Careless Driving in Weehawken, New Jersey

[Mike13]

Hi, everyone. I'm new to this forum because I've never needed advice like this before. You guessed it--I got a careless driving ticket. The full scoop is on the page linked below. I have prepared a set of photos of the intersection I was at, along with videos of other people doing similar maneuvers (to show that it is not careless). I plan on showing it to the prosecutor. What do you all think?

http://personal.stevens.edu/~mforbes/sss/weehawken

Thanks,
Mike

[seniorjudge]

Q: What do you all think?

A: I think that if you had not been driving carelessly, then you would not have had a wreck.

[Bookm]

I think your wrong about the double line issue. The only reason the lines are not painted through the intersection is so that cross-traffic from your left can turn into the proper lane. Most intersections have no lines for this reason. I believe they are "implied" for cars travelling straight through.

However, I DO like your arguement about being "helped" in by the car beside you. I would press the officer (at trial) on whether he could see the other drivers "indication" to let you in. If he can't prove that, then a decent judge should accept your argument that he DID let you, therefore NOT causing any negetive impact to other drivers, therefore NOT being careless.

I think the prosecutor would still win an "improper lane-change" conviction though. If it were me, I'd try to plea down to the lane-change charge BEFORE trial. You don't want that Careless charge

I read nothing about a "wreck" as SJ mentioned.

[Mike13]

Bookm: That's pretty much what I was thinking. And there was no collision, if thats what you meant by wreck, SJ.

[seniorjudge]

Bookm: That's pretty much what I was thinking. And there was no collision, if thats what you meant by wreck, SJ.

Sorry about the "wreck" reference.

I do agree with bookm:

"...I think the prosecutor would still win an "improper lane-change" conviction though. If it were me, I'd try to plea down to the lane-change charge BEFORE trial. You don't want that Careless charge...."

[seniorjudge]

Q: What do you all think?

A: I think that if you had not been driving carelessly, then you would not have had a wreck.

The answer should've been:

A: I think that if you had not been driving carelessly, then you would not have had a ticket.

[Bookm]

... I think that if you had not been driving carelessly, then you would not have had a ticket.

Not necessarily true. Cops are only human and prone to errors in judgement just like anyone else. Also, according to three seperate police forums, they ARE expected to write a certain number of tickets (not necessarily a "quota" though).

So this is why we have traffic courts, and we should never critisize folks for utilizing them.