Charged With Reckless Driving Based on a Witness's Statement

Quote:

---

Matt.Wolk;841495]Could the prosecutor be bluffing about five witnesses.

---

could he? Sure but they do have to disclose their evidence to you prior to trial.
.

Quote:

---

I've heard about something called a valid cause of action. What is it?

---

that is concerning a civil trial

Quote:

---

Also doesn't a have to experience personal injury as a plaintiff and have proof. I'm sorry, I'm new to all this

---

the state is the plaintiff. The person you are referring to is merely a witness. It would be no different than if I witnessed a murder. I would be a witness, not a plaintiff. In criminal prosecutions, the state is the plaintiff.

this is serious stuff dude. You need to do whatever it takes to hire an attorney, that is if you do not qualify for a public defender (although that is not a free attorney, merely a discounted one with a deferred payment plan)

So long story short I have to get an attorney.
Does anyone know average cost for a traffic attorney?
I'm so upset I have to pay out for something I never did. Nothing more than a revenue generating corporation. Should I go court appt or hire on my own?

So you have 5 different people that called in to 911 and complained about you. These calls came in at different times over a 50 mile period. They would be much harder to defend against then 5 people in one car that you may have pissed off because you cut them off.

Quote:

---

Quoting Matt.Wolk

---

So long story short I have to get an attorney.
Does anyone know average cost for a traffic attorney?
I'm so upset I have to pay out for something I never did. Nothing more than a revenue generating corporation. Should I go court appt or hire on my own?

---

while this is a traffic law, make no mistake, if found guilty you will have a misdemeanor crime on your record. If you have a clean record otherwise, while the chances of jail are slim, there is still that possibility. Never discount what the law says is possible.

and no, you don't have to get an attorney but a smart person will want an attorney.

Depending on how far this goes (there is a prelim hearing or two where this could be settled if a plea agreement is offered and accepted) I would guess around $1000-$1500 for that. If it goes all the way to trial it could easily double that and possibly more, depending on the prices charged and what is involved in your trial. If you lose or plead guilty to a plea agreement you will have a grand or two of court costs and fees on top of that plus any fine imposed.

that is just a guess though. your mileage may vary.

The point being just like a mask, a helmet obscures the features of the operator. If OP does not testify, the most a witness can testify to is that someone riding bike X, plate Y wearing helmet Z was racing down the highway. They cannot identify the OP specifically. In a partitioned trial where he does not testify, all his lawyer needs to do is provide doubt that another person could have been operating his bike, wearing his helmet. I have borrowed a bike and helmet from a friend before.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

depends on how distinctive the helmet was or anything else concerning the bike plus what was actually witnessed from how far away and if the witness lost site of the OP but if the witness says everybody was doing wheelies or standing on their seats and didn't lose sight of them, it's a hard time proving innocence.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting Disagreeable

---

The point being just like a mask, a helmet obscures the features of the operator. If OP does not testify, the most a witness can testify to is that someone riding bike X, plate Y wearing helmet Z was racing down the highway. They cannot identify the OP specifically. In a partitioned trial where he does not testify, all his lawyer needs to do is provide doubt that another person could have been operating his bike, wearing his helmet. I have borrowed a bike and helmet from a friend before.

---

they do not have to be able to identify the specific person. The cop took care of that. All they have to do is say:

the guy with the black helmet with the fauxhawk on top of it riding a red motogeezer did [this]. The cops report will associated the identity of the person with the motogeezer. Identification complete.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

depends on how distinctive the helmet was or anything else concerning the bike plus what was actually witnessed from how far away and if the witness lost site of the OP but if the witness says everybody was doing wheelies or standing on their seats and didn't lose sight of them, it's a hard time proving innocence.

---

Last I checked, the defendant doesn't have to prove innocence. Regardless of this, a lawyer is called for here, even if money has to be borrowed or if the OP has to wash the lawyers windows for a year.

The witness also must prove he operated" in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property". What are his qualifications for this determination? Did anyone ask OP if he operated in willful or wanton disregard and he agreed? The witness will likely not show up and the case will be dismissed. I remember winning a ticket from an OH Trooper who could only articulate that he would not have driven how I did (hence the ticket). I replied as my own council, officer, how you would have done it is irrelevant. What matters is whether it was illegal and you have not proven that it was, you simply expressed your opinion. I won the case.

Quote:

---

Quoting jk

---

they do not have to be able to identify the specific person. The cop took care of that. All they have to do is say:

the guy with the black helmet with the fauxhawk on top of it riding a red motogeezer did [this]. The cops report will associated the identity of the person with the motogeezer. Identification complete.

---

Quote:

---

Quoting donzoh1

---

Last I checked, the defendant doesn't have to prove innocence. Regardless of this, a lawyer is called for here, even if money has to be borrowed or if the OP has to wash the lawyers windows for a year.

---

Not sure of your point. You and dis are getting hung up on the ID issue. If the witness never lost sight of the guy he's toast on the id part. He isn't going to be abme to argue; somebody else was riding my bike.

The witness can testify they saw somebody breaking the law. They described that person to the police who pulled over a person fittng thst description. The cop id'd that person. He is now being charged with a crime.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote:

---

Quoting Disagreeable

---

The witness also must prove he operated" in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property". What are his qualifications for this determination? Did anyone ask OP if he operated in willful or wanton disregard and he agreed? The witness will likely not show up and the case will be dismissed. I remember winning a ticket from an OH Trooper who could only articulate that he would not have driven how I did (hence the ticket). I replied as my own council, officer, how you would have done it is irrelevant. What matters is whether it was illegal and you have not proven that it was, you simply expressed your opinion. I won the case.

---

no. If he operated in a willful and wanton manner is a question of law. The witness will testify to what the saw. The jury will decide if it was willful and wanton.

True matter of point jk, the issue being testimony of one persons interpretation carries little weight, when a good lawyer keeps asking them a variety of questions they have answered I don't remember to.
It will be one of those situations I sometimes refer to that a jury is a group of people who get together and decide which was the best attorney.