Ticket for a Defective Left Taillight

My question involves vehicle maintenance laws for the State of: tn

I was blue lighted on the 6th of this month for not having my seat belt on. I have had contact with this officer before. He done a u turn in the middle of the road then followed me into another city. I went over some tracks and about a quarter mile before I reached the neighboring city. I did not hit my breaks at all when crossing the tracks because I wasn't going that fast, I just coasting. I could not have observed my tail light at all at this time. I did not hit my breaks when I cut the right to go into the other city. Even if I did there was no way he could had observed my light out because he was still not over the rail road tracks which are on a hill. He could see me going down that road to the next city however. I was not blue lighted until I was in the neighboring city and then the tail light was observed. His camera will show him not being able to view my vehicles lights until we are in the next city. My argument is this, he would had been in his right to forward his citation to the county court but not his city court because even though the light had been dimmed or out of order in his jurisdiction its pure speculation on his end that it wasn't working in his jurisdiction. I argue we don't know when it stopped working properly and that it had worked in his jurisdiction and only stopped when we reached the next city. Can I make this jurisdictionakl argument for the light portion of his ticket? Does he have to show me his camera footage before trial? If the camera shows my light working but dim or just that he could only observe it in the neighboring city what does that mean in legal context? Also was it illegal for me to coast over those tracks and when i made that right? Do I absolutely have to come to a full stop to make those turns or cross those tracks? What statutes can i view over this?

did you actually receive a ticket? More than one? what was(were) it(they) for?

Posting hx folks.

I suggest you shut of your internet. In 2 months you will have saved the $40 for your other tickets.

Isn't this a fix-it ticket? If so, why not fix it?

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

He done a u turn in the middle of the road then followed me into another city.

---

Why?

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

I could not have observed my tail light at all at this time.

---

I would not expect that you would be able to see it from the driver's seat.

You appear to be stating that you knew your taillight was out and you were hoping not to alert the officer to that fact.

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

I did not hit my breaks when I cut the right to go into the other city. Even if I did....

---

You either did or you didn't.

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

I was not blue lighted until I was in the neighboring city and then the tail light was observed.

---

So you were pulled over for some other reason. What other reason?

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

His camera will show him not being able to view my vehicles lights until we are in the next city.

---

Assuming he had a camera in his vehicle and that it runs at all times, capturing vehicle activity in front of his vehicle, and assuming that you did not in fact use your brakes.

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

My argument is this, he would had been in his right to forward his citation to the county court but not his city court because even though the light had been dimmed or out of order in his jurisdiction its pure speculation on his end that it wasn't working in his jurisdiction.

---

You are free to try to make that argument in court.

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

I argue we don't know when it stopped working properly and that it had worked in his jurisdiction and only stopped when we reached the next city.

---

Good luck with that one. You have made it pretty obvious that you knew your taillight wasn't working, and if you are going to claim that you don't know the officer can be expected to help you out by indicating that it didn't function while he was behind you.

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

Can I make this jurisdictionakl argument for the light portion of his ticket?

---

Successfully? Not based on, "I think it was working before I deliberately failed to touch my brakes for miles in the hope that the officer wouldn't see my working taillight."

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

Does he have to show me his camera footage before trial?

---

The officer doesn't have to do anything for you. You can explore with his department whether it is possible to view or purchase a copy of any video that was recorded on that day, or attempt to obtain it through discovery or by subpoena.

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

If the camera shows my light working but dim....

---

If it was so dim as to be below the legal requirements for a taillight, that won't help you.

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

... or just that he could only observe it in the neighboring city what does that mean in legal context?

---

You are deliberately omitting a lot of important facts, so fill in the missing information and we'll talk.

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

Also was it illegal for me to coast over those tracks and when i made that right?

---

We cannot see the railroad tracks from here, or the signage around the tracks. Were you ticketed for an offense related to the tracks and, if so, what offense?

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

Do I absolutely have to come to a full stop to make those turns or cross those tracks? What statutes can i view over this?

---

Tennessee statutes are available here.

Well the light works but its not as bright at the right so depending on brightness standards so hisview point is probably that there's no diff between not working amd dimness. Its not obvious at dark and debatable during the day. I know the officer and he made his uturn over the. Seat belt not being buckled. He couldn't make it very fast due to traffic. And I just coasted over the tracks on the hill before his crusier was even at a ninety degree angle. When I had turned right after going. A bit past the tracks I did not break at all but slowly coasted down the side street. He only seen me after I was down the side street already because. It tookhim that long to cross the tracks. When he. Entered the side street he caught up to me at the end of it. The core reason for the stop was the seat belt.after the seat belt business he observed the light. The light was only observed after he stopped me in the next city.so. basically he was. Always. Too far or too down hill to see my lights and I never breaked anyways until the literal stop. I knoow he couldn't see me due to obstructions.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

did you actually receive a ticket? More than one? what was(were) it(they) for?

---

There are four citations in all and that ties into my other seat belt status. This stop was due to a seat belt and the light was thrown in as a last. Minute extra. The seat belt citation from this stop also has a number in conflict with the other. The one from. This stop says sixth. Offense when its not the second ticket from my seat belt thread says that its my fifth in the system. I hope that clarifies everything for you guys.

so the records he saw were incorrect or he was mistaken so the number of tickets is wrong;

so what? It changes nothing. That is something you argue in court.


it really doesn't sound like the cop did anything wrong. He can follow you all over the place. If he testifies the light was intermittent, you will not be able to beat that unless there is video evidence proving him wrong. Depending on how dim it is, that too can be a valid basis to stop you. I don't have the requirements offhand but since you do get to deal with this, ask whomever you must prove the fix it ticket to what the requirements are.

If the stop was actually for a seatbelt violation, unless your state does not allow that as a primary cause for a stop, you have no argument. Some states do not allow a stop for only a seatbelt violation.

The camera would be on the whole time because he knows me.it would shoow what I described. I'm asking I guess is what he observed during the literal stop can be applied to his valid seat belt violation in his city?

Quote:

---

Another Demise;758429]The camera would be on the whole time because he knows me.

---

most cop cams do not activate until the lights go on when in auto mode. Otherwise they would have to activate them manually.
and what makes you so certain there was even a camera?

Quote:

---

I'm asking I guess is what he observed during the literal stop can be applied to his valid seat belt violation in his city?

---

huh? basically, from what I have read, your dead in the water unless you come up with a valid argument he did not have reasonable suspicion to stop you. So far it sounds like he did.

I'm saying its speculation that the light had any issues at all in his jurisdiction. Does that make better sense?

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

I'm saying its speculation that the light had any issues at all in his jurisdiction. Does that make better sense?

---

nope. You are speculating it didn't have a problem and the fact he did give you a ticket for it shows his belief there is a problem.



even you say there is a problem with it.

The law specifies the light must function properyly. If it is partially grounded, it likely does not meet the requirement.
[quote](b) (1) Every motor vehicle shall be equipped with two (2) red tail lamps and two (2) red stoplights on the rear of the vehicle, and one (1) tail lamp and one (1) stoplight shall be on each side, except that passenger cars manufactured or assembled prior to January 1, 1939, trucks manufactured or assembled prior to January 1, 1968, and motorcycles and motor-driven cycles shall have at least one (1) red tail lamp and one (1) red stoplight. No non-emergency vehicle shall operate or install emergency flashing light systems such as strobe, wig-wag, or other flashing lights in tail light lamp, stoplight area, or factory installed emergency flasher and backup light area; provided, however, that the foregoing prohibition shall not apply to the utilization of a continuously flashing light system. For the purposes of this part, “continuously flashing light system” means a brake light system in which the brake lamp pulses rapidly for no more than five (5) seconds when the brake is applied, and then converts to a continuous light as a normal brake lamp until the time that the brake is released.

(2) The stoplight shall be so arranged as to be actuated by the application of the service or foot brake and shall be capable of being seen and distinguished from a distance of one hundred feet (100¢) to the rear of a motor vehicle in normal daylight, but shall not project a glaring or dazzling light.

(3) The stoplight may be incorporated with the tail lamp.

(4) Motor vehicle tail light lamps may operate as following:

(A) A white backup light operates when the motor vehicle is in reverse;

(B) When the driver is in a panic stop condition going forward, the backup lamp pulses or flashes red; and

(C) Upon normal stops of the motor vehicle, there is no action by the backup light.

(c) Each lamp and stoplight required in this section shall be in good condition and operational.

[h QUOTE=jk;758450]nope. You are speculating it didn't have a problem and the fact he did give you a ticket for it shows his belief there is a problem.



even you say there is a problem with it.[/QUOTE]oh goood lordd. You. Know damn well I knew the condition of the light, you know I. Am asking you all these questions becausse I am. At. War with this department. The same one we always talk about and you know I didn't break on purpose so he couldn't see them and you know I hurried to the other jurisdiction just to atleasst be stopped there so that it wouldn't be observed quicker. It might be wrong and sneaky but we are talking law not right and wrong. So the jist is do I haveto always break to make a turn under the law. Can I get a ticket for a bad light if it wasn't used? Can he issue me a light ticket for his damn city court over somethin he couldn't. Had observed or proven. In his city? The camera was on because we know each other and shit was likely to. Pop off or go south.. now that we are throught frontin can ig get the legal answer to a black and white issue?

Quote:

---

Quoting Another Demise

---

[h QUOTE=jk;758450]nope. You are speculating it didn't have a problem and the fact he did give you a ticket for it shows his belief there is a problem.



even you say there is a problem with it.

---

Quote:

---

oh goood lordd. You. Know damn well I knew the condition of the light, you know I

---

. and you said it was not working properly.That answers all your questions then

Quote:

---

War with this department. The same one we always talk about and you know I didn't break on purpose so he couldn't see them

---

there is a difference between a tail light and a stop or brake light. You said you got a ticket for the tail light so whether you used your brakes or not is irrelevant.

Quote:

---

and you know I hurried to the other jurisdiction just to atleasst be stopped there so that it wouldn't be observed quicker.

---

what makes you think he couldn't follow you into the other jurisdiction? You really need to check into that before you put any weight on it. I would bet he has full authority to act in that jurisdiction, especially if he is following somebody where he has PC to make a stop.


It might be wrong and sneaky but we are talking law not right and wrong. So the jist is do I haveto always break to make a turn under the law.

Quote:

---

Can I get a ticket for a bad light if it wasn't used?

---

absolutely

Quote:

---

. now that we are throught frontin can ig get the legal answer to a black and white issue?

---

sure. It would appear you are guilty and will be found so if you challenge this in court.

Break light. I call them all tail light out of habit. But it was the break light. This is happening at three p.m. so the oother lights weren't being used. Sorry to confuse you. Now aas for him following me that's fine and understandable. That's why I accept the seat belt part of the ticket. I know this ain't the dukes of hazzard where you can run to the county line. So you also so I can be cited for a bad light even if I don't use it? How so? Other than inspections which tennessee doesn't do how would he even figure it out?

- - - Updated - - -

Offtopic I've.been wondering for awhile if you and cdw consider is wrong or unethical to try to exploit loop holes or technicalities?

Quote:

---

. So you also so I can be cited for a bad light even if I don't use it? How so?

---

because of this posted by disagreeable previously:

Quote:

---

(c) Each lamp and stoplight required in this section shall be in good condition and operational.

---

that means they have to work anytime you take the car on the roadway.

Quote:

---

Other than inspections which tennessee doesn't do how would he even figure it out?

---

well, how did he know in your case?

I understand what your saying by working at all times. But its more complicated then that. In addition to a statute being written you have to prove it and you have to be ina position to take action. Everything haas a breaking point. Before that point everything is non broken. My. Argument is this, he doesn't know when it broke, he didn't know it was broken until he. Seen it, he didn't see it until we were in a new jurisdiction.. the seat belt ticket is good because he seen that in his jurisdiction. The bulb was not noticed until we left his jurisdiction.that's what I'm saying. For all he knows itt fuctioned until we lleft his city. In which case did he not observe the seat belt as an officer and the bulb later as a private citizen?

Quote:

---

I understand what your saying by working at all times. But its more complicated then that.

---

No, it's not. Did you use your brakes when you eventually stopped? There ya go.

Your argument that the light just happened to become defective after you crossed this jurisdictional line you are putting so much (undeserving) faith in is not going to be a winner.

if he saw you with no seatbelt and your state allows it as a primary justification for a stop, you lose everything else. If it doesn't, then he could follow you until he say another violation. After that, you lose, even if he followed you into another jurisdiction (and I still suspect that doesn;t make a whit of difference).

Okay then based on that logic let's compare itto another. If he followed me into another county and we started fighting over the tickets the tickets would still belong to our county but the new charge of fighting would come from the new county annd be handled in their county court. I wouldn't face assault charges in county a. And county b. I would just face them in county b. And be. Handled in county b. Court. If I fought him in county a. Then he chased me to county b. County a. Would handle me in county a. Court. If subdued in county b. County b. Couldn't charge me with the original assault. Maybe. Other charges but not that. If I fought in until we entered county b. Both counties would have identicle charges they could give me. The. Light is a new offense because we don't know when the hell is began. Based on your logic if I was a trucker in the same situation every county, city, and state could charge me with a light bulb offense because we don't nedd a starting point just an end point then we rtroactively assume and back track. I mean that's how I understand the response u gave.

You are putting way too much weight in this jurisdiction issue. You were charged with state laws. The county isn't prosecuting you. The state is. There may be a venue issue but there is not a jurisdiction issue.

none of that is going to save your ass in court.

A change of venue is something id behappy with. I wouldn't mind paying the fine to the neighboring city they have a damn could police force anyway I feel. Could I force a change of venue? That was what I was wanting either to get the venue change and they just let it go because that's too much trouble or get the venue change so that another department can get my money instead of this one. I'm content with either I. Just don't want my department to get even a penny ya kno?

You can continue being cited for the same violation, over and over, by different officers. It would be up to a court to throw out what they deemed unreasonable if you appealed.

i get that man i was just saying a change of venue is as good to me as a not guilty verdict because i just dont want their department to get the fines. if the same cop agreed to send his citation over to the county or other city that would be cool too, i just don't won't these bastards getting a penny.

I would like to get some advice on my case I was pulled over early sunday morning for my brake light not workin properly the officer informed me about why i was pulled over. I told the officer the circumstances i was in i was going to my friends house to borrow 10 dollars i could buy and change the light bulb he had me wait while he looked up my information. He later came back with a ticket for no insurance, andalso telling me to change the light bulb and to get insurance. Will i have a good chace fighting this ticket?

- - - Updated - - -