Warrants Issued For Defendants Who Don't Show, While Police Get Continuances

[Maxima Lover]

So I have court in the morning in St. Louis City, MO traffic court. I went down today during a trial time to get familiar with that court and their procedures.

There were 4 defendants there and 6 officers in the court room. All 6 officers were there for 1 defendant, who didn't show up. That defendant was issued a warrant, and the officers asked when it would be in the system because they were going to go try to find him.

So then the officers left and the prosecutor told the defendants in the court room that their officers hadn't shown up and their cases would be continued. The one defendant’s case had already been postponed because the officer didn't show up at another date. The prosecutor said if the cop didn't come the third time, the charges would be dismissed.

Why do the cops get 3 times to show up at court while the citizens have to take off work to take care of their revenue generated ticket and be there each time? In what professional job can you miss your meetings and just be told, "try to make one of the next 2"?

This is why I intend to draw my ticket out as long as possible to complicate things by requesting that I get everything that the law entitles me to. If they want to play games, we should too.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Traffic court procedures are different in each state. In some states if the driver doesn't show up for a civil infraction hearing, the driver is simply defaulted.

Why are the driver and offer treated differently? Well, because one of them is the defendant, and the other is a witness with other important job duties which sometimes take precedence.

[Maxima Lover]

Traffic court procedures are different in each state. In some states if the driver doesn't show up for a civil infraction hearing, the driver is simply defaulted.

Why are the driver and offer treated differently? Well, because one of them is the defendant, and the other is a witness with other important job duties which sometimes take precedence.

Well in a lot of courts, there is no prosecutor and the cop acts as one.

I have important job duties that take precedence to traffic court as well, it doesn't mean I can skip out when everyone is ready to go, and just expect to be given another date. It's up to the state to get their case together by the trial and if they can't that's too bad.

[aaron]

Perhaps you missed two key statements, "Traffic court procedures are different in each state" and "because one of them [the driver] is the defendant".

[Maxima Lover]

Perhaps you missed two key statements, "Traffic court procedures are different in each state" and "because one of them [the driver] is the defendant".

No, I didn't miss them.

Traffic court in Missouri is like criminal court. I'm granted all the constitutional rights as in a criminal trial.

I know I'm the defendant, but why should I be put out of my way because of lack of prosecution? I'm being treated as though I'm guilty until I prove myself innocent.

At the next trial when the officers are there, my witness won't be there and I'll ask for a continuence as well. I want to inconvience them as much as possible now.

[jk]

I believe you are setting yourself up for a denial. Since you have all the rights of a criminal trial, I suspect the judge will not allow a continuance due to the fact you have the right to subpeona your witnesses. Should you fail to take an action avaiable to you, I would think the judge would not be too cooperative in granting your continuance for your mistake.

You do not give any reason for the officers absence. He may very well have been excused due to other duties that were not able to be altered. His absence could have been a last minute situation as well that he must give reasonable explanation to the judge.

You simply cannot condemn the situation because it did not happen they way yo believe it should.

[Maxima Lover]

I'm sorry, I thought I had posted what happened to me the next day in court, but I guess it didn't go through...

The officers didn't show up for me either. They called me up and gave me a new court date. I told them, "I don't want to waive my right to a speedy trail based on lack of prosecution".

The judge said that each side gets one continuance. I told her that if I had just not shown up, I would have the police knocking on my door with an arrest warrant. She agreed, but said the court had made the mistake of not sending a subpoena to them. Why should I have to come back because they screwed up?

I then told the judge I had taken off work and so had my witness to be at court on time to have a trial that I'm promised. She said she was sorry again.

She said if they don't show up next time, she promised she would dismiss the charges.

This is why I'm going to not have my witness show up and ask for my continuance. I expect to get it since she said we each get one and it will be based on the exact same circumstances.

I suspect the forgetting to subpoena officers is not an accident. The news might be interested if the courts are giving citizens the run around just to make it harder to contest a ticket.

[aaron]

If you don't have your witnesses show up, you had best be prepared to proceed without them. It is your responsibility to make sure your own witnesses appear, and you can expect the hearing to proceed as scheduled.

[Maxima Lover]

If you don't have your witnesses show up, you had best be prepared to proceed without them. It is your responsibility to make sure your own witnesses appear, and you can expect the hearing to proceed as scheduled.

Then how is it any different if the prosecution doesn't have their witness show up when I'm ready to go? Plus add in the fact the judge said we both get one shot to continue.

[aaron]

I am not going to repeat myself. Asking the same question over and over again is not going to get you different answers each time.