United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: I Fought the Law
Source:
Lew Rockwell
URL Source: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/06/jared-wall/i-fought-the-law/
Published: Jun 1, 2015
Author: Jared Wall
Post Date: 2015-06-01 09:29:39 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1022
Comments: 11
In September of last year, I was pulled over by a quota-driven cop and given a ticket for speeding. The ticket carried with it a significant fine and the addition of 4-points onto my license. This past Thursday (May 28, 2015), I successfully defended myself in court, and had the charges dismissed. Leaving aside the fact that I had committed no real crime (there was no victim), the financial ramifications of this “crime” would have hurt me significantly, and I felt a strong urge to fight the charges and pursue true justice. Just a month prior, I had received and was eventually convicted of a separate traffic “crime” which also carried a significant fine and was a 2-point violation. Had I been convicted of the second September “crime,” I would have not only had a significant increase in the cost of my insurance, but because the “crimes” took place within an arbitrary time limit, I also would have been labeled as a Super-Duper-Violator-of-Arbitrary-Traffic-Laws-and-Limits-on-Velocity-of-Travel (or something like that) offender. This carried with it an additional $750 fine. When I first went to the courthouse, I was told to speak with the prosecutor. He informed me that I had two options, plead guilty to the charges as they were, or plead guilty to a lesser “crime” that would have had a much more significant fine, but would add 0-points to my license. He looked at me waiting for an answer. I was somewhat surprised because he never indicated that I had the option to plead not guilty and proceed to trial. I said to him, “well, actually I’d like to do neither, plead not guilty, and proceed to a trial.” He looked at me as if I had three heads. Apparently not enough people pursue this route. I sat around in the courthouse for what seemed like an eternity waiting for my chance to appear in front of the judge. In the meantime, the prosecutor had called in the cop who had written me the ticket to discuss the matter with me (intimidate me into pleading guilty). The cop essentially said that it was going to be his word against mine, and that the judge would always take his word over mine. I asked why that was. His explanation was less than satisfactory. We went back and forth a little while (probably a mistake on my part because you should never talk to the police), and eventually I made a statement along the lines of “this seems to be all about revenue generation and not about safety.” With that, he huffed, rolled his eyes, and walked away saying sarcastically, “have a nice day.” I got a small amount of satisfaction from this encounter. Finally, the prosecutor and I appeared in front of the judge. I informed the judge that I was pleading not guilty, and that I wished to proceed to a trial. I also indicated to him that I would be requesting all of the documents that the state had associated with my case and any proof of guilt they had. At this time, I learned that the legal term for this is ‘discovery.’ The judge was fair and said that this was all within my rights. He then instructed the prosecutor to send me a letter with instructions on how to attain that discovery. He instructed me to wait for that letter. Instead of receiving this letter, I received a notification from the court that I had been scheduled for another court date. I wrote a letter to the court saying that this was out of order, that I had not yet received the judge’s ordered letter, and stated that I would not be appearing until I received the prosecution’s letter. A few weeks passed and again, the same thing happened. No letter, but a notification of a new court date. I proceeded with the same type of letter, only this time more strongly worded, and I insisted upon dismissal of the charges on the grounds that I was being denied my 6th Amendment right to a speedy trial. More than a month passed, and I thought maybe the court had agreed with me and that this had been the end of it. This proved to be naïve on my part. Two new notifications from the court arrived on the same date. They indicated that my court date had again been re-set, and that if I did not show up, there would be a warrant issued for my arrest (see how quickly a minor traffic “crime” gets escalated into violence?). Because of this threat of violence, I opted to go to the courthouse and argue my case before the judge instead of writing another letter. Nearly seven hours, and another meeting with the prosecutor later, I was finally before the judge again. I stated my case, that I had been before the court several months prior, opted for a trial and made a request for discovery, and that the judge then had instructed the prosecutor to send me a letter. I also explained how I had never received that letter, had written letters to the court requesting the letter, and still had not received it. I then requested that he dismiss the charges as per my 6th Amendment rights. The judge took his time looking through my file, examining the letters I had written; I came prepared with copies of my letters along with proof that the court had received my letters, as I had sent them certified and had documents with court representative signatures indicating they had been received. Being as how I had been sitting in the courthouse for almost a whole day’s proceedings, I had become familiar with the judge’s actions. After reviewing my file, he picked up a stamp which I had come to identify as the ‘dismissal’ stamp. I almost couldn’t contain my excitement. He proceeded to go into an oration of his decision, that I had been within my rights as per all of my requests, and that it was obvious that I had gone above and beyond in my attempts to receive discovery and defend myself in trial. He concluded that he had no choice but to dismiss my charges on the grounds I had argued. “You are free to go, have a nice day,” were his last words to me. To add icing to the cake, the judge also informed me that my file indicated I had paid $150 bail previously in association with this case, and that since the charges were now dismissed, I was entitled to reimbursement! As I left the courtroom, I unleashed an epic Tiger Woods-style fist pump, and walked out with my arms raised in the air. I got a few chuckles from the courtroom audience. More people should pursue this route. Even if not victorious, the time added to the courts would force them to change the laws, and as I’ve said before, these laws are making all of us poorer, and are keeping the most poor among us from rising out of poverty. It could be considered a technicality, but I felt like I had won true justice for myself. Victory tastes so sweet.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Interesting. He never said he wasn't speeding. Just that he didn't want the ticket. "Even if not victorious, the time added to the courts would force them to change the laws" What laws, exactly? Speed limits? Typical whiny liberal. Break the law then cry that the law is unjust. Refuses to take personal responsibility for his actions.
Some people march to a different drummer - and some people POLKA.
the law is unjust Nullification by apathetic numskull! The DA can't be bothered with due process or court orders, so the law is null and void. A rare instance of the justice system working, by not working.
And you know he's a liberal just how exactly? Why does it always seem to chap your ass whenever someone is successful defending himself against the so-called "justice system"? Being as how I had been sitting in the courthouse for almost a whole day’s proceedings, I had become familiar with the judge’s actions. After reviewing my file, he picked up a stamp which I had come to identify as the ‘dismissal’ stamp. I almost couldn’t contain my excitement. He proceeded to go into an oration of his decision, that I had been within my rights as per all of my requests, and that it was obvious that I had gone above and beyond in my attempts to receive discovery and defend myself in trial. I'm sure you think he should have done what you would have - just bent over and taken it.
I'm breakin' rocks in the hot sun I needed money 'cause I had none I miss my baby and I feel so sad I'm robbin' people with a six-gun I miss my baby and the good fun I miss my baby and I feel so sad
Not proven. Case dismissed. You'd support a presumption of guilt instead of innocence for our legal system? What transpired here is that the cops and the court wasted a tremendous amount of a citizen's time for nothing; they couldn't even justify a trial to make their case.
Huh? He said he "wants to change the laws". I asked, "Which laws?" Do you know?
Whoa! HE'S the one who wasted the court's time with his request for discovery and a jury trial -- for a f**king speeding ticket that he deserved but didn't want to accept personal responsibility for.
Because he's whining. But mainly because he refuses to take personal responsibility for his actions.
He did. He took his case to court - and won. That's the part that gives you the vapors.
Who says he deserved it - you? I thought citizens were presumed innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. There are several factors that would make him not guilty - mis-calibration of the radar for one. Defending Your Ticket in Court The RADAR system is a reliable way of measuring speed, but it is not perfect. Radar works by reflective capability. A tractor-trailer has five times the reflective capability as a standard motor vehicle. There are several factors that influence RADAR. If the operator is not familiar with these factors a false reading could be obtained. These factors are: If you represent yourself in court, you may ask the officer: Were you using a k-band, ka-band, x-band or kx-band radar? Most likely he will not know which band he was using and this will produce doubt in the judge’s mind. Many speeding tickets result from the police officer following or “pacing” a suspected speeder and using his or her own speedometer to clock the suspect’s speed. With this technique, the officer must maintain a constant distance between the police vehicle and the suspect’s car long enough to make a reasonably accurate estimate of its speed. Some states have rules that the officer must verify speed by pacing over a certain distance. (For example, at least one-eighth or one-fourth of a mile.) In practice—even in states that don’t require pacing over a minimum distance—most traffic officers will usually try to follow you for a reasonable distance to increase the effectiveness of their testimony, should you contest the ticket. In misterwhite Bizzaro World is he not allowed to present these factors as a defense, or is he automatically guilty becuase the cop "says so"?
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
and the Law won!
#3. To: misterwhite (#1)
whiny liberal
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#4. To: misterwhite (#1)
(Edited)
Typical whiny liberal.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#5. To: Willie Green, Deckard (#2)
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I guess my race is run
Like she's the best girl I ever had
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
I guess my race is run
Like she's the best girl I ever had
I fought the law and the law won
I fought the law and the law won
#6. To: misterwhite (#1)
Break the law then cry that the law is unjust.
What is YOUR life here on Earth worth?
#7. To: Hank Rearden (#6)
"You'd support a presumption of guilt instead of innocence for our legal system?"
#8. To: Hank Rearden (#6)
"What transpired here is that the cops and the court wasted a tremendous amount of a citizen's time for nothing"
#9. To: Deckard (#4)
"And you know he's a liberal just how exactly?"
#10. To: misterwhite (#9)
...he refuses to take personal responsibility for his actions.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#11. To: misterwhite, Hank Rearden (#8)
(Edited)
HE'S the one who wasted the court's time with his request for discovery and a jury trial -- for a f**king speeding ticket that he deserved but didn't want to accept personal responsibility for.
Pacing
Aircraft Speed Detection
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]