ExpertLaw.com Forums

Should This Forum Focus on Beating Tickets Instead of the Law

Printable View

  • 04-17-2018, 11:26 AM
    zeljo
    Should This Forum Focus on Beating Tickets Instead of the Law
    Thanks, that was very informative. And you're right about some people here wanting to convince people that they are guilty. That's a head scratcher in itself.
  • 04-17-2018, 11:34 AM
    free9man
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting zeljo
    View Post
    Thanks, that was very informative. And you're right about some people here wanting to convince people that they are guilty. That's a head scratcher in itself.

    It's not really a head scratcher. This forum, in general, does not exist to provide people outs or assistance with defenses when they commit crimes. If someone comes here and says "This is what I did. I think I didn't do something wrong", the volunteers here will provide evidence they did if they did or they didn't if they didn't. The majority of the volunteers here are in the "If you do the crime, you do the time" camp. If law enforcement makes a mistake, they will often point it out though. There are some people who assist those who have committed crimes/infractions/whatnot with ways to game the system or work legal loopholes to their favor. That's all well and good but they shouldn't throw a fit when the other side puts in their 2 cents worth.
  • 04-17-2018, 12:59 PM
    free9man
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting EJay
    View Post
    This forum has a bias towards people being guilty when they are not.

    Not really. They are very often guilty. That there are loopholes/games that can get them off does not change the fact they committed a crime. While a court may find them innocent, they still broke the law.

    Quote:

    Quoting EJay
    View Post
    When a defendant has been accused of a crime and they are posting for help to fight their ticket, convincing them to submit to the punishment and plead guilty does them absolutely no good. They are here looking for a defense. Not a reason for their guilt.

    If they say "Was this a legit ticket?", we are going to tell them if it is and to take their lumps. If they say is there a way to get off/beat it, the volunteers aren't required to help. They can if they want. But they are also free to say "take your lumps" if the person did break the law. Again, the purpose of this forum generally is not to help people get away with crimes.

    Quote:

    Quoting EJay
    View Post
    There are multiple elements which must be proven beyond reasonable doubt to be fact in order to convict someone of a crime.

    For crimes, generally yes. For traffic infractions and their ilk, beyond a reasonable doubt is not always the standard.

    Quote:

    Quoting EJay
    View Post
    Posters on this forum often overlook many of these elements.

    No, they don't. Oftentimes, the elements are met. I support everyone's right to fight a traffic ticket to their death if they choose. But if they did it, then I'm gonna tell them they should take their lumps. I don't have to help them if I don't want to. No one does.
  • 04-17-2018, 01:29 PM
    zeljo
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting free9man
    View Post
    Not really. They are very often guilty. That there are loopholes/games that can get them off does not change the fact they committed a crime. While a court may find them innocent, they still broke the law.

    It's hilarious that you apparently find it totally legitimate to charge people exorbitant fines for traffic infractions (such as $500 for failing to come to a complete stop before turning right on red, even when there is 0 safety concern), but people taking advantage of the letter of the law is "loopholes and games" and they "still broke the law", even if a court finds them innocent (!!!). That's all that I'm going to say, because I'm not here to argue with you.
  • 04-17-2018, 01:46 PM
    cbg
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Actually, no court finds anyone innocent. "Not guilty" and "innocent" are different concepts.
  • 04-17-2018, 01:59 PM
    free9man
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting zeljo
    View Post
    It's hilarious that you apparently find it totally legitimate to charge people exorbitant fines for traffic infractions (such as $500 for failing to come to a complete stop before turning right on red, even when there is 0 safety concern), but people taking advantage of the letter of the law is "loopholes and games" and they "still broke the law", even if a court finds them innocent (!!!). That's all that I'm going to say, because I'm not here to argue with you.

    I'm not here to argue either. I don't necessarily agree with the fines that are levied for some offenses. I think some of the Scandanavian countries have a far better fine system with their proportional fines but doubt it will ever make it over here. But that is something to be taken up with one's congresscritter.

    A finding of not guilty does not necessarily mean someone didn't do it. It just means the prosecution couldn't prove their case. That can mean the defendant was actually factually innocent but does not always.
  • 04-18-2018, 10:15 AM
    hr for me
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    "congresscritter"...new word to add to my vocab..... I love it!
  • 04-18-2018, 10:29 AM
    flyingron
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    This is not the "How do I break the law and get away with it forum." It's to provide the options for people who are facing existant legal problems. Despite what some other websites or publications will tell you, there's no magic defense procedure to dogde properly issued tickets. We can give the normal legal outs (cause for the stop, speed trap/engineering survey issues in California, various procedural stuff in Washington state, etc...). In many cases, there's really not much on a defense so we have to deal with mitigation (traffic school if that's an option in the situation, deferral if available, fine waivers, etc...).

    In a lot of courts, you're pretty much univerally fighting a losing battle unless you have something clearly exculpatory. Just arguing some imagined loophole to dodge a infraction you did commit doesn't often exist.
  • 04-18-2018, 10:31 AM
    cbg
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    While I personally am of the, "If you can't do the time don't commit the crime" school, this board can be a means for someone who (is too much of a coward to) is less inclined to take responsibility for their actions to find the holes in their story so they can patch them up before they get into court.
  • 04-18-2018, 10:43 AM
    Mr. Knowitall
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Very often the people who whinge and whine about how we're supposedly too hard on people who get tickets are upset because we do crazy things, like suggesting that people not perjure themselves in court. Or answer the actual question asked instead of confabulating fanciful scenarios that the person could present to a court as an ostensible defense, even though we have no basis to support those fantasized excuses. Or correct them when they post nonsense.

    Posts that ignore the question asked and say something to the effect of, "Just pay the ticket", aren't helpful. But factual, legally accurate posts are helpful, even if we don't also encourage perjury or help people concoct fake defenses.
  • 04-18-2018, 10:43 AM
    free9man
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting hr for me
    View Post
    "congresscritter"...new word to add to my vocab..... I love it!

    I must give all credit for that one to Carl. He's the first person I ever saw use it. I don't know if it's his but he introduced me to it.
  • 04-18-2018, 10:46 AM
    PayrolGuy
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Google congresscritter
  • 04-18-2018, 11:29 AM
    L-1
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting EJay
    View Post
    This forum has a bias towards people being guilty when they are not.

    Au contraire. If you read a lot of the posts, based on the OP's own statement they committed the violation. They just don't want to be guilty. There's not much of a defense for that.
  • 04-18-2018, 12:58 PM
    adjusterjack
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting zeljo
    View Post
    I'm not here to argue with you.

    Yet, here you are - arguing.

    :friendly_wink:
  • 04-18-2018, 03:32 PM
    cdwjava
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting free9man
    View Post
    I must give all credit for that one to Carl. He's the first person I ever saw use it. I don't know if it's his but he introduced me to it.

    I first heard it a couple decades ago spoken by Rush Limbaugh. I liked the term. :)

    Though, I have to clarify for the poster, that Congress has nothing much to do with traffic offenses as these are state matters.
  • 04-18-2018, 05:24 PM
    free9man
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting cdwjava
    View Post
    Though, I have to clarify for the poster, that Congress has nothing much to do with traffic offenses as these are state matters.

    That was my intent to refer to state critters although probably should have clarified to avoid any confusion.
  • 04-19-2018, 12:08 AM
    Taxing Matters
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    Quote:

    Quoting free9man
    View Post
    That was my intent to refer to state critters although probably should have clarified to avoid any confusion.

    Maybe for state legislators we could use the term legislature lemming? It has the alliteration and has a nice image to it. I'll claim credit for being the first to think this one up! :D Perhaps someone else can coin a better phrase?
  • 04-27-2018, 04:37 PM
    sniper
    Re: Is a Public Record Exempt from Discovery in California
    I've posted some things that are hugely beneficial to some OP's when they describe the actions of the officer as being wrong.

    A lot of the time though the OP has a vested interest in not paying a $500 rolling a right on red ticket and they are intentially vague or misrepresent what the officer did. (Amusingly enough many OP's are mind readers and think they know what the officer thought or saw). Most of the time it does not matter what the officer did, it matters more what the OP did since they received the ticket. A lot of OP's have a loose grip of the vehicle code or misinterpret sections and try to justify their actions. If they are called out on their misinterpretation of the vehicle code it is simply calling a spade a spade.

    Before I started my career with law enforcement I got a citation for 22349(b). I drove that road all the time and I knew there wasn't a speed limit sign. I threw a fit that there wasn't in court and guess what I learned...a two lane undivided road has a max speed limit of 55 mph, unless it's posted otherwise. I lost but I learned.

    That is what this law forum us about, the law. People come here with questions and frustrations because they themselves do not deal with these laws on a daily, weekly, monthly, if even ever basis. I tend to stick to the criminal laws, vehicle code, vehicle accident, and police procedure sections of this forum. I do this because I'm simply not versed on things like family law, intellectual property rights, mineral rights etc. That's where other volunteers come in who know those sections.

    If you want to focus on having a website where people can go to get out of tickets then make one yourself. Post a link where people can buy a book and fight their tickets.

    On a side note, I ran across two people who posted on these forums in court. One was my case. It was great when I realized the guy was an OP here. I already knew the weak arguments he was going to bring up and I actually addressed them all prior to my testimony being completed. He was dumbfounded to why I addressed everything.

    The other guy failed to challenge jurisdiction in a clear case of the violation location being issued outside of the courts juristictional realm. I specifically told him on this forum to challenge the jurisdiction. It baffled my why he didn't challenge it. He lost on top of it. Sometimes you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

    I also don't believe in using a traffic lawyer. Every time I have faced one they stink. One lawyer specifically was representing a guy I wrote for 22348(b) for driving 140 MPH (that's correct, one-hundred-forty). When I got to the part where I said "I obtained a speed reading of 140 on my radar display", I was interrupted by the lawyer because he gasped and said "140? Wow!" I finished my testimony and when it was his turn he said, "I don't have anything your honor, I didn't realize my client was going that fast." (The defendant was not present in court). The fine was exactly the same and the license suspension was exactly the same for this guy had he represented himself.
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:52 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4
Copyright © 2023 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2004 - 2018 ExpertLaw.com, All Rights Reserved