It's so freakin stupid here in Spokane. I got pulled over at 1:15 Sunday morning for 1) failing to turn into the closest lane on a left turn. the only problem is that i did but changed lanes quickly. i have two witnesses in the car that will say i did. 2) front clearance lamps where NOT amber. $71 each infraction. then the cop had the ***** to say that my muffler sounded a little loud. BULL****! i have a completely stock exhaust. he didn't believe me and i almost said lets go have a look but didn't. so that's one traffic and one non traffic violation. the funny thing is that of all of the idiotic things i did that night in the max, i get pulled over for those two things. i don't know if i just want to go get it reduced or challenge the first one and admit to the second. some one said i might have to pay court fees if i lose so i dunno. whose a lawyer or has experience in traffic court around here?

 

here in Tennessee, you have to pay court fees even if you win. Bummer, they get there money either way.

 

I don't think that you can get a tiket for having clear turn signals. But if you don't have the amber bulb in them, that's a different story.

 

they can.. but usually cops don't u find an upset cop and u can almost bet ur getting one.. the law wants them to reflect amber not only blink it.. just like in back must reflect red not only emit it

 

All the 3-gens have clear front bumber lens w/ a orange light from the factory. Definately does not reflect orange.

I also note that the newer Civics and maybe G20s have clear rear lenses w/ orange bulbs inside in the rear tails.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jeff92se

All the 3-gens have clear front bumber lens w/ a orange light from the factory. Definately does not reflect orange.

I also note that the newer Civics and maybe G20s have clear rear lenses w/ orange bulbs inside in the rear tails.


okay lemme put it this way.. front of car must reflect amber.. now u know the stock 3rd gens have the amber on the corner lights, and civics and the like have it too.. very small amount but its there..

 

There are s*** loads of cars and SUVs with clear plastic but amber light. If you've got clear bulbs, then there's no argument, gulty as charge. If you got orange bulbs, take ur camera to your local mall and satrt taking pictures for your deffense. Since you'll most likely pay court fees anyways, might as well get your point across. Don't let the Cop take out his bad mod on you. Fight For Your Rigths!!!

just my .2¢

 

FIGHT !

You must go to court. The lame COP has no argument. Stick to your rights. They might offer a plea bargen (something mild), but the supposed infractions they said you have commited are mild enough.
The first supposed moving violation is a phoney one. There is no law that specifies the time to make a lane change!
The second one is stupid, ther is no law against these kind of corner covers, cite the different models and makes that have the same configuration in stock form (one I think is cadillac).
The third one is even more stupid, his interpretation of loud is inmaterial. If he can prove (beyond any reasonable doubt) that the sound level is correctly measured with calibrated and certified instrumentation and the result compared to a level dictated by law (in decibels) to be the "acceptable" noise level (which by the way does not exist) he could have an argument but.. he doesn't.
In short, he was looking for any reasons to give you the tickets. This must be the quota time around where you live.

FIGTH!

Appearing before a court is a legal procedure which is governed by US law (and overseen by state law).
There must be a hearing before it can be determined that there is a valid case to go to a formal court proceeding.
In a formal court the "charges" made agaist you will crumble. Usually the COPs try to get you to plea guilty and not go to court hoping that you would be lazy, intimidated or busy. This way they "collect" money for the court and town (usual practice in NY).
In the hearing you will have the chioce to continue to a formal court engagement or to accept the plea bargen (it is up to you).
Going to court (the formal session) is the real thing and you will need an attorney. There though, your attorney will have a field day with the allegations made by the COP. There is no proof of anything (and technically he has only words to show for it). The case will be dismissed in a hurry! with no implications to you (you might even get a formal appology).
The case screening (in this case) is nothing but a stall technique employed by small town courts to discourage you to go to a formal court (they know they will lose). Even more, if the COP is not there you win by default.
It is up to you. Personally, if I had to pay anyone, I would rather pay for anything related to prove my inoscense than give the stupid COP the satisfaction.

FIGHT!

 

the first charge is as quoted: "RCW 46.61.2q0 (2) improper left turn" second: "RCW: 46.57.090 Front Clearance Lamp color - amber only" each infraction carries a $71 fine. there was also two officer signatures even though only one cop approached me. only one badge number. let me see... i have a witness in the car whom says i did turn into the proper left lane and then switched lanes right after. the second charge is for placing a MILD blue light into the side portion and wiring it so it alternated blinking with the front blinker. the only thing is that he called it a "clearance lamp" instead of a turn signal, which is what it is. the law requires, when looking from the side of the car, to reflect orange/amber in the front and red in the back. so those cars/suvs with clear lights but flash orange are legal as along as there is a reflector on the side. so, how does this change things?

 

the judge will more than likely listen to the pork chop. so u might as well assume position and recieve it from the back.

 

Carlos A or anyone else that can help....


i agree with you cause from my experinces and knowledge is true but recently i was in court for "something" and the judge said common misconception is if the officer doesnt sure the charge is automatically dropped. She said not true in ALL cases but in Most/some. Do you know these for a FACT and can give me any proof? i have a pending court case where i was pulled over and harassed then the officer poped my hood to check under and saw my turbo and didnt know what it was, but said it wasnt stock so its a smog violation. Any help is really appreciated. thanks alot

 

If you quickly changed lanes into the far left lane before turning, it is possible that you crossed a solid white line which divides the turning lane from the other lanes. In that case, it's an illegal maneuver. It sounds stupid, but a cop has the right to give tickets for that. A friend of mine recently got a ticket for stopping at a crosswalk and her bumper was past the crosswalk lines. Cops find any excuse to write tickets...sure beats chasing down the real criminals.

Good luck if you go to court. Don't forget that for moving violations like you have there, go to traffic school to erase it from your record.

 

turbomax - it's hard to say since it isn't a stock turbo so they have no way to measure what a turbo should be putting out smog wise. i suppose if you car can pass emmissions with the set up, you should be fine. it'll be considered a project/restoration vehicle though and you might need a specific license i think.


ericL - there is only one turn lane turning left so i didn't change lanes in the middle of an intersection which is illegal. all he cited me for was an "improper left turn" which could mean anything. i have decided to challenge this ticket because of the way it is worded and the fact that there is TWO officer's signature when only one approached me which means that an officer presigned the ticket so they can issue them out faster.

 

Greetings,

Sorry I didn't reply earlier.
The judge is right. When someone is charged with a traffic violation (or any law violation for that matter) a legal procedure continues regardless of the presence (or absence) of the accuser (assuming that a prosecutor takes the case and represent the accuser). This is specially true at the hearing (to determine if there is a valid case).
It is common practice though (in small town courts) to dismiss the case as it will not yield a favorable outcome for the procecution in a formal court session without a solid case and non refutable evidence.
As it stands, if you were to go to a formal procedure, the prosecutor will have to come up with more than "maybes", "the honorable COP says", "his experience on that sort of thing"... The prosecutor will have to prove conclusively with facts and with certified measurements that the allegations made against you are true and (the toughest) have to place you in the crime scene at the precise time it occurred (the COPs word is just not enough, he could have seen someone that looks like you… end may have a lost ID of yours, maybe the COP hates you and is making this up, you name it…), there will be a need for witnesses.
Now, to go through all this trouble and to loose at the end, small courts prefer to offer the plea bargain, get their money, keep you a relatively happy customer (because your insurance will not go through the roof), and hope to do more business in the future (with you).
One such proof is the case of a fatal accident (maybe a hit), there you will see the COPs treating the scene as a murder scene and get really technical, there you will see "experts" collecting evidence and so on.
Finally, at the end of the day you will still pay (to the court for the plea bargain, or to the lawyer unless is your friend or family) I would (personally) pay the lawyer and take the grin away of the b@st@rd COP if the allegations are multiple and are petty, and only take the plea bargain if it the allegation is stupid and cost more to go through it that paying and be done with it (kind of like a business decision: which is cheaper and takes the least).


[Edited by Carlos A on 09-25-2000 at 09:35 PM]

 

Last sat morning, I got a ticket for failure to stop the stop sign. I brake less than 5 mph then go but almosts everyone do that. I saw the incoming police car front of me. The policeman decided to turn around and stopped me. That is my second tickets for this year! I am waiting for the court appoinment. What can I say at the court?

The first one the policeman clocked me 39 mph over 25 speed limit. Then I had to pay the fine at the court. I think all policemen are discriminating all maxima. Am I right? Should we strike? Help me!

Policemen are not very nice to our maxima like Romeo.

My max tried to waste my money! I start hating my maxima.

 

dam i got a court date coming up for 100mph plus and unsafe lane change....pretty dumb though..theres no way i was going 100mph plus..if anyone knows LA freeways, they know its impossible to go faster than 80 on the 101fwy(near union station), since its my 1st ticket ever..im HOPING just to pay a BIG fine, and do traffic school, my friend told me imma have to go to a morgue(did i spell that right?) cuz the judge wants me to teach me a lesson. but if it turns out otherwise..imma fight it, no way im getting a point on my record wish me luck people...

 

maybe they just descriminate against people like you for running stop signs and speeding. How dare they?

 

that was a reply to maximaisokay by the way.

 

It is up to the judge if you will get traffic school. . . If they don't allow you traffic school then it appears on your record for 5 years (it is considered reckless endangerment). . . Normally they don't allow it, so you will have to hope the judge is in a good mood that day. Good luck though.

 

in pa., to fight the ticket, you have to pay the ticket plus 5.00 court cost. if you are young 16-25ish, i would get your dad, to go to court and stick up for you, and let the judge know that he thinks you have been harrassed, and