Retired Cal Cop Sergeant & Teacher
Walk humbly with your God
-- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM
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.