Police Moderator
Global Moderator
On The Job and Tangled Up In Blue
Posts: 9,821
|
Post by Police Moderator on Dec 26, 2011 9:53:31 GMT -5
Or, one could not drink and drive, or exceed the speed limit, and one generally won't have to worry about getting out of it?
Innocence is a very credible defense platform.
It's when you are guilty that defense strategy (As outlined by the original poster) comes into play. ;D
|
|
|
Post by davrik on Dec 26, 2011 10:30:21 GMT -5
I agree...No defense needed if no offense is committed. However, in the case of my guilty son, he turned left out of a McDonalds at 4:30 AM on the way to work. There was a no left turn sign there, but he chose to ignore it, as there were no cars coming in either direstion at that time of the morning. (His freeway entrance ramp was to the left.) There was however a police officer hiding behind a sign across the street and he gave him a ticket. They have a little hand held computer that prints out the ticket. When my son got home, he noticed he received the ticket according to the printout on Saturday December 17 at 9:35 AM. The offense occurred on Monday, December 20 at 4:30 AM. I suppose the little machine internal clock was off. Other than his bad decision to turn left against the traffic device, does he have a defense of the crime of ignoring the traffice device?
|
|
Police Moderator
Global Moderator
On The Job and Tangled Up In Blue
Posts: 9,821
|
Post by Police Moderator on Dec 26, 2011 11:04:56 GMT -5
A technicality, but, maybe, worthy of an attempt to have it dismissed by going to court with a solid alibi for the time the ticket says it was written. "Yer Honor! This ticket says that on, 'Saturday December 17 at 9:35 AM' I committed the alleged offense. That is impossible as I was at _______________ at that time, and date, (With witnesses who will attest, under oath, to this fact) and I could not have possibly been at two places at the same time." The burden of proof is on the State, not you, but an affirmative defense to what the State alleges (Wrong date, in black and white on the ticket) simply cannot be true which cracks the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' thing. This may work as long as the officer doesn't show up and testify that he observed your son making the illegal turn (Not in dispute and probably on video-tape with the correct date and time) and that, in good faith, he issued the ticket, not knowing that the time/date stamp was way off since they've only been using this new technology for 3 weeks. As soon as the officer realized the error, he testifies that he made a note of it on the ticket that was turned in, under oath, in writing, on the ticket (Which may not have been provided to you.) Or, he can pay the ticket and forgo all that since it has been admitted, in writing, on a public forum, that he knowingly violated the law on said correct date and time. I am sure that Duke, can recommend a much more expensive resolution, which could cost $4,000, to be found innocent of a crime for which you would have been fined a max of $50.00. If it is a matter of principle, go for it. Principle can be expensive, though. (I am not a lawyer, but I play one on here, so this should not be construed as legal advice or they might disbar me.)Next, I'll cover Miranda and the right to remain silent instead of admitting, in writing, on a public forum, that someone knowingly violated the law on said correct date and time, even if it was on video!
|
|
|
Post by gaonagetu on Dec 26, 2011 15:26:47 GMT -5
Or, one could not drink and drive, or exceed the speed limit, and one generally won't have to worry about getting out of it? Innocence is a very credible defense platform. It's when you are guilty that defense strategy (As outlined by the original poster) comes into play. ;D
|
|
Police Moderator
Global Moderator
On The Job and Tangled Up In Blue
Posts: 9,821
|
Post by Police Moderator on Dec 26, 2011 18:01:32 GMT -5
Cited for one mph over the speed limit? Really? Cite one case, that can independently be verified. I'll make it simple. Since you are from Arizona, and those records are public under FOIA, I'll just ask that you limit your search to Arizona. Just scan the original citation in and post it here, as an attachment. Really? You were there and you failed to prevent an obviously unlawful arrest of an innocent citizen? And you did this for 20 years? If so, then you are complicit in that alleged unlawful activity. Really? So you covered for these 'crooked cops' all the while you ignored their crookedness? If so, then you are complicit in that alleged unlawful activity. And you turned your head for 20 years? Share with us illiterate, backwardass, country, LE numbnuts in Tennessee, and CMF Police Blotter readers (Who are far from illiterate, backwards and country), the newspaper articles (Via a simple link) in which Trooper Gabe Gaona (Ret.), formerly of the Arizona Highway Patrol (for 20 years), stopped an unlawful, crooked Arizona cop from doing something illegal. Should be pretty simple to provide us with that link. If that whistle-blowing had occurred, I am sure some local newspaper, or TV news outlet would have jumped all over it, if it could have been verified. Just post a link to those stories, from over the last 20 years. (I won't hold you accountable for things that allegedly happened when you were not there.) Should be pretty simple to provide us with that link. Really? In Tennessee (Where this forum originates) it is unlawful for an LE agency to demand a 'quota' in any manner, shape or form. It is unlawful for any LE agency to promote, reward, discipline, require, counsel, expect or demand a certain number of citations/arrests from a LE Officer for any reason. If things in Arizona were what you alleged, then starting a blog, 20+ years after the fact, really does nothing, but line your pockets, right, Trooper Gabe Gaona (Ret.)? Y'all's retirement program must suck worse than ours, Gabe! Really? You need to go turn yourself in, then, just to make it right. Really? Get some drunk driver out of being charged with DUI 80% of the time? Cite, please. Are you claiming that the other 20% of innocent, sober drivers will not benefit from your program? Please share with us, Trooper Gabe Gaona (Ret.), the data upon which you base that statement. Until then, Trooper Gabe Gaona (Ret.) we'll treat you as what you are.... Until then, Trooper Gabe Gaona (Ret.):
|
|
|
Post by ssmynkint on Dec 26, 2011 18:10:42 GMT -5
Aw, shucks!
Has ol' Gabe told us what this great advice is gonna cost?
|
|
Police Moderator
Global Moderator
On The Job and Tangled Up In Blue
Posts: 9,821
|
Post by Police Moderator on Dec 26, 2011 18:23:11 GMT -5
Nope.
Part of the sales pitch, I reckon.
|
|
duke
Senior Forumite
Mr. Tepid
Posts: 3,706
|
Post by duke on Dec 26, 2011 18:41:01 GMT -5
PM likes to cite the law regarding police behavior as though a law actually precludes the behavior.
Like another officer I heard in a Chattanooga court one day. When asked if the cop had trespassed onto property to gather information without a warrant, the cop's repeated reply was that it was not legally allowed, but refused to deny the unlawful behavior. The 'good' judge claimed that the officer had answered the question. It was unthinkable to this judge to order the cop to directly answer the question about his own behavior rather than quoting what the law allowed.
|
|
Police Moderator
Global Moderator
On The Job and Tangled Up In Blue
Posts: 9,821
|
Post by Police Moderator on Dec 26, 2011 19:09:56 GMT -5
Care to cite the case, and the Judge, and the officer, and the defendant on that one, Duke?
You allegedly were there when all this allegedly transpired, so you should have the complete documentation on it.
How about you share that info with us?
We have a 'Right 2 Know.'
|
|
duke
Senior Forumite
Mr. Tepid
Posts: 3,706
|
Post by duke on Dec 26, 2011 20:33:53 GMT -5
It was a few years ago. City court. No records kept.
|
|
TNBear
Senior Forumite
Posts: 2,285
|
Post by TNBear on Dec 26, 2011 20:55:17 GMT -5
Crap, another troll.
|
|
|
Post by professorx on Dec 26, 2011 22:33:52 GMT -5
PM likes to cite the law regarding police behavior as though a law actually precludes the behavior. Like another officer I heard in a Chattanooga court one day. When asked if the cop had trespassed onto property to gather information without a warrant, the cop's repeated reply was that it was not legally allowed, but refused to deny the unlawful behavior. Sounds like he did answer the question. That is he did not enter the residence or other private areas of the property because it was not legally allowed. IE "Mr. Cop, did you search the car's trunk and locked areas without a warrant and without consent?" "It was not legally allowed".
|
|
|
Post by davrik on Jan 1, 2012 20:04:19 GMT -5
In regards to my sons ticket for turning left out of McDonalds...he did check and found the officer that wrote it was not on duty on the day the ticket was listed as being given. However, he decided to just pay it, as a day off from work cost way more than the fine and he did make the illegal turn. He was just pissed that the cop was hiding at 4:30 in the morning to catch someone turning left out of McDonalds. He got over it. His attitude was that it makes up for all the times he didnt get caught doing something.
|
|