Going to court, need advice please!
04-30-2006, 12:39 AM
#22
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (31)
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 1,284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rookiels1
Yeah I spent $350 on mine and didn't even have to show up to court she got it dropped. Jeannie Mucklestone 206-623-3343
Another vote for Jeannie! She got my tire noise ticket dropped too.
04-30-2006, 06:15 AM
#23
If you are going in on your own - supeona the police report that was the cause of the ticket.
The cop won't have one and won't remember you from the 100's of other people he wrote up that month let alone that night. If they do then supeona the cop - you have to ask, in front of a judge, why the 'report' was so late in being filed and what date it was written then filed. Chances are it was not done at shifts end nor filed within the 48 hours by law.
Write your explanation so you keep it short and simple. Judges hate long stories and words like "um" or "uh" as every other word. Always say "Your Honor" and *nothing* else like "Sir" or "Judge".
If you get a judge who won't listen and gives you a fine, you can pay up to be heard in Superior court which I've done. The prosecutors do not show up nor do the police at which point the judge will dismiss your case entirely.
**I'm not a lawyer. This is just from past expierence (and plenty of it!) so don't take my word for it - check www.findlaw.com and the RCW/WAC's at www.wa.gov for our state first and get your ammo there. Seems to me on the back of the ticket it says "by PREPONDERANCE of evidence". Check out the exact meaning of that word and its context - by bringing that up in court to the judge, as a reference that the officer could not have proven you were going too fast for conditions, you have made your biggest legal point. Its the basis of which every case is either thrown out or found to be of sound evidence for a fine.
Good luck. You can do this on your own if you want to spend the time messing with the research you NEED to do first.
The cop won't have one and won't remember you from the 100's of other people he wrote up that month let alone that night. If they do then supeona the cop - you have to ask, in front of a judge, why the 'report' was so late in being filed and what date it was written then filed. Chances are it was not done at shifts end nor filed within the 48 hours by law.
Write your explanation so you keep it short and simple. Judges hate long stories and words like "um" or "uh" as every other word. Always say "Your Honor" and *nothing* else like "Sir" or "Judge".
If you get a judge who won't listen and gives you a fine, you can pay up to be heard in Superior court which I've done. The prosecutors do not show up nor do the police at which point the judge will dismiss your case entirely.
**I'm not a lawyer. This is just from past expierence (and plenty of it!) so don't take my word for it - check www.findlaw.com and the RCW/WAC's at www.wa.gov for our state first and get your ammo there. Seems to me on the back of the ticket it says "by PREPONDERANCE of evidence". Check out the exact meaning of that word and its context - by bringing that up in court to the judge, as a reference that the officer could not have proven you were going too fast for conditions, you have made your biggest legal point. Its the basis of which every case is either thrown out or found to be of sound evidence for a fine.
Good luck. You can do this on your own if you want to spend the time messing with the research you NEED to do first.
04-30-2006, 10:14 AM
#24
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lynnwood, WA (North of Seattle)
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 1BAD95Z
I think it's really strange that you got a ticket in the mail a month and a half later..is that even legal?
Happens allllll the time with car accidents. Can't write a ticket (as the investigating officer) on the scene because it is (most of the time) an infraction and we have to witness those to write a ticket on sight like that. So what happens is the accident is reviewed by the "chief accident investigator" and then charges are or are not recommended and then the DA ok's a ticket being issued and it is mailed out. 
Originally Posted by dafriezez28
Thanks for the encouragement. I'm really not sure if it's legal. I know what it IS, though, and that's BULLSHIT! The cop took one look at me and saw an easy opportunity for a ticket. He just wasn't man enough to do it to my face.
I was respectful, cooperative, and tried to be patient while he harrassed me on the side of the road in the rain and accused me of driving recklessly and drinking. He even said he 'smelled a little something' on my breath
I know that if I end up going alone I won't disrespect the officer in any way--and I think that's the mistake people make. Judges are probably more inclined to go w/ an officer's word because they are on the same 'side' if you know what I mean.
I like a lot of cops. . . even have some friends, but this one was a real
I was respectful, cooperative, and tried to be patient while he harrassed me on the side of the road in the rain and accused me of driving recklessly and drinking. He even said he 'smelled a little something' on my breath
I know that if I end up going alone I won't disrespect the officer in any way--and I think that's the mistake people make. Judges are probably more inclined to go w/ an officer's word because they are on the same 'side' if you know what I mean.
I like a lot of cops. . . even have some friends, but this one was a real
Also, the thing about alcohol or "something" on your breath is an easy "mistake" as on the side of the road there are tons of things that stink and end up smelling like used alcohol, as does mouthwash, old gum, etc. Every person has their own chemical makeup and how the different things we put into our system (gum, food, drinks - not alcohol) etc all "react" differently and can end up smelling like old beer, etc. Also if he had arrested any drunks or dealt with anyone who was intoxicated, that smell tends to linger in the nostrils and can show up later on in the shift on other people........And there are times when cops are just dicks and treat ya like hell.
Originally Posted by GEARHED
If you are going in on your own - supeona the police report that was the cause of the ticket.
The cop won't have one and won't remember you from the 100's of other people he wrote up that month let alone that night. If they do then supeona the cop - you have to ask, in front of a judge, why the 'report' was so late in being filed and what date it was written then filed. Chances are it was not done at shifts end nor filed within the 48 hours by law.
Write your explanation so you keep it short and simple. Judges hate long stories and words like "um" or "uh" as every other word. Always say "Your Honor" and *nothing* else like "Sir" or "Judge".
If you get a judge who won't listen and gives you a fine, you can pay up to be heard in Superior court which I've done. The prosecutors do not show up nor do the police at which point the judge will dismiss your case entirely.
**I'm not a lawyer. This is just from past expierence (and plenty of it!) so don't take my word for it - check www.findlaw.com and the RCW/WAC's at www.wa.gov for our state first and get your ammo there. Seems to me on the back of the ticket it says "by PREPONDERANCE of evidence". Check out the exact meaning of that word and its context - by bringing that up in court to the judge, as a reference that the officer could not have proven you were going too fast for conditions, you have made your biggest legal point. Its the basis of which every case is either thrown out or found to be of sound evidence for a fine.
Good luck. You can do this on your own if you want to spend the time messing with the research you NEED to do first.
The cop won't have one and won't remember you from the 100's of other people he wrote up that month let alone that night. If they do then supeona the cop - you have to ask, in front of a judge, why the 'report' was so late in being filed and what date it was written then filed. Chances are it was not done at shifts end nor filed within the 48 hours by law.
Write your explanation so you keep it short and simple. Judges hate long stories and words like "um" or "uh" as every other word. Always say "Your Honor" and *nothing* else like "Sir" or "Judge".
If you get a judge who won't listen and gives you a fine, you can pay up to be heard in Superior court which I've done. The prosecutors do not show up nor do the police at which point the judge will dismiss your case entirely.
**I'm not a lawyer. This is just from past expierence (and plenty of it!) so don't take my word for it - check www.findlaw.com and the RCW/WAC's at www.wa.gov for our state first and get your ammo there. Seems to me on the back of the ticket it says "by PREPONDERANCE of evidence". Check out the exact meaning of that word and its context - by bringing that up in court to the judge, as a reference that the officer could not have proven you were going too fast for conditions, you have made your biggest legal point. Its the basis of which every case is either thrown out or found to be of sound evidence for a fine.
Good luck. You can do this on your own if you want to spend the time messing with the research you NEED to do first.
Regardless, I am fairly sure that has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a citation can be issued........it is more for DMV/insurance reasons then legal/court ones. :shrug:Good luck and I agree with going in, being polite, respectful (Your Honor, not sir to the Judge) and telling your side.......I highly recommend against offering your opinion of anything, especially how the cop acted, what he did, etc. Only because you will come off as a pissed off "kid" ranting & raving, instead of a mature young person who is earnest in his attempts to take care of this situation.
04-30-2006, 10:59 AM
#25
TECH Addict
As usual my view ques onto completely differant aspects of the story You hit a piece of unknown debris at 45 mph .... it wasn't bad enough to disable your car, not even a flat tire ? You then ( over? ) corrected the slide back and forth 3-4 times before losing it completely right ? I'd do these things in this order.
1. I'd delay the court appearance for a month
2. I'd go take the Proformance driving school ( or equivalent )
3. I'd then go explain to the judge that the cause of the accident was your lack of driving skill, and NOT speed since any reasonably skilled driver should have been able to correct the situation thru proper steering inputs, and 45 mph WAS in fact well below normal road speeds thusly demonstrating that you WERE taking into account the poor road conditions. This course of action will demonstrate three things to the judge.
1. You're maturity. Since NOBODY in your age bracket would EVER normally admit to having sub par driving skills because of youthful pride.
2. Your sense of responsibility, since you not only objectively evaluated your driving skills, but took concrete steps to fill in this "gap".
3. The last thing is what I'd call "visual impact". You could hold up your very professional looking ( hopefully in a nice wooden frame
) Proformance driving school " street survival skills " completion certificate for all to see. Sometimes a certificate like this will take you where words will not.
This course of action would also have the obvious benefit of turning a lawyer fee into a high performance driving school ( fun fun ! ) And instead of returning to the street with the same skills that got you here in the first place, you would have a brand new set of skills that would stay with you a lifetime This could easily translate into NOT having to pay for a dented up car in the future This is all just a passing thought I had lol !
You hit a piece of unknown debris at 45 mph .... it wasn't bad enough to disable your car, not even a flat tire ? You then ( over? ) corrected the slide back and forth 3-4 times before losing it completely right ? I'd do these things in this order.1. I'd delay the court appearance for a month
2. I'd go take the Proformance driving school ( or equivalent )
3. I'd then go explain to the judge that the cause of the accident was your lack of driving skill, and NOT speed since any reasonably skilled driver should have been able to correct the situation thru proper steering inputs, and 45 mph WAS in fact well below normal road speeds thusly demonstrating that you WERE taking into account the poor road conditions. This course of action will demonstrate three things to the judge.
1. You're maturity. Since NOBODY in your age bracket would EVER normally admit to having sub par driving skills because of youthful pride.
2. Your sense of responsibility, since you not only objectively evaluated your driving skills, but took concrete steps to fill in this "gap".
3. The last thing is what I'd call "visual impact". You could hold up your very professional looking ( hopefully in a nice wooden frame
) Proformance driving school " street survival skills " completion certificate for all to see. Sometimes a certificate like this will take you where words will not.This course of action would also have the obvious benefit of turning a lawyer fee into a high performance driving school ( fun fun ! ) And instead of returning to the street with the same skills that got you here in the first place, you would have a brand new set of skills that would stay with you a lifetime
This could easily translate into NOT having to pay for a dented up car in the future This is all just a passing thought I had lol !
04-30-2006, 11:32 AM
#26
TECH Addict
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While you don't always need a lawyer in traffic court, it certainly does help. I have spent more than my fair share of time in courtrooms and I can vouch for their necessity. Get a good one and it will be worth it in the long run. (Sometimes just having someone from a reputable lawyers' office make a few phone calls can save you a trip to the judge.)
<soapbox>
Don't be fooled by shows like Matlock and Cops. Real court does NOT work anything like what you see on television. And, with all due respect, this is the State of Washington. What that means is this: you can be dead to rights and have God's own truth on your side, but they will still come up with some reason you never heard of to rule against you. (I know this is America and it is not supposed to work like that but just trust me on this.) Many lawyers will acknowledge that we have rules, not laws that govern this state, and there is a difference.
</soapbox>
<soapbox>
Don't be fooled by shows like Matlock and Cops. Real court does NOT work anything like what you see on television. And, with all due respect, this is the State of Washington. What that means is this: you can be dead to rights and have God's own truth on your side, but they will still come up with some reason you never heard of to rule against you. (I know this is America and it is not supposed to work like that but just trust me on this.) Many lawyers will acknowledge that we have rules, not laws that govern this state, and there is a difference.
</soapbox>
04-30-2006, 11:47 AM
#27
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Edmonds, WA
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UGH! How can I subpoena the police report? Doesn't that take a long time to get, like longer than two weeks?
Also, I am a very respectful guy. . . I am not going to question the officer's motives or bring up the 'harrassment' unless I have to.
He basically said "Come on, you know you just came out of the curve too fast and hit the gas. You ripped the back end loose and couldn't do anything about it." He continued to goad me on like this and accuse me. . . then burned out when he left. I'm sure if I brought that up he'd just say he was on a call
Also, I am a very respectful guy. . . I am not going to question the officer's motives or bring up the 'harrassment' unless I have to.
He basically said "Come on, you know you just came out of the curve too fast and hit the gas. You ripped the back end loose and couldn't do anything about it." He continued to goad me on like this and accuse me. . . then burned out when he left. I'm sure if I brought that up he'd just say he was on a call
04-30-2006, 02:10 PM
#29
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lynnwood, WA (North of Seattle)
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dafriezez28
UGH! How can I subpoena the police report? Doesn't that take a long time to get, like longer than two weeks?
Also, I am a very respectful guy. . . I am not going to question the officer's motives or bring up the 'harrassment' unless I have to.
He basically said "Come on, you know you just came out of the curve too fast and hit the gas. You ripped the back end loose and couldn't do anything about it." He continued to goad me on like this and accuse me. . . then burned out when he left. I'm sure if I brought that up he'd just say he was on a call
Also, I am a very respectful guy. . . I am not going to question the officer's motives or bring up the 'harrassment' unless I have to.
He basically said "Come on, you know you just came out of the curve too fast and hit the gas. You ripped the back end loose and couldn't do anything about it." He continued to goad me on like this and accuse me. . . then burned out when he left. I'm sure if I brought that up he'd just say he was on a call
Crown Vics have some lame torque management setup that makes burnouts a near impossibility. 
But pointing out someone else's (possible) wrong doing doesn't excuse your accused wrongdoing...........just food for thought. I know you said you are (and do seem to be) a respectful and good person.As for the police report, if you are the named party in it, you can go down and purchase a copy of it from whatever Agency wrote the report. Will cost a few bucks ($5-20ish) and may take a couple days. I would call that Agency today or tomorrow and ask what their specific process is for obtaining a copy of your accident report.
No need for a subpoena.My guess for his "goading and accusing you" is because "most" people lie and under continued questioning, will slip up or finally tell the truth.
04-30-2006, 02:12 PM
#30
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lynnwood, WA (North of Seattle)
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by howierd42
Actually, when you have them on the stand and dead to rights, their favorite response is, "I don't recall."
04-30-2006, 02:32 PM
#31
Originally Posted by dafriezez28
UGH! How can I subpoena the police report? Doesn't that take a long time to get, like longer than two weeks?
Also, I am a very respectful guy. . . I am not going to question the officer's motives or bring up the 'harrassment' unless I have to.
He basically said "Come on, you know you just came out of the curve too fast and hit the gas. You ripped the back end loose and couldn't do anything about it." He continued to goad me on like this and accuse me. . . then burned out when he left. I'm sure if I brought that up he'd just say he was on a call
Also, I am a very respectful guy. . . I am not going to question the officer's motives or bring up the 'harrassment' unless I have to.
He basically said "Come on, you know you just came out of the curve too fast and hit the gas. You ripped the back end loose and couldn't do anything about it." He continued to goad me on like this and accuse me. . . then burned out when he left. I'm sure if I brought that up he'd just say he was on a call
Never use the word "harrassment" or "I was being harrassed" in court. You can say something like: "I felt like the officer did not believe I drove over some debris causing my car to slide. The officer was very through in assessing if I had been drinking or driving unlawfully or recklessly. Since I have not experienced this before, it seemed as if he was taking an inordant amount of time doing that."
You put it any other way and you are going to wind up with a fine.
Its short, sweet and to the point without the perception of having a chip on your shoulder. Another thing you may want to do is look at what a Judge is: your driving report from the DMV. You can walk into any DMV and request a copy of your record - it used to be $5 but I'll bet it costs more now. Most people are surprised to find information on theirs they didn't know was reported or how far it goes back so get it first - you'll know how a judge is going to percieve you from that alone before you open your mouth.
Hey Rott! You sure about the two weeks? I know the laws may have changed but it used to be 48 hours to get a report filed. Haven't looked at the WAC's lately so they might have changed, did you ask the retired officer or is that the way it is in Cali?
(Just curious)
04-30-2006, 02:41 PM
#32
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lynnwood, WA (North of Seattle)
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GEARHED
Call the court clerk tomorrow and ask how to serve papers. They only require 7 days from the date of service to the court date. You can't serve them but a friend can. It doesn't matter if *they* make the deadline, it only matters you served papers in time. You have a 99% chance the papers or officer will not make it to court even with two weeks notice, at which point the states case against you falls apart. Doesn't mean you will get an automatic dismissal but it sure cuts the time the Judge will spend on your case to sustain the ticket against you.
Never use the word "harrassment" or "I was being harrassed" in court. You can say something like: "I felt like the officer did not believe I drove over some debris causing my car to slide. The officer was very through in assessing if I had been drinking or driving unlawfully or recklessly. Since I have not experienced this before, it seemed as if he was taking an inordant amount of time doing that."
You put it any other way and you are going to wind up with a fine.
Its short, sweet and to the point without the perception of having a chip on your shoulder. Another thing you may want to do is look at what a Judge is: your driving report from the DMV. You can walk into any DMV and request a copy of your record - it used to be $5 but I'll bet it costs more now. Most people are surprised to find information on theirs they didn't know was reported or how far it goes back so get it first - you'll know how a judge is going to percieve you from that alone before you open your mouth.
Hey Rott! You sure about the two weeks? I know the laws may have changed but it used to be 48 hours to get a report filed. Haven't looked at the WAC's lately so they might have changed, did you ask the retired officer or is that the way it is in Cali?
(Just curious)
You put it any other way and you are going to wind up with a fine.
Its short, sweet and to the point without the perception of having a chip on your shoulder. Another thing you may want to do is look at what a Judge is: your driving report from the DMV. You can walk into any DMV and request a copy of your record - it used to be $5 but I'll bet it costs more now. Most people are surprised to find information on theirs they didn't know was reported or how far it goes back so get it first - you'll know how a judge is going to percieve you from that alone before you open your mouth.
Hey Rott! You sure about the two weeks? I know the laws may have changed but it used to be 48 hours to get a report filed. Haven't looked at the WAC's lately so they might have changed, did you ask the retired officer or is that the way it is in Cali?
(Just curious)
Most 48 hour report deadlines are for physical arrests (including DUI's alone or from crashes) to get the paperwork to the courts in time for arraignments. The actual accident report from a DUI crash still has 10 days to 2 weeks unless that has changed vvvvery recently which I doubt.....like I said, too much stuff involved to get a proper and accurate accident investigation report done in that short amount of time.
04-30-2006, 02:42 PM
#33
Originally Posted by Rottluver
As for the police report, if you are the named party in it, you can go down and purchase a copy of it from whatever Agency wrote the report. Will cost a few bucks ($5-20ish) and may take a couple days. I would call that Agency today or tomorrow and ask what their specific process is for obtaining a copy of your accident report. No need for a subpoena.
No need for a subpoena.
My guess for his "goading and accusing you" is because "most" people lie and under continued questioning, will slip up or finally tell the truth.
04-30-2006, 02:46 PM
#34
Originally Posted by Rottluver
Or just go down to the Agency and pick up a copy of it without the added mess of subponeas and what not.
It was that way in Cali, it is that way here as well, last I heard which was late last summer when I got rear-ended and asked about it. Waaaaaay too much involved in any kind of major accident, DUI crash or fatality crash to get the report done in 48 hours.
Most 48 hour report deadlines are for physical arrests (including DUI's alone or from crashes) to get the paperwork to the courts in time for arraignments. The actual accident report from a DUI crash still has 10 days to 2 weeks unless that has changed vvvvery recently which I doubt.....like I said, too much stuff involved to get a proper and accurate accident investigation report done in that short amount of time.
It was that way in Cali, it is that way here as well, last I heard which was late last summer when I got rear-ended and asked about it. Waaaaaay too much involved in any kind of major accident, DUI crash or fatality crash to get the report done in 48 hours.
Most 48 hour report deadlines are for physical arrests (including DUI's alone or from crashes) to get the paperwork to the courts in time for arraignments. The actual accident report from a DUI crash still has 10 days to 2 weeks unless that has changed vvvvery recently which I doubt.....like I said, too much stuff involved to get a proper and accurate accident investigation report done in that short amount of time.
I dunno - wanna share some pain meds? (my pancreas is killing me today!)
04-30-2006, 03:24 PM
#35
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lynnwood, WA (North of Seattle)
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GEARHED
And here we disagree. You subpoena the exact report or officer because, again, it is by perponderance of the evidence one is given a ticket and found guilty or not. If they are too lazy or don't have the papers then that is their problem - not the driver who recieved the ticket. They make the laws, they need to follow them.
) so that I can remember what happened and besides, the court WILL have copies of it on file and the officer will also be subpoen'd by the court (no need for the defendant to do it) since he has to testify as to why the citation was issued......hence he will need the report, etc. Not having a copy of the report (the officer) can just testify from memory and then if the defendant doesnt have his own copy of it, he cannot challenge the validity of ANY of it. :shrug:I have never been to court and HAD to have the report with me. I have testified from memory more then once.........worst case scenario (being called in without warning/no subpoena), the DA, the court or even the defense has provided me with a copy of it.
As far as the "preponderance of evidence", that is what is used to determine guilt in a traffic citation situation, not what is used for issuance of the actual ticket. A ticket is either written on the spot for a "crime" witnessed by the oficer or issued later (as in this case) based on the evidence. The preponderance part comes in determining guilt or not, not in issuing the ticket.
Originally Posted by GEARHED
Could be - I need to look up the WAC's (because its interesting) to find out if there is a difference on ones that are just moving violations vs arrests. My gut feeling is since no one else was involved in this situation the time for filing was overshot.
I dunno - wanna share some pain meds? (my pancreas is killing me today!)
I dunno - wanna share some pain meds? (my pancreas is killing me today!)
04-30-2006, 05:02 PM
#36
Its rare for an officer to show up in court these days, they just hand in a 'brevity' report on a case like this *if* one exists (really, they do not show up in court unless it is by subpeona, you have no idea how lazy they are). Some 'traffic courts' don't even have a transcriber, its recorded. Its why you would want to either have them in court or have the full file with the date it was filed - as you said in response to "I don't recall" scenario - if it wasn't filed in a timely manner then how can the officer remember what happened?
(argument for the courts, not you)
...that would be my point in court...
If the officer did not witness what happened then there is no way to determine if a ticket was supposed to be issued with validity. If no scene reconstruction was done right then and there, nor search for road debris then its hard to prove any law was broken.
This would be the basis of my argument, if it were me. I'd stick to it like glue. Fer instance: while I may be guilty of driving faster than conditions warranted, it would be the officers duty to make sure the laws were met before issuing a citation:
1. They witnessed me going faster than I should have been for the vehicle I was driving.
2. They looked for road debris so no other vehicles would be involved in a crash.
3. File a report within a timely manner as predicated by the number of hours per shifts, number of shifts and responses to similar calls per shift during the time period of when I made first contact with the officer to the filing of his report.
4. With such a broad based description of "driving too fast for conditions", there would have to be a measure presented by the officer to prove, beyond any doubt, without having witnessed the incident, I was indeed traveling too fast at that time.
The claim that my actions were "willful and wanton disregard for the saftey of persons or property" (as per RCW 46.61.500) without being witnessed is the onus of the officer to prove.
5. RCW 46.61.465 "The unlawful operation of a vehicle in excess of the maxium lawful speeds" (the posted speed) know as "prima facie" evidence where the officer would have to some way of determining I was in fact, going over the speed limit, not having witnessed my speed OR done a on scene accident investigation. He could not reasonably determine my speed at the time the crash occured.
RCW 46.61.400 is the only caveat to this scenario - the officer could argue I was driving 100mph when I ran over the bunny but proving it would be different in court sans not seeing me flying off the ramp and a dead bunny.
(someone smack me, I should be charging for this)
(argument for the courts, not you)
The preponderance part comes in determining guilt or not, not in issuing the ticket.
If the officer did not witness what happened then there is no way to determine if a ticket was supposed to be issued with validity. If no scene reconstruction was done right then and there, nor search for road debris then its hard to prove any law was broken.
This would be the basis of my argument, if it were me. I'd stick to it like glue. Fer instance: while I may be guilty of driving faster than conditions warranted, it would be the officers duty to make sure the laws were met before issuing a citation:
1. They witnessed me going faster than I should have been for the vehicle I was driving.
2. They looked for road debris so no other vehicles would be involved in a crash.
3. File a report within a timely manner as predicated by the number of hours per shifts, number of shifts and responses to similar calls per shift during the time period of when I made first contact with the officer to the filing of his report.
4. With such a broad based description of "driving too fast for conditions", there would have to be a measure presented by the officer to prove, beyond any doubt, without having witnessed the incident, I was indeed traveling too fast at that time.
The claim that my actions were "willful and wanton disregard for the saftey of persons or property" (as per RCW 46.61.500) without being witnessed is the onus of the officer to prove.
5. RCW 46.61.465 "The unlawful operation of a vehicle in excess of the maxium lawful speeds" (the posted speed) know as "prima facie" evidence where the officer would have to some way of determining I was in fact, going over the speed limit, not having witnessed my speed OR done a on scene accident investigation. He could not reasonably determine my speed at the time the crash occured.
RCW 46.61.400 is the only caveat to this scenario - the officer could argue I was driving 100mph when I ran over the bunny but proving it would be different in court sans not seeing me flying off the ramp and a dead bunny.
(someone smack me, I should be charging for this)
04-30-2006, 05:29 PM
#37
I got the car fixed, told my insurance company I wasn't ticketed, and then got a ticket in the mail a month an a half later for "driving too fast to avoid collision."
Huh. I can't find a law for that. As in no specific law. The only ones that would fall under the blanket would be the two RCW's listed above - but that would have to have been on the ticket listed as either "Reckless Driving" or "Driving too fast for conditions".
I'd ask the judge to throw it out on that basis alone - either you broke a real law or you didn't. Its that simple.
04-30-2006, 06:48 PM
#38
On The Tree
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Edmonds, WA
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't tell you guys how much I appreciate this help...
I think I have a solid case. If I had been driving recklessly or been acting stupid, I would man up and take this ticket... just like if I were caught speeding or something equally stupid. In this case, the officer saw nothing, could not judge skid-marks because it was wet, and didn't investigate my claim of debris.
I understand about the filing of the report and how that doesn't really need to be done within 48 hours. I guess I'll just go down to the agency and get these papers later in the week (like Wednesday when I'm off work early) and get my case ready to go. Really, I am a nice, respectful kid. I'm not going to call the officer out on anything, but just argue respectfully that he did not investigate my claim of debris, showed up after the fact, and that he has no way of determining my speed at the time of loss of control--only that something caused me to lose control.
I believe I have a strong case. . . we will see.
Thanks for the help, guys.
I think I have a solid case. If I had been driving recklessly or been acting stupid, I would man up and take this ticket... just like if I were caught speeding or something equally stupid. In this case, the officer saw nothing, could not judge skid-marks because it was wet, and didn't investigate my claim of debris.
I understand about the filing of the report and how that doesn't really need to be done within 48 hours. I guess I'll just go down to the agency and get these papers later in the week (like Wednesday when I'm off work early) and get my case ready to go. Really, I am a nice, respectful kid. I'm not going to call the officer out on anything, but just argue respectfully that he did not investigate my claim of debris, showed up after the fact, and that he has no way of determining my speed at the time of loss of control--only that something caused me to lose control.
I believe I have a strong case. . . we will see.
Thanks for the help, guys.
04-30-2006, 09:15 PM
#39
12 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Washington State
Posts: 862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does suck when something like this happens. In 96 I had just bought a brand new car, left the dealership, went through downtown Tacoma and decided to go the waterfront, since I lived down in that area. Traffic was backed up, so I creeped along and was hot out, so I rolled down the windows, up ahead a motorcycle cop was sitting on his bike...as I passed him at about 1mph, he was about 5 total feel away and could hear my stereo??? He pulled me over and gave me a noise ticket ($500), the damn stereo was a stock piece of crap and the volume was less than a normal conversation in a car..but being he was 5 feet away he could hear it.. I was pissed, I had a few choice words for him since I knew he was writing a lame ticket, even gave him the finger a few times..I think I was lucky not to get thrown in jail. Anyway, I went to court and looked like the DSHS office...about 40 people in a room all waiting to go see the judge on noise and other stupid violations. There was the da sitting there and a few minutes before each case was brought up, they offered a deal..$200 and would come off my record after 1 year if no other violations. I only went for it because it wasn't a violation that could raise my insurance..but chances of wining were slim anyway. In your case, the officer has to prove to the judge his report, which I don't think there would be anything to prove, it was all a guess. You should be able to get it thrown out. If you don't feel real confident..A attorney would be worth it..you would save more on the insurance rates...a accident would make the rates go way up... Could have been from standing water on road etc, which after trying to miss a piece of something in the road, could make a person spin out at any speed.
04-30-2006, 11:00 PM
#40
Rotwiler,
Seems like they are really big on writing tickets down there for noise but you couldn't get one to save your life anywhere else - like at 1AM in a close residential neighbourhood. WTF is that all about?!
dafriezez28,
Anyone could have slid in the place you did. Its why its called an "accident". The reason I'm so intent on this is my son was in a rental car in May of 04' on that same corner and it was raining, going close to 10 under the speed limit and lost control as well. The officer(s) (there were 3 units that showed up total, two left) flat out said they saw spin outs there constantly no matter what the vehicle or speed. He nailed the light pole head on, not as lucky as you but did not get a ticket for it. The officer said it happens all the time there and was so used to more damage or other vehicles involved.
Good thing he bought the rental insurance.
The other point is there were no skid marks that you could say were his. As my son was trying to figure out how he lost control the officer said there was no point in trying to look for skid marks or how it happened - there are too many there from *dry* pavement crashes.
He was just a few years older than you and in a rental. He could have gotten a ticket but the officers all said its all too common there to make a fuss about it. Go figure.
Seems like they are really big on writing tickets down there for noise but you couldn't get one to save your life anywhere else - like at 1AM in a close residential neighbourhood. WTF is that all about?!
dafriezez28,
Anyone could have slid in the place you did. Its why its called an "accident". The reason I'm so intent on this is my son was in a rental car in May of 04' on that same corner and it was raining, going close to 10 under the speed limit and lost control as well. The officer(s) (there were 3 units that showed up total, two left) flat out said they saw spin outs there constantly no matter what the vehicle or speed. He nailed the light pole head on, not as lucky as you but did not get a ticket for it. The officer said it happens all the time there and was so used to more damage or other vehicles involved.
Good thing he bought the rental insurance.
The other point is there were no skid marks that you could say were his. As my son was trying to figure out how he lost control the officer said there was no point in trying to look for skid marks or how it happened - there are too many there from *dry* pavement crashes.
He was just a few years older than you and in a rental. He could have gotten a ticket but the officers all said its all too common there to make a fuss about it. Go figure.