Got a ticket, and call BS - Page 2

DarknessofDeath · #16 02-25-2006, 03:29 PM

that's a very good point that you have there/

lhopp77 · #17 02-25-2006, 07:45 PM

The ticket for reckless driving is one issue, but causing an accident is another. I would contest the reckless driving ticket. It would be interesting to see who shows up in court to prove the charge. I do not see how the officer could be a witness unless he actual viewed the incident. The real issue is the "causing accident". IF there was in fact an accident, the officer would have to file an official accident report. Check to see if one was filed and see what it says--damages, witnesses, etc.

Lee

DarknessofDeath · #18 02-26-2006, 04:19 AM

yeah..that's right...
go to court...
because with my other SVX i got a ticket as well..and neither the cop or the other driver showed up.
thing was. the day after the accident i had to go to the police station. that ***** ***er told me that there were a lot of witnesses and that my girlfriend's condition is worse than what it really was.

when the time finally came to the court date. my ticket agent told me that. there are no witnesses and that the two stories that the drivers (me and the other guy) dont even match up. they weren't even close to being the same.

like i said. cop didn't show. no surprise and the other guy didnt' show..
if the other driver did show...i might have gotten everything turned around and blamed on him. providing the judge sided with me.

in the end , there was a no show and my ticket was just thrown out. i dont remember what it was for..but it was a serious ticket. 6 demerit points.
////////

...........****
///

dannmarr · #19 02-26-2006, 06:25 AM

Most likely the other two drivers will not show up in court because you were not ticketed for causing an accident. In this case, it's your word against the officer in court. The officer did not witness your reckless driving, so fight it!

svxistentialist · #20 02-26-2006, 06:55 AM

It sounds like an insurance scam. In which case they probably will show up in court, because there are two of them, against one of you.

If the so-called accident happened near a junction, you should immediately check with the highway authority if there are any traffic cameras near the junction. If there were, and it is recorded, you may have a chance to show there was no contact, and importantly, that your driving was not reckless or dangerous.

But you would need to check that IMMEDIATELY.

Joe

lhopp77 · #21 02-26-2006, 09:10 AM

Again--an official accident report would be a major factor. Was one filed?? If one was not filed by the officer--the two witnesses would have a harder time proving it did in fact happen.

Lee

AppStateSVX · #22 02-26-2006, 11:02 AM

can he write you ticket w/o the officer seeing anything? that seems really strange...... and the thing about them following you home, it bothers me a lot that they all had the SAME idea to follow you home, and were able to keep up with you enough to follow you home and find you......even though they all supposedley wrecked..... this whole thing is complete bull****

subi-crosser · #23 02-26-2006, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HighwayUFO

I got a ticket this past Sunday, and I call bull****. I was just wondering what chances you think I stand of getting this dropped. Here is the scenario.

Four lane road with a center turn lane. Speed limit - 45. Car positioning.

One person traveling at 35 mph in a 45 in the right lane. About two to three car lengths in from of him in the left lane sits another car. About two to three car lengths in from of him in the right lane sits the final car car. This is a perfectly staggered grid of cars all traveling at the same speed.

I am in the left lane coming up to the grid of cars. I have to slow to 35 for these cars. I back off slightly, regain speed and make a casual pass in and out of the grid of cars. All is well.

I get home and two of the three cars that I passed in the cluster follow me home. I walk inside thinking nothing of it. An hour later a police officer knocks on my door and informs me that I caused "two wrecks in my daredevil highway shenanigans." He asks if I knew that I had caused the collisions to the VW Jetta and the Suzuki Samurai.

My reply... "No, i did not know that they were involved in any accidents"
The officer asks for my license and all that good stuff. I tell him that I need to go out to my car to get the insurance papers. He follows me and says, "Running people off the road isn't a good thing.".

Now here is my problem with the whole situation. Both the cars involved in the accidents were present at my house. I asked the officer if there was any damage incurred by either vehicle. He says no and proceeded to go speak with the other party's outside my house. I over hear them talking about who needs to call whose insurance company to report damages.

Is there any point in my trying to fight this ticket or am I screwed. The only thing I did wrong was fail to signal lane changes.

Do you think I was wrong in doing anything, with the exception for failure to signal.

Also will note the the police officer did not witness any of this.

I did not force my way through. It was a legitimate pass. Also near the end of the month.

To recieve 'DAMAGES' they have the burdon of proof, that there are 'damages'.. in the absence of 'damages', There is no proof, therefore, no violation.

Go to the judge, and wait for the 'proof'....

Jerry

TCamusJr · #24 02-27-2006, 01:21 AM

Interesting story...

Your description of the events is very unclear. Did you cause an accident between the two vehicles? Or did you just force one or both of them out of their lane to avoid a collision with you? Did you get a copy of the police/accident report?

Wreckless driving is one of the easiest moving violations to cite/prove. Weaving in and out of traffic, at any speed, can be seen as wreckless...coupled with not signaling to the other drivers of whom you're weaving in and out could very well force someone off the road.

Is it that hard to believe you were driving like an a$$hole and got busted for it?

No, in most jurisdictions an officer need not bear witness to the offense to issue a citation as long as there is substantial proof (i.e. corroborating witness statements and/or visible damage) to suggest to the officer that it was more likely than not that something illegal went down.

Don't you think it's rather telling that two vehicles that you admit to cutting off basically follow you home? Clearly had you not cut them off and they still followed you home, then your claim of being setup may hold water...but you yourself admit (in less remarkable terms) to weaving in and out of other drivers' lanes without signaling.

What seems like a safe passing distance to you may very well be quite dangerous to other drivers, especially if you just start to veer over into their lane without signaling. I'm not sure of what a safe distance is defined as, but i'm fairly certain it is not one to two car lengths. Sounds like you ended up tailgating, if only for a few moments, which is yet another form of wreckless driving.

You say the officer told you there was no damage, but then you go on to say that the two drivers were discussing damage. You need to get the facts. If the other drivers are citing an accident in which you are at-fault to your insurance company, then get the information from the insurance company.

As far as your citation goes...you've admitted to two infractions that could warrant a citation (failure to signal and weaving in and out of traffic). So I'm not sure what makes you think a magistrate would find in your favor, unless you plan on lying about the situation?

Regardless...this seems like something very minor. Is it really worth it to you to take a day or half a day off from work in order to fight what is probably a hundred dollar ticket and which could very well be your fault, depending on perceptions? Sometimes you just gotta learn from events like this - in this case learn to be a bit more patient with other drivers on the road and learn to use your signals - take it on the chin, let it go, and move on.

NapaBavarian · #25 02-27-2006, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TCamusJr

Don't you think it's rather telling that two vehicles that you admit to cutting off basically follow you home? Clearly had you not cut them off and they still followed you home, then your claim of being setup may hold water...but you yourself admit (in less remarkable terms) to weaving in and out of other drivers' lanes without signaling.

No. It seems strange that they would both follow him, and this follows an exact method of insurance fraud, to parties conspire to look like they don't know each other and then corroberate each others stories, what the cop said makes me think that maby he is somehow conected, it just isn't logical.

Besides, if the cop is going to start issuing tickets then the guy in the left lane gets one for holding up traffic, stay right except to pass!

Wreckless driving is NOT a minor thing!!! A ticket like that with an injury accident may be enough for you to loose your lisense in CA, and injury can be faked.

AppStateSVX · #26 02-27-2006, 09:54 AM

the question still remains though, HOW did they both simultaneously have the SAME idea to follow him, at enough speed to catch up to him and find out where he lives.......AFTER a wreck? things don't add up here

Electrophil · #27 02-27-2006, 10:54 AM

This really does sound like 2 people trying to pull off something. Either just dent repairs and a new paintjob each or they are going for the throat with medical damages.. or both.

The scary part really is that wreckless driving ticket. That should have you shuddering regardless of age. Most of us never see one of those. Personally, I would be forced to fight it, and if possible, find the connection between these two guys. Work together, school buddies? There is something connecting them.

I don't think anyone here would condone the weaving part, I certainly won't. But perhaps.... you were provoked into the maneuver?

NapaBavarian · #28 02-27-2006, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Electrophil

I don't think anyone here would condone the weaving part, I certainly won't. But perhaps.... you were provoked into the maneuver?

I wouldn't go so far as to say that I condone it, however I don't see that manuver as any more of a problem than the guy dawdeling in the left lane where he shouldn't have been. Stop and think about it, if people stayed in the proper lane on lightly traveled highways there would be almost no weaving! Saying you were provoked will win you no friends in the courtroom, saying you were baited for insurance fraud might stand a chance if you word it just right, remember, what you say is often less important than how you say it in the court of public opinion

I see idiots every day between my house and town, 7 miles of twisty canyon road, the guys who drive it at 30mph, presumably because it is the maximum safe speed, are the same ones who cut into the oncoming lane, sometimes drive right up the center of the road, run the stop sign-not a rolling stop, but practically ignore it- refuse to pull over and let faster trafic by, then complain about people driving too fast, because speed is so much more dangerous than what they are doing! Same thing goes for dawdelers in the left lane

Everyone driving faster than you is a maniac, anyone driving slower is an inconsiderate jackarse!

Electrophil · #29 02-27-2006, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NapaBavarian

I wouldn't go so far as to say that I condone it, however I don't see that manuver as any more of a problem than the guy dawdeling in the left lane where he shouldn't have been. Stop and think about it, if people stayed in the proper lane on lightly traveled highways there would be almost no weaving! Saying you were provoked will win you no friends in the courtroom, saying you were baited for insurance fraud might stand a chance if you word it just right, remember, what you say is often less important than how you say it in the court of public opinion

I see idiots every day between my house and town, 7 miles of twisty canyon road, the guys who drive it at 30mph, presumably because it is the maximum safe speed, are the same ones who cut into the oncoming lane, sometimes drive right up the center of the road, run the stop sign-not a rolling stop, but practically ignore it- refuse to pull over and let faster trafic by, then complain about people driving too fast, because speed is so much more dangerous than what they are doing! Same thing goes for dawdelers in the left lane

Everyone driving faster than you is a maniac, anyone driving slower is an inconsiderate jackarse!

Yeah, I agree with all of this. True points. Especially the baited for insurance fraud.

MNYPNNY · #30 02-27-2006, 02:39 PM

Okay, this has got to be one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Who in their right mind this day and age would EVER follow someone to their home even if they truly were violated? I know I wouldn't! I'd get the license plate or at least the description and immediately report a hit and run. And what are the chances that TWO people would be equally daring? None of this smells anything like a legitimate incident. Get a lawyer and pin them with attempted insurance fraud.

And by the way guys.... it's "reckless" not "wreckless".