[DMCForum] Re: Administrative law
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DMCForum] Re: Administrative law

--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Marc Levy <malevy_nj@xxxx> wrote:
> Traffic court never gets that far anymore (in NJ).  It
> is always a plea-bargain so the court gets MORE money
> in exchange for saving some points on the license.

Well I have to disagree, but then again I am sure I have quite a bit
more experience in traffic court than maybe Marc.  Unless he is in
one a lot :-)  It does go that far (trials) every month in most
towns.  True most cases are plea bargains, but then again those
bargains offered are usually very good for the defendant and far
less of a charge or points they would have gotten with the original
charge.  Hence the reason someone would take a plea bargain.

> Anytime I have been to traffic court I see the same
> thing over and over.  That is, the officers testimony
> is taken as "fact" by the judge and for the defendant
> to have any chance at all they need to prove they are
> innocent.

Well I would disagree again, but then again I don't know how much
experience you have in traffic court.  I assume it is in repsonse to
receiving tickets?  I know from my experience since I am in court
twice a month.  I find most judges to be honorable and unbiased
people, who take their high level of authority and responsibility
quite seriously.  I have seen officer error ruled (they are human)
for the defendant whether it pertains to improper radar
certifications or whatever.  Of course in the majority of cases I
have seen, I can tell you that people come to court knowing they
were speeding or whatever the charge, and are looking for that plea
bargain to a lesser charge.  Again most not all.

> Recently, I had a young lady pass me on a road and
> come too close to my car.  In the process, her car
> caught my bumper and tore it off.  I called the
> police, and the officer that came ISSUED ME A TICKET!
> No point in arguing with him.  When I got the accident
> report it was written as if the accident was my fault
> (of course).  I also noticed the owner of the car was
> a local restaurant in town.  Could it be the officer
> was biased? 

I hear these stories daily and in most cases when I hear from the
other party is is quite a different account.  Well Marc since we
only hear your side of this story and not the lady, or the officer
in the case, I would say its pretty unreasonable to judge a
situation from a one-sided account.  I would bet that the lady or
the officer has a different account.  As you asked about the
officer, could it be your biased from maybe getting a few tickets,
and not he?  I could assume that since you say you have been to
traffic court, but I will not make that assumption I will just ask
the same question as you did and say I have heard many stories from
those who have had traffic encounters and in most cases the one side
you hear differs or leaves many facts out that took place.  I would
not pass judgement on anything, or any story such as this stated
secondhand, where I heard from only one of three parties involved.

> I went to court to fight my ticket, but was offered a
> plea.  At the risk of having points on my license (and
> the insurance charges associated with it), I felt no
> choice but to take the offer.

Everyone is offered a plea to keep the court moving.  NO ONE has to
take a plea, and many don't, but it is always offered.  Again most
poeple come to court looking for it such as if they are doing 20mph
over the limit they would take a lesser point ticket when offered. 
I know some people that did it routineley to keep their points down,
as they got ticekts every month, in various towns. In fact that
problem was so wide spread in NJ the DMV now asseses 2 points
automatically, if you have gotten two pleas bargains in traffic
court already, to keep those habitual offenders from using that

> When I went to put in a claim with the girls insurance
> company, I got a letter telling me the insurance was
> canceled 4 months before.  So, I went to the court to
> issue a ticket and was told the officer had to do it.
> I then went to the police station with my evidence and
> requested a ticket be issued for uninsured.  The
> officer (same officer at the accident) refused!  He
> then said to me, "Why are you issuing a ticket, the
> accident was your fault".  having no idea what that
> had to do with the other driving being uninsured I
> simply said "You were not a witness to what happened,
> so how can you say I was at fault?"  With that, he
> walked away in a huff.

Again I would not judge a situation where we hear only one side, 
not to say your story is inaccurate, but again I am sure I would
hear a different one from the other parties.  That was in fact my
point in the original thread. 
People tell their stories (like the one about the cop who pulled a
gun because the Delorean door startled him or something) which I
think are probably not true or distorted.  That leads to some taking
them as fact and of course if it were, it should be critizied, but I
am sure there is a diffent account from the other party.  Again I
don't think anyone would take whatever someone says about a
situation as absolute fact, and again in many cases I am sure the
other party or parties they are claiming did certain things, would
offer a different account.

> With this law, facts and reality have no impact on the
> outcome.  All that really matters is what the officer
> "thinks"..  And THAT is why they are the topic of
> discussions more than other professions.

That is your opinon and I think saying "All that really matters is
what the officer "thinks".."  is inaccurate, and in my opinion
biased, to say the least.  Of course again I doubt you have
extensive experience in court to witness as many outcomes ruled for
the defendants as I have seen, or have been witness to hundreds of
trials, as those involed for some time in that process are, but then
again I may be wrong.  I don't know how often you have been in
court, or what your experience is.



> --- dmcgman <DmcGman@xxxx> wrote:
> > Well Bob I would disagree with some of your claims.
> > For instance if
> > you fight a traffic ticket you have :
> >
> > thge right to a trial
> > the right to discovery
> > the right to depose accusing persons
> > the right to independence of the jurist (i have seen
> > judges rule
> > against the enforcing agency on more than once
> > occasion)
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com

Dmc Dml Dmc fz10
Dmc fz1s Delorean part Dml forte


Home Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN 

Copyright © 2018 ProjectVixen.com.  All rights reserved.

Opinions expressed in posts reflect the views of their respective authors.
DMCForum Mailing List Archive  DMCNews Mailing List Archive  DMC-UK Mailing List Archive