Posted: 1/2/2011 11:07:09 AM EDT
|
Let's say you are travelling north on I-5 in a 70MPH zone. You are travelling at 71 MPH. You see a state police vehcile approx 1/4 mile behind you. You continue to travel 71 MPH to pass a minivan and a tractor trailer. Upon reaching the front of the tractor trailer, you find the state police vehicle is right behind you and you indicate your intention of moving to the right lane and then proceed to do so. After moving to the right lane, the police car does not pass you, but stays in your blind spot for approximately 1/2mi until you come upon another slower car that you want to pass. The police car is still in your blind spot and is there until you are upon the the car in your lane and you have to press your brakes to slow down to it's speed. The police car then accelerates and proceeds out to the front of everyone.
As you pass the vehicle in front of you, you notice the police car increase speed to approximately 80 MPH. You increase your speed to the requisite 70 and then follow the police car and continue driving. The police car then increases it's speed to approx 85-90 MPH. You cannot follow, but you are still in the 80 range following the police car. You drive for another 1/4mi and you see the officer use the area between a rest stop off-ramp and the highway as a stopping point. HE practically slams his brakes to stop while another motorist is exiting to the rest area. You slow down and switch lanes to avoid the officer and whatever he may be doing. As you pass the police car, he gets back on the highway and lights you up. You pull over to the side of the road, put your hands on the wheel and the officer approaches your vehicle. "What were you doing?" says the officer. "Following you." you reply. "I know", he says, "I was watching to see what you would do if I sped up...I need your license, registration, and proof of insurance." You ask "You have rear radar?". He replies in the affirmative. You hand him you information and he runs it in his car. Comes back with a ticket. He asks you some more questions and you say nothing. He then tells you to be safe and you say thank you. In that scenario do you: A - Pay the fine and be done with it. B - Contest and get your day to plead your case. C - Mitigate and plead guilty but explain the situation and see if you can get reduction of penalty? What say the WAHTF? |
|
You got caught. If an officer claims to have gotten me on radar, I always ask if I can see their radar unit readout. Of course, that virtually guarantees you're getting a ticket.
Fight it if you want to, but you could fight it best with an attorney. I have no idea how the officer could say that your vehicle is the one his radar was locked onto at the distances you can get on a freeway. There were other vehicles around, yes? I try to do nothing behind the wheel that I cannot afford. That includes needing a traffic attorney. |
|
Quoted:
After moving to the right lane, the police car does not pass you, but stays in your blind spot CLUE #1 for approximately 1/2mi until you come upon another slower car that you want to pass. The police car is still in your blind spot and is there until you are upon the the car in your lane CLUE #2 and you have to press your brakes to slow down to it's speed. The police car then accelerates and proceeds out to the front of everyone. As you pass the vehicle in front of you, you notice the police car increase speed to approximately 80 MPH. CLUE #3 You increase your speed to the requisite 70 and then follow the police car and continue driving. The police car then increases it's speed to approx 85-90 MPH. You cannot follow, but you are still in the 80 range following the police car. Clue #1: he's running your plates. He had to get close enough to see them, but he can't see them when he's beside you. Clue #2: he knows he's in your blind spot. He wants to you either cut him off so he can pull you over, OR he wants you to hit the breaks to "teach you a lesson" to slow down. Sometimes, just putting on the show that you've learned your lesson is enough to get 5-0 to move along. Clue #3: He's baiting you. He has no reason to increase speed after he's passed other than to see if you'll increase speed after you pass. You took the bait like most clueless prey. Why the fuck would you make yourself more conspicuous when you've already aroused suspicion/attention? You deserved the ticket for "contempt of cop", prey behavior, and general stupidity. That said, lawyer up. The officers illegal behavior (speeding as bait) does not justify (to a court) your illegal behavior. But you're gonna pay the lawyers cost anyways between paying the ticket/missing work for court/increased insurance for 3-5 years. So might as well pay up front to the lawyer and have a clean record for the future. That way, if you get stopped again, Johnny Law might be more likely to let you slide with a warning... |
|
"Speeding as bait"? Is that like, "Hey, they was all grabbin' tv's & shit. I figgered it wuz ok." Seeing someone else do something is not justification for any behavior. As to the trooper's "illegal behavior", for all you know, he was responding to a call, then terminated. The OP did something stoopid and wants cheerleaders. He can go to court, toss a quarter on the floor to see which side is up, but, he's still gonna be out the quarter. Simple advice: if you don't want want someone looking in your pants, keep 'em up. |
|
Quoted:
Seeing someone else do something is not justification for any behavior. How much simpler can I make it? We're sayin' the same damn thing... 
Quoted:
The officers illegal behavior (speeding as bait) does not justify (to a court) your illegal behavior. Quoted:
As to the trooper's "illegal behavior", for all you know, he was responding to a call, then terminated. I'm absolutely sure that sometimes this IS the case. Police have more than one person to worry about. I'm also absolutely sure that it's not the case EVERYTIME an officer does something that a mere citizen wouldn't be allowed to do. You and I both know that even if a citizen called in an officer for breaking the law (speeding, etc.), the most they would get is a questioning from their superior and a verbal warning. No permanent record, no ticket, and certainly no demotion/firing for having a substandard character. Because the blue line protects it's own. In some cases, I think that is a great thing, and very helpful. In other cases, it furthers the stereotype of JBTs. I can be honest and realistic by admitting that sometimes what looks wrong is for good reason, why can't the police apologists do the same? Why do they ALWAYS, 100% OF THE TIME, close ranks and pretend that they can not possibly do any wrong? Why can't they admit that not every stretching of their authority was "in the line of duty"?
|
|
Pay the fine and be done with it. You admitted speeding for no good reason other than to fuck around for curiosity sake. There is no case to plead here and any explanation will only make you look worse in court. It's your money, time, and ego here. In the end how much of it you piss away is up to you. |
|
Quoted:
I'm also absolutely sure that it's not the case EVERYTIME an officer does something that a mere citizen wouldn't be allowed to do. You and I both know that even if a citizen called in an officer for breaking the law (speeding, etc.), the most they would get is a questioning from their superior and a verbal warning. About a decade ago, two motorcycle officers from Clackamas County were radaring folks going south on I5 in wilsonville, or. They catch someone going to fast, a red mustang in the left lane, point at the vehicle as it goes by, and then prepare to take off after it. Red mustang makes a safe lane change from left lane to right lane, then to shoulder. Two motorcycle officers fly by my left side, see the red mustang has already pulled onto the shoulder, and proceed to cut off the 40 ton big rig I was driving at the time. I blew the air horn at them to help them identify the STUPID FUCKING THING THEY DID THAT WOULD HAVE CAUSED THEM INSTANT DEATH HAD I NOT BEEN PAYING ATTENTION. At the Woodburn scales, I get redlighted, and asked ordered to park and come inside the building. I get interrogated about why I honked the horn at the officers in pursuit of a car. I told the officer the facts, and then he went to make a phone call. He came back to me and told me I was free to go. I called the CCSO and asked to talk to the traffic supervisor. I left a voice mail asking for a call back regarding the situation. It never happened. I've always been polite to police, but some take the power a little too seriously. When I call to complain, which I've done a couple times, I don't expect anything to happen. |
|
Quoted:
Because, my dear squirrel, they are, used to be or wish they were part of that blue line. Bobbity is my friend, and I know some of what he used to do. My rant isn't against him specifically, it's against the mentality that "Some are above questioning". I guess my point is that when one party can NEVER admit the possibility that they are wrong, they are deluded/irrational/crazy/living in a fantasy. 
SOMETIMES the blue line is unreasonable, and I would hope more people see that. 
|
|
Quoted:
And with all the talk on this forum, I am surprised the number of you who would just seem to roll over. "Rolling over" can be a good tactic depending on the scenario. 
Unfortunately, in YOUR scenario, you provoked the attack. That changes the dynamics "just a tiny bit". 
|
|
To clarify: No person,or group, is above the law. Just saying that there are times when you aren't seeing what's in front of you, or don't have all the information. The trooper may have been "enjoying" PTK's company, or doing something else. I am not ere to defend him. But, based solely on the scenario as described, PTK got the answer he sought. After all, we not only don't have statements from both parties involved, we only have one side, as viewed through his perspective, salted with hindsight, fricasseed in his experiences and frosted with his agenda. neenerneener |
|
Quoted: Quoted: blah, blah, blah.... I went 80 MPH behind a cop car... blah, blah, blah... I gave cop smartass response to first question he asks... blah, blah, blah... I got a ticket... blah, blah, blah... What should I do?... Answer: I think you have done enough already.  An idiot decides to cross the street, in a crosswalk, with the light and gets WHACKED by a bus. It kills him. He may have been right, but he is still dead. I think you did enough already as well. I have been known to ease up the highway, but when I see the man in a 70, I am trying to peddle at 75 on cruise. I let him go and then ease back up to what I want to be at with him almost out of sight. Been using this strategy for years and years and have had NO issues. |
|
Quoted:
Dispute the ticket. Subpoena Mr. Piggie. Make him look foolish in front of His Honour. If the radar evidence is affirmitive, contestating will be counterproductive. Typically, if you have a decent record & plea mitigation the fine will autoomatically be reduced. From your own account, you were speeding. Try & lie your way out of it & you'll get worse. Remember, the officer's written statement is sworn testimony, so whatever is in their report is taken as truth/fact. I believe independant, verifiable evidence like radar/laser is required by WA State law, but he probably had that or else you wouldn't have gotten popped. PNWriders.com forum has traffic attorney references that are purportedly pretty good, so if you want to spend a little more you could possibly win on a technicality of some sort. |
|
Whether or not he was speeding or a prick to the cop is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that both sides of the law have to operate within the same paramiters and it doesnt take but one of many technicalities to get the charges dropped. Ive been guilty of speeding many times and have operated within the law to have charges dropped. Roll over ans piss myself just for the sake of taking my medicine? I dont think so. The law is there for both sides. Use it. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted: Quoted: You admitted speeding for no good reason other than to fuck around for curiosity sake. I have admitted nothing. And with all the talk on this forum, I am surprised the number of you who would just seem to roll over. No, no, no. They are suggesting YOU roll over and take it (and suggesting you follow the letter of the law in the future). They themselves would probably fight tooth and nail, and create long, hate filled rants full of spite, and curse words. It's the standard, double standard. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I have admitted nothing. You sure about that? Quoted: but you are still in the 80 range following the police car. You said yourself it was a 70mph zone. That means you wuz speeding. Play stupid games and all that..... You think you're all fancy with your reading comprehension and whatnot!? Come entertain me at work. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have admitted nothing. You sure about that? Quoted:
but you are still in the 80 range following the police car. You said yourself it was a 70mph zone. That means you wuz speeding.
Play stupid games and all that..... Absolutely. I gave a hypothetical for you guys to answer. No where in my post did I refer to myself. I did say it was a 70 MPH zone, but never said I was there. Remember, the law is full of interpretations and technicalities. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: <snip> your concert truck will do 70?  Mine was a handmedown from the company pet. They decided when he got that truck to "turn it up and experiment to see if major ponys would get better mileage" (wink, wink, bullshit, wink). They never turned it back down. I only drop one gear on the big hill going south-loaded. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
You admitted speeding for no good reason other than to fuck around for curiosity sake. I have admitted nothing. And with all the talk on this forum, I am surprised the number of you who would just seem to roll over. To be clear, you are doing 71 in a 70? Big deal, yeah yeah, black and white letter of the law............. He paced you in the blind and you knew he was there. Again no big deal. You slowed down in your lane for a car that was going less than the speed limit? Due caution. After he got out of the way you sped up to pass a car going less than the speed limit. LEGAL. After passing the car you maintained stated speed of 80 for how long/far? Not legal. Was it baiting and bullshit? Sure was. Are you going to win? Hell no. Check the upper right corner of the Infraction, bet it says "Pace" not "SMD" *speed measuring device* |
|
Quoted:  technically, it's NEVER o.k. to exceed the speed limit...even to pass another vehicle.....it's a technicality, but could still be used as a noose I learned that one a long time ago.  My wife and I were headed South on 95 (posted 65MPH) in two vehicles from Sandpoint, behind some douchefag that travelled at 50 in no passing areas and 65+ in passing zones...had to wait for 12+ miles to get to an area where there was an actual passing lane. When I was finally able to get next to him on the left and was passing him, he continued to try to pace/pass me. I put my foot in it and was doing 75-ish in order for there to be room for my wife to safely pass and get in between him and I before the road returned to a single lane southbound....dammit all if there wasn't an ISP headed North. I explained the "Why" and the Trooper wrote my wife a ticket for 72 in a 65 (IIRC...$75 ticket or so). We went and fought it, predicated on the fact we were passing a motor vehicle that was obstructing normal traffic. The judge was >slightly< sympathetic, and even provided the text of the law, it falls under "Basic Rule" in ID...long story short, he ended up mitigating the ticket to $35 and a non-moving violation. |
|
It's legal in WA.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.425 RCW 46.61.425 Minimum speed regulation — Passing slow moving vehicle. (1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law: PROVIDED, That a person following a vehicle driving at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle may exceed the speed limit, subject to the provisions of RCW 46.61.120 on highways having only one lane of traffic in each direction, at only such a speed and for only such a distance as is necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety. |