead em
but the TRVTH they won't see
these spiritual pipsqueaks
are gonna crucify me
disinformation agents are lurking
the defamation, it never ends
for there's no one, you see
who takes me seriously
so on the Bullies� now my life codepends
christ, you know it ain't easy
you know how hard it can be
i can't be a martyr
until they crucify me
please make me a martyr
oh let's all crucify me
STANDING-O, bay-beeeeeee!
Encore!
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"I am no longer posting and all messages you see are forgeries." - Ed,
still lying after all these years.
richard
>That is what's supposed to happen. A clerical error by the
>cop does not mean another ticket can't be issued later.
>
>Raymond Karczewski from Oregon was stopped in Shasta County,
>CA, in 1995, for running a red light. He decided that the
>chapter and verse of the Cal vehicle code, as referenced in
>the Summons, did not exist. Ray leapt to the conclusion
>that he did not have to respond to the summons. A default
>judgment against him was issued, along with a bench warrant.
>
>In 1999, the Oregon DMV revoked Ray's ODL over the Ca
>ticket. He continued driving anyway, and driving poorly.
>When he was stopped for Failure to Dim, he was convicted of
>driving with a suspended license. Ray parlayed this into 7
>felony convictions, spent months in jail, was voted Usenet
>Kook of the Month and Kook of the Year, and to this day he
>is still a wanted man in California.
>
>You really don't want to tread this path.
If the cop writes down a nonexisting code, it does not mean that you
do not have to appear in court. Ray Schmuck should have appeared in
court any ways and let the judge properly dismiss the case.
However, I do find it hard to believe that 4 years later his home
state revoked the license over a simple traffic violation. And the
rest of the bullshit is even harder to believe.
But this is exactly the kind of material that kookmeister "Just
Taylor" would expand upon and have a field day with.
One of the AUK clowns once tried to make a case that I had been busted
in Cincinnati for giving a false name and a wrong SSN. They claimed
this because they had searched the county courthouse records and found
some guy who had a similar SSN and name. Taylor was never able to show
proof of a court date or which judge handled the case.
Naughtius
> Consider this hypothetical:
>
> You are stopped for running a stop sign. The officer writes
> the citation, but plugs in the wrong vehicle code; he writes
> the number for illegal left turn, instead of stop sign violation.
>
> You think "this is my lucky day!" You go to court, request
> a trial. You and the cop testify, the judge dismisses the
> charge of illegal turn.
You're Confused...
First: It only *MIGHT* Be You're "Lucky Day"
Second: You *FIRST* "Request a Trial" THEN "Go To Court"
Third: IF You're *SMART*, You FIRST DO YOUR HOMEWORK vis a vis
Criminal Procedure at Trial, THEN [Having NEVER Alerted the Prosecutor/
SAP/Court to the FATAL ERROR in play], You Let The Stupid-Ass PIG..
OR Stupid-Ass Prosecutor "Prove" that You Violated that part of the
Code that Prohibits THE ONLY OFFENSE You Stand Charged With, ie,
"illegal left turn". ON CROSS-EXAMINATION, You ask such Seemingly
Innocuous "Clarifying" Questions as "Are You Officer Krupke? Are You
Employed By the Kern County SAP Dept? What Color is your shirt?", then
Shut The Fuck Up and WAIT for "The People" to FORMALLY "Rest"...
Fourth: THE INSTANT "The People" Rest, YOU are On Your Feet Moving
The Court to DISMISS on grounds "The People" have - FAILED TO PROVE -
*ANY ELEMENT* of the ONLY Charge you stand accused of... ie, an
"illegal left turn", the SAP having EXHAUSTIVELY Testified as to his
Observations [NOT Describing an *illegal turn*] but WRT Your
Scofflawing a Certain *Stop Sign*... AND Pointing out now, that
Officer Shithead has Testified UNDER OATH, that HE DID Write Citation
#SAP666, Complaining of Violation *VC ILT666, ILLEGAL LEFT TURN*, and
as the Court well knows, The Witness has just Testified that he
Observed Defendant "running a stop sign" As Prohibited, as Gave NO
Testimony As To any Prohibited "left turn" activity.
> To your chagrin, the cop then immediately writes a citation
> for the failure to stop, based on his recollection of the
> event. Is that kosher? Can you object? How would it
> play out?
You are UTTERLY CONFUSED... At BEST...
I'll explain a bit, HOW SO, But it REALLY Behooves YOU... as a DUTY
of Citizenship... to do some Self-Educating in Disipating that
CONFUSION... You'll be HAPPIER, LESS PRONE To such UNinformed Paranoid
Fantasies, Able To RUN FASTER and JUMP HIGHER, AND a BETTER CITIZEN...
Thus: "...cop then immediately writes a citation for the failure to
stop... can you object... play out..." Very Simple... *DOUBLE
JEOPARY*... While there's Nothing To Prevent the _STUPID_Ass Pig from
- In a Fit of Humiliated RAGE - STUPIDLY, ILLEGALLY, "REciting" for
the "Stop Sign" Offense... Here, The Implication raised by "can you
object" is that SAP, *STILL IN* the Courtroom, In Front of Judge/
Prosecutor, Cites for Stop Sign... IF BOTH Judge and Prosecutor do NOT
tell the IDIOT to Put the Ticket Book away and Shut The Fuck Up, YOU
Live in Saudi Arabia and *I* Withdraw everything I've thus far
Written... *In ameriKa*, it "plays out" that it doesn't Play Out like
that at all...
AGE-OLD Saying: "The Prosecution Gets ONLY ONE Bite At The
APPLE"...
> --
> Rich
Naughtius "I Fought The Law And The Law... Well... LOST" Maximus
David Martel
Everybody makes mistakes, even cops. The courts do not expect perfection.
It depends on the judge but I'd expect the DA and the cop to make this
correction during your case. I'm assuming here that the cop testifies to a
stop sign offense. The DA and the cop have a quick discussion and the DA
amends the charge to stop sign. If you then need more time to research the
stop sign you can request it, since the summons lead you to believe that the
crime was an illegal turn.
If it's importantn that you win this case perhaps you should speak with a
lawyer.
Good luck,
Dave M.
Deadrat
d845ab...@c36g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
I'm not sure about infractions, but for a criminal charge it would work out
depending on how far the trial proceeded. Before the trial completes,
either the prosecutor would amend the complaint when it became clear there
was an error or the judge would dismiss the case without prejudice and the
prosecutor would refile on the correct charge. Upon acquittal, the
defendant cannot be retried; upon conviction, the defendant could appeal as
to an error in law.
richard
If that state even allows trials for infractions.
We can only assume this happens in a state that allows trials for
infractions.
AdvocatusDiablo
"Cujo DeSockpuppet" <cu...@petitmorte.net> wrote in message
news:h39mo8$4hi$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
Godamn, you're a genius!
That was the best I've read here since ~~~AllisonWonderland~~~ passed away.
Edgar Wolphe
absolutely CLASSIC- Bravo!
EW
Laughter is a refuge for cowards, idiots, and morons
----Raymond Ronald Karczewski
Deadrat
news:bokh559ibfnugeb3f...@4ax.com:
All states allow trials for infractions. Otherwise, the state could take
your money in fines without due process of law.
I don't know of a state that allows *jury* trials for infractions.
> We can only assume this happens in a state that allows trials for
> infractions.
Who's we?
Cujo DeSockpuppet
news:7JGdnRNio6Z9S8XX...@insightbb.com:
Can't take credit. See the OP, Mirror of TRVTH.
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"Complaints will continue into infinity-and increase." - Edmo not
quite grasping the concept of infinity.
Cujo DeSockpuppet
news:5c2h5511rtjc35hgf...@4ax.com:
More proof that even the dumbest kooks (that's you, Richard the St00pid)
are smarter than bRay teh Kazoo.
> However, I do find it hard to believe that 4 years later his home
> state revoked the license over a simple traffic violation. And the
> rest of the bullshit is even harder to believe.
Get your fat brother, Livin' Large Larry to squander any other money that
should have been yours, assuming Joan hasn't eaten it, to hire a real
lawyer and look it up, St00pid.
> But this is exactly the kind of material that kookmeister "Just
> Taylor" would expand upon and have a field day with.
Let's see, I'm expanding on it and am one of many having a "field day"
with it, so I guess I'm Taylor?
OOPS! I forgot that St00pid already thinks I'm Taylor, Joe Jared and the
FNVW rolled into one.
> One of the AUK clowns once tried to make a case that I had been busted
> in Cincinnati for giving a false name and a wrong SSN. They claimed
> this because they had searched the county courthouse records and found
> some guy who had a similar SSN and name. Taylor was never able to show
> proof of a court date or which judge handled the case.
I hear it was just a coincidence. But how about having Kentucky law visit
you and coincidentally moving to a new trailer home in warm, sunny
Wisconsin? How about the county citing you for back taxes on your
doublewide, St00pid?
I guess those are "coincidences" too.
There's a very good reason you are called St00pid, St00pid. I'm still
amazed you haven't figured out a way to Darwin yourself, CENKOC[1].
http://home.comcast.net/~unit24/cenkoc/
http://www.kookpedia.net/index.php/Richard_Bullis
[1] Clueless Eternal Newbie Kook Of the Century.
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
""Screed"?, you mean my offer of service in astrological
writings that I also post in the proper groups--Because I am
EXTREMELY competant, I am able to carry 30 units, write
articles, date 25 year olds, kill spinics accounts, do artworks
of high calibur, and read 10 books at a time. Where do
you find the courage or audacity to challenge me?" - Edmo
richard
Read the earlier post on california infractions.
California does not allow jury trials for infractions.
You pay the fine or contest it in front of a judge.
Deadrat
news:u4di55peje9ii2aum...@4ax.com:
What is wrong with you? You said "If that state even allows trials for
infractions." *All* states allow trials for infractions, just not *jury*
trials. And my answer to the OP does not depend on there being a jury
trial.
Try to follow along.
a425couple
I'm probably too late in posting this,
but wish to inform "richard".
Your thought is totally wrong.
It is perfectly legal for the LEO to write the citation or
notice of infraction many days after the event.
Few chose to do so
(Likely reasons = 1. sense of 'fair play', 2. a more
disputable case of identification and documentation,
but more, 3. the press of new work and events.)
I was a supervisor, where the court system
(overwhelmed/undermanned) very deliberately chose
to have the LEOs not give the violators any written
notice. The LEO was to stop, investigate, confirm ID,
then release with the oral instruction that the driver
would recieve the notice later in the mail sent out
by the court system.
The court administrator very clearly admitted that this
process was 'not ideal', 'possibly harmful to public relations',
but it was "LEGAL", and it was going to be used as a
"court docket management tool." !
Back to RichD's questions
>> Is that kosher?
I'd say not kosher. Most LEOs would just let it go.
Get back to the street & work, plenty of new things to work on.
The LEO that chose to write that would probably
get lots of kidding from his peers and supervisors.
>> How would it play out?
It could go either way. If the judge believed the LEO
was being vindictive, self rightous, & petty, probably toss.
If the judge believed the driver/violator was somewhat
a 'smart aleck', probably let it stand.
IMHO - "Naughtious" gave a pretty decent response.