I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I am very
confident that I did not run the red light. Even my wife who was
sitting next to me said the same thing.

I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But he
gave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerely
believe that did not run the red light.

This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautious
driver. I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much of
a help that would be.

Can anybody give suggestions how to effectively present my case to
the judge?.

"Arun" <aruns_nj@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cd5102a5.0307091806.57f5d243@posting.google.c om... I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I am very confident that I did not run the red light. Even my wife who was sitting next to me said the same thing.

"EVEN your wife..."? I'm impressed. I'm sure the the cop was too.
I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But he gave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerely believe that did not run the red light.

Somehow, the phrases "I do not remember", "I sincerely believe" don't have a
strong ring of honesty. If you really didn't run the red light, then say "I
positively know that I didn't run the red light". Don't prevaricate.
This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautious driver. I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much of a help that would be.

Isn't 3 tickets in 6 months a lot for such a cautious driver? I haven't
received that many tickets in 30+ years of driving.
Can anybody give suggestions how to effectively present my case to the judge?.

On 9 Jul 2003 19:06:59 -0700, aruns_nj@yahoo.com (Arun) wrote:
This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautiousdriver.

No you're not, there's two other tickets in 6 months that tell the story.

aruns_nj@yahoo.com (Arun) wrote in message news:<cd5102a5.0307091806.57f5d243@posting.google.com>... I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But he gave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerely believe that did not run the red light.

And he apparently sincerely believes that you did.
This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautious driver.

Three citations in six months means either you're on a stupendous run
of bad luck or you're a just plain bad driver, cautious or not.
Cautious does not necessarily equate with 'good'. In fact, IME, it
more often equates with 'barely adequate', 'marginally incompetent',
or even 'downright lousy'.
I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much of a help that would be. Can anybody give suggestions how to effectively present my case to the judge?

Through counsel.
--
C.R. Krieger
(Been there; litigated that)

"Arun" <aruns_nj@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cd5102a5.0307091806.57f5d243@posting.google.c om... I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I am very confident that I did not run the red light. Even my wife who was sitting next to me said the same thing. I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But he gave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerely believe that did not run the red light. This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautious driver. I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much of a help that would be. Can anybody give suggestions how to effectively present my case to the judge?.

If you don't remember whether you ran the light or not, but you think you
didn't and you're not sure, etc, etc,..... how do you expect to convince a
judge that you absolutely did not run it? It would sound to me like you
weren't paying attention and the cop was sure that you did run it.

--

jaybird

I am not the cause of your problems. I am the result of your actions...
Your life is not my fault.

---------

In article <cd5102a5.0307091806.57f5d243@posting.google.com>,
aruns_nj@yahoo.com says...I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I am veryconfident that I did not run the red light. Even my wife who wassitting next to me said the same thing. I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But hegave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerelybelieve that did not run the red light. This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautiousdriver. I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much ofa help that would be. Can anybody give suggestions how to effectively present my case tothe judge?.

Are you sure you did not run the red light? Where was the cop situated
when he observed the alleged violation? Can your wife testify that she
saw you enter the intersection when the light was not red? Did the cop
tell you what he saw?
-----------------
Alex __O
_-\<,_
(_)/ (_)

It would help to know what state you were in.

JSACKS<<
If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes!

"Arun" <aruns_nj@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cd5102a5.0307091806.57f5d243@posting.google.c om... I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I am very confident that I did not run the red light. Even my wife who was sitting next to me said the same thing. I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But he gave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerely believe that did not run the red light. This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautious driver. I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much of a help that would be. Can anybody give suggestions how to effectively present my case to the judge?.

Suggestion - let your wife drive from now on.

"Arun" <aruns_nj@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cd5102a5.0307091806.57f5d243@posting.google.c om... I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I am very confident that I did not run the red light. Even my wife who was sitting next to me said the same thing. I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But he gave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerely believe that did not run the red light. This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautious driver. I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much of a help that would be. Can anybody give suggestions how to effectively present my case to the judge?.

"LuckyDucky" <LuckDucky@WSJ.com> wrote in message
news:vgqp81gi298ad@corp.supernews.com... "Arun" <aruns_nj@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:cd5102a5.0307091806.57f5d243@posting.google.c om... I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I am very confident that I did not run the red light. Even my wife who was sitting next to me said the same thing. "EVEN your wife..."? I'm impressed. I'm sure the the cop was too. I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But he gave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerely believe that did not run the red light. Somehow, the phrases "I do not remember", "I sincerely believe" don't have
a strong ring of honesty. If you really didn't run the red light, then say
"I positively know that I didn't run the red light". Don't prevaricate.

You are not very good at lie detecting. Someone who is a real liar, is much
likely to be assertive in his lie, rather than being unsure. More, being
unsure is likely the sign of being honest, as most drivers do not constantly
remember all the millions of details on their daily drives.

is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautious driver. I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much of a help that would be. Isn't 3 tickets in 6 months a lot for such a cautious driver? I haven't received that many tickets in 30+ years of driving.

Being cautious has little to do with the amount of tickets you receive. In
my experience, I have only received tickets when I'm driving as most
"cautious" motorist do, that is, relatively slow and like everyone else, and
thus not looking out for cops. When I ride very fast, run red lights, pass
on double yellow lines, heavily intoxicated, etc., I am on the lookout for
cops and have never received a ticket. So the lesson is, to avoid getting
tickets -- forget about driving within reason like most other drivers-- keep
an eye out for where cops can and may be hiding and that will keep you out
of trouble.

motocat

"Arun" <aruns_nj@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cd5102a5.0307091806.57f5d243@posting.google.c om... I recently got a traffic ticket for running a red light. I am very confident that I did not run the red light. Even my wife who was sitting next to me said the same thing. I told the cop that I do not remember running the red light. But he gave me the ticket nevertheless. I feel so helpless since I sincerely believe that did not run the red light. This is the 3rd ticket in the last 6 months. I am a very cautious driver. I plan to go to court this time, but I don't know how much of a help that would be. Can anybody give suggestions how to effectively present my case to the judge?.

Most people learn that preparing a good defense is a waste of time and
energy, as you will see if you sit and watch some cases. Of course, if you
are or use a lawyer with the proper relation with the court, you have a good
chance of winning. In CA, Best chance to win is to delay, delay, and delay.
The longer you delay, the more likely the cop won't be available in court,
and then you win Also, ask for the officers notes through a discovery
motion and then when they are not provided, and he appears in court, tell
the judge they where not provided and have the case rescheduled for another
date (you need time to properly prepare with the notes you finally have).
If the cop shows up again, dismiss the judge (in CA, you can do that for any
reason that you think he is prejudiced against your interest). Remember --
in traffic cases you are not innocent until proven guilty -- the trials are
a sham and the main point is to efficiently generate revenue. Why else do
you think you are no longer given the right of jury trial? So don't waste
your time with a good defense, just do whatever it takes such that you get
the case dismissed when the officer does not show up.

Question for everyone: Does anyone now of a source that lists traffic
infraction fine amounts for various states and also objectively compares how
strict the cops are in pulling people over for infractions? That way, we
can at least choose to not live in and avoid states whose cops are most
likely to commit highway robbery. And for LEO's who actually believe their
ticketing makes a difference, providing such info may help keep what you see
as dangerous motorist out or your jurisdiction.

motocat

"swatcop" <swatcop@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:tWUPa.79998$bK5.1771017@twister.tampabay.rr.c om... Suggestion - let your wife drive from now on.

Suggestion - let your boyfriend reply for now on.

> Remember --in traffic cases you are not innocent until proven guilty -- the trials area sham and the main point is to efficiently generate revenue. Why else doyou think you are no longer given the right of jury trial?

Most traffic violations are infractions, not punishable by jail time. That's
why you don't get a jury trial in most cases. If cited for a misdemenor
with the possibility of jail time, you can have the jury trial.

Skip

"Skip" <skipfromla@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ona4hvoqnnscd2c86k2v9balie5jijabiu@4ax.com... Remember --in traffic cases you are not innocent until proven guilty -- the trials
area sham and the main point is to efficiently generate revenue. Why else
doyou think you are no longer given the right of jury trial? Most traffic violations are infractions, not punishable by jail time.
That's why you don't get a jury trial in most cases. If cited for a misdemenor with the possibility of jail time, you can have the jury trial. Skip

Infractions can be punishable by jail time -- when you are pulled over for
an infraction, you are actually being arrested. The officer lets you sign
the ticket and you promise to appear for court, but an officer can, and
sometimes do, take people to jail for infractions. Also, before the 1950's,
infractions did not exist, and where created in California for the specific
purpose of streamlining the process of ticketing and collecting revenue from
large amounts of motorist. Before the infraction was created, everyone, as
guaranteed in our Constitution, had a right to a jury trial by ones peers,
even if it was just for speeding.

motocat

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 06:35:22 GMT, "motocat" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Skip" <skipfromla@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:ona4hvoqnnscd2c86k2v9balie5jijabiu@4ax .com... Remember --in traffic cases you are not innocent until proven guilty -- the trialsarea sham and the main point is to efficiently generate revenue. Why elsedoyou think you are no longer given the right of jury trial? Most traffic violations are infractions, not punishable by jail time.That's why you don't get a jury trial in most cases. If cited for a misdemenor with the possibility of jail time, you can have the jury trial. SkipInfractions can be punishable by jail time -- when you are pulled over foran infraction, you are actually being arrested. The officer lets you signthe ticket and you promise to appear for court, but an officer can, andsometimes do, take people to jail for infractions. Also, before the 1950's,infractions did not exist, and where created in California for the specificpurpose of streamlining the process of ticketing and collecting revenue fromlarge amounts of motorist. Before the infraction was created, everyone, asguaranteed in our Constitution, had a right to a jury trial by ones peers,even if it was just for speeding.motocat
I'll rephrase. You can't be sentenced to jail if convicted for an infraction.
The officer can only take the person to jail for infractions under certain circumstances,
such as, no having any ID, failing to sign the citation promising to appear, trying to
evade and a very few others. The officer does not have blanket power to take to
any one to jail on a traffic violation becasue he wants to do so. California started
the infraction program in the late 1960s to streamline the court system. If you think
it was done to enhance revenue, you could be correct.

Skip

Moto,

I have read several of your posts, and though your information may "seem"
good" to some readers, you give incorrect information on most.
A simple traffic stop is not an arrest, it is an investigative detainment.
If you are ticketed, then you have been arrested by citation. Also,
arresting someone due to an infraction, where is that legal? It is my
understanding that there are different classes of crimes (infraction, felony
and misdemeanor) as to determine penalties for same. I am not saying that
I can not arrest in certain instances for an in fraction. Failure to
produce ID and such can require bond.
"motocat" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:KasQa.50793$sY2.25692@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.n et... "Skip" <skipfromla@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ona4hvoqnnscd2c86k2v9balie5jijabiu@4ax.com... Remember --in traffic cases you are not innocent until proven guilty -- the trials area sham and the main point is to efficiently generate revenue. Why else doyou think you are no longer given the right of jury trial? Most traffic violations are infractions, not punishable by jail time. That's why you don't get a jury trial in most cases. If cited for a misdemenor with the possibility of jail time, you can have the jury trial. Skip Infractions can be punishable by jail time -- when you are pulled over for an infraction, you are actually being arrested. The officer lets you sign the ticket and you promise to appear for court, but an officer can, and sometimes do, take people to jail for infractions. Also, before the
1950's, infractions did not exist, and where created in California for the
specific purpose of streamlining the process of ticketing and collecting revenue
from large amounts of motorist. Before the infraction was created, everyone,
as guaranteed in our Constitution, had a right to a jury trial by ones peers, even if it was just for speeding. motocat

That's because he's a troll.

"Thin Blue Line402" <thin_blue_line402@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:iYBQa.1549$Mc.142971@newsread1.prod.itd.earth link.net... Moto, I have read several of your posts, and though your information may "seem" good" to some readers, you give incorrect information on most. A simple traffic stop is not an arrest, it is an investigative detainment. If you are ticketed, then you have been arrested by citation. Also, arresting someone due to an infraction, where is that legal? It is my understanding that there are different classes of crimes (infraction,
felony and misdemeanor) as to determine penalties for same. I am not saying
that I can not arrest in certain instances for an in fraction. Failure to produce ID and such can require bond. "motocat" <nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:KasQa.50793$sY2.25692@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.n et... "Skip" <skipfromla@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ona4hvoqnnscd2c86k2v9balie5jijabiu@4ax.com... > Remember -- >in traffic cases you are not innocent until proven guilty -- the
trials are >a sham and the main point is to efficiently generate revenue. Why
else do >you think you are no longer given the right of jury trial? Most traffic violations are infractions, not punishable by jail time. That's why you don't get a jury trial in most cases. If cited for a
misdemenor with the possibility of jail time, you can have the jury trial. Skip Infractions can be punishable by jail time -- when you are pulled over
for an infraction, you are actually being arrested. The officer lets you
sign the ticket and you promise to appear for court, but an officer can, and sometimes do, take people to jail for infractions. Also, before the 1950's, infractions did not exist, and where created in California for the specific purpose of streamlining the process of ticketing and collecting revenue from large amounts of motorist. Before the infraction was created, everyone, as guaranteed in our Constitution, had a right to a jury trial by ones
peers, even if it was just for speeding. motocat

"Thin Blue Line402" <thin_blue_line402@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:iYBQa.1549$Mc.142971@newsread1.prod.itd.earth link.net... Moto, I have read several of your posts, and though your information may "seem" good" to some readers, you give incorrect information on most. A simple traffic stop is not an arrest, it is an investigative detainment. If you are ticketed, then you have been arrested by citation. Also, arresting someone due to an infraction, where is that legal? It is my understanding that there are different classes of crimes (infraction,
felony and misdemeanor) as to determine penalties for same. I am not saying
that I can not arrest in certain instances for an in fraction. Failure to produce ID and such can require bond.

Recently, in Texas, the court ruled that it was within an officers authority
to jail a woman who was not wearing a seat belt. As you point out above,
you are "arrested by citation" when you are given a citation. This was what
I was refering to.

"swatcop" <swatcop@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:nBCQa.95828$bK5.2141606@twister.tampabay.rr.c om... That's because he's a troll.

So sensitive! Watch out for the really big trolls! You are just the kind
of food they love!