Guys,

I don’t think we ought to be having a mock trial here, replete with a prosecutor, one or more lawyers, and several reverent opinions and character issues wading in. Especially since we have no facts or basis for the issue to begin with. But it is kind of fun, so just for the sake of fun, I will add that any time a “law” is regarded as an absolute, unswerving value, we as both individuals and a country have diminished ourselves greatly.

Our legal system is, in fact, obligated to provide the burden of proof by the person making the claim of law breaking. In other words, if the Police say something happened they are obligated to prove it. Unfortunately, the court system takes the word of the Police as the unswerving truth. The result is that the burden has so conveniently obligated the accused to defend themselves and not the accuser to prove their case. It is a shame and too often a sham. Worse is that on the part of the State you so often have lunatics that actually think they are helping in some way.

Claiming anarchy as the antithesis of our legal system is as extreme an error as is claiming our legal system is without flaw. Here in Seattle members of our Police department daily and flagrantly break the law. In their cars, they fail to signal, fail to stop at lights and signs, tail-gate, obstruct traffic, and worse, they often fail to stop others doing the same things they do. I’ve even seen police officers riding horses downtown, going the wrong way on 1 way streets; completely indifferent to the fact that they are both blocking traffic and their horses are pooping on the streets. I can’t imagine that the local cops are any different from cops in other cities. And I’d bet anything that they either have lame reasons for their actions or simply don’t care. Given the realities of this type of behavior is proof positive that laws are not absolute, nor should they be. Remember that laws are tools of the State. A long time ago they were intended to help society; now traffic laws are often simply means of making money and jerking folks around.

In Blau’s case failing video "proof" of the alleged offence, it will get down to the word of the Officer verses Blau’s dad. His dad doesn’t have a prayer of a chance. The system is set up to make easy money for the State.

All of this said I remember a story that is pretty much on point: A guy gets pulled over by an Officer for failing to stop at a Stop sign. The guy complains to the officer that he slowed way down. At which point the Officer pulls out his billy-club and says to the guy. Okay I’m going to start beating you. Do you want me to slow way down or stop?

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

Sorry Tracy, but I did not state that anarchy was the "antithesais of our legal system", which I clearly indicated was subject to flaws, interpretation, and sometimes let people get away with it. I stated that anarchy was the absence of law - the definition in the dictionary.

Maybe the point I was trying to make was too subtle, but judges are not idiots, and can usually recognize a snow job. I was attempting to explain the reasons why attempts to "get off on a ticket you properly deserved" often make the situation worse, rather than better.

__________________
John

2003 Firemist Red/grey leather SL 500
2015 Palladium Silver/black mbtex GLK 350
1987 Smoke Silver/burgundy mbtex 300E Sportline (SOLD)

Click to see 87 300E

Actually, this is pretty cool. We're having a spirited debate of opinion and no one has resorted to name calling or insults. I think everyone should be pleased with themselves for that reason.

blau, certainly everyone should be presumed innocent and has the right to defend themselves. However, the way I read your comments, it indicated to me that your dad made a rolling stop. If that's the case, you are wasting your time. The judge will find him guilty.

I don't agree however that admitting guilt will cause a judge to impose the maximum penalty. I know a few judges and at least with them I think a sincere admission and contrite attitude would be considered in the degree of fine or penalty.

The idea that admiting something will bring the worst consequences is troubling to me. IMHO, (and I'm entitled to it) this has been perpetuated over the last decade or so. Look at the dealings of our last President. It seemed that being able to dance and spin the truth became an art form. Personally, I have a problem with that.

Only your dad knows if he really stopped, completely or not. If he really did, it's his right to fight the charge. If he really didn't stop, it's a waste of time.

Regards,

Bill

__________________
Mr. BILL

91 300E 120K
90 300SE 275K (sold)
92 BMW 525iM 120K
90 BMW 525iA 175K
85 300D 175K (sold)
84 300SD 245K (sold)

Fight neighborhood speeders.

http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?ei=UTF-8&cache=1&gid=946608&vid=1537171&b=2

My neighbor killed a ten year old girl twenty years ago when she darted out in front of him a block from our house. The speed limit was lowered to 25mph afterwards and he has never gotten over it. That's why police are more hard nosed(no disrespect intended) when they are in residential areas.

The bottom line is money, how much do you spend just to prove your innocence, plead down to a non-points charge, pay the lessor fine, and move on...carefully.

__________________
'86 300E 5 speed
'71 Triumph TR6
'46 Cushman Scooter
'41 Ford 9N tractor