If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
In Indianapolis, Marion County Superior Court has started fining
motorists who take their cases to court and settle moments before their trials start. Judges hope that will discourage people who go to court in hopes of winning a dismissal simply because a police officer fails to show up. The new fines were announced after an investigation by The Indianapolis Star found that more than one in three traffic ticket cases is dismissed because officers skip their court dates. Now, drivers who request a trial and then pay after they get to court and see the officer has shown up will pay an additional $50 fine. The policy took effect Monday. Critics question the policy. Defense attorney Jennifer Lukemeyer said the court is applying a broad policy to matters that ought to be handled on a case-by-case basis. The court might be inviting a class-action lawsuit or review by the Indiana Supreme Court. "No court should have a uniform policy on imposition of any sentence, fine or disposition," Lukemeyer said. "It's no different than if the court tells a defendant, 'If you go to trial, you will get an extra 10 years.'" Others say the new rules penalize people for exercising their constitutional rights. "You have a right to have the state produce their evidence and go forward," Marion County Chief Public Defender David Cook said. "The state still has the obligation to show up at trial." Cook thinks the new rules have a chilling effect that discourages motorists from coming to court even if they have good excuses that could persuade a judge. Under the old rules, drivers accused of running a red light or speeding, for example, had their cases dismissed if they came to court and the officer who wrote their ticket was absent. But if the officer is present, the motorist could pay the fine with no additional penalty. "This is all because officers didn't show up, and now the court wants to infringe on a defendant's right to have a trial," Indianapolis attorney John Fierek said. "That's the wrong approach." |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
> wrote in message oups.com... > In Indianapolis, Marion County Superior Court has started fining > motorists who take their cases to court and settle moments before their > trials start. > > Judges hope that will discourage people who go to court in hopes of > winning a dismissal simply because a police officer fails to show up. > The new fines were announced after an investigation by The Indianapolis > Star found that more than one in three traffic ticket cases is > dismissed because officers skip their court dates. > > Now, drivers who request a trial and then pay after they get to court > and see the officer has shown up will pay an additional $50 fine. The > policy took effect Monday. > > Critics question the policy. Defense attorney Jennifer Lukemeyer said > the court is applying a broad policy to matters that ought to be > handled on a case-by-case basis. The court might be inviting a > class-action lawsuit or review by the Indiana Supreme Court. > > "No court should have a uniform policy on imposition of any sentence, > fine or disposition," Lukemeyer said. "It's no different than if the > court tells a defendant, 'If you go to trial, you will get an extra 10 > years.'" > > Others say the new rules penalize people for exercising their > constitutional rights. > > "You have a right to have the state produce their evidence and go > forward," Marion County Chief Public Defender David Cook said. "The > state still has the obligation to show up at trial." > > Cook thinks the new rules have a chilling effect that discourages > motorists from coming to court even if they have good excuses that > could persuade a judge. > > Under the old rules, drivers accused of running a red light or > speeding, for example, had their cases dismissed if they came to court > and the officer who wrote their ticket was absent. But if the officer > is present, the motorist could pay the fine with no additional penalty. > > "This is all because officers didn't show up, and now the court wants > to infringe on a defendant's right to have a trial," Indianapolis > attorney John Fierek said. "That's the wrong approach." > Well what do you expect? People fighting corruption are interfering with the money flow. A solution had to be found, somehow. -Dave |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
On 29 Jul 2006 10:22:48 -0700, wrote:
> >"No court should have a uniform policy on imposition of any sentence, >fine or disposition," Lukemeyer said. "It's no different than if the >court tells a defendant, 'If you go to trial, you will get an extra 10 >years.'" > Hell - courts have always done that. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
"Dave" > wrote in message
reenews.net... > > > wrote in message > > "This is all because officers didn't show up, and now the court wants > > to infringe on a defendant's right to have a trial," Indianapolis > > attorney John Fierek said. "That's the wrong approach." > > > > Well what do you expect? People fighting corruption are interfering with > the money flow. A solution had to be found, somehow. -Dave > I don't have a problem with fining the citizen in these cases. I do think, though, that police officers should *also* be fined for not showing up to testify. I would think that's part of their job, just as it is for the civilian CSUs. I bet my daughter would be in serious trouble, maybe to the point of losing her job, if she ignored a subpoena. Linda |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
>> Well what do you expect? People fighting corruption are interfering with
>> the money flow. A solution had to be found, somehow. -Dave >> > I don't have a problem with fining the citizen in these cases. I do > think, > though, that police officers should *also* be fined for not showing up to > testify. I would think that's part of their job, just as it is for the > civilian CSUs. I bet my daughter would be in serious trouble, maybe to > the > point of losing her job, if she ignored a subpoena. > > Linda Cops have plenty of incentive to show up. Their next promotion depends on it. If you ask, you will be told that there are no ticket quotas. That is a bald-faced lie. Cops on traffic duty are rated by number of tickets they write per hour, and (more important) HOW MUCH MONEY is collected in fines. That's why you see so many cops on speed patrol on major highways and ignoring speeders in school zones (for example). 5 over in a school zone is much more serious than 30 over on the highway, but guess which activity has the larger fine? Anyway, when it comes to court, having too many tickets tossed can really screw up a cop's numbers. So it is in the cops' best interest to show up and lie to the judge so that the ticket doesn't get tossed. But if the cop does NOT show up, it hurts nobody except the cop. So nobody is going to twist a cop's arm and tell them that they have to go to court on their day off to keep their numbers up. So it is quite common for cops to ignore court appearances. -Dave |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
Cliff and Linda Griffith wrote: > "Dave" > wrote in message > reenews.net... > > > > > wrote in message > > > "This is all because officers didn't show up, and now the court wants > > > to infringe on a defendant's right to have a trial," Indianapolis > > > attorney John Fierek said. "That's the wrong approach." > > > > > > > Well what do you expect? People fighting corruption are interfering with > > the money flow. A solution had to be found, somehow. -Dave > > > I don't have a problem with fining the citizen in these cases. I do think, > though, that police officers should *also* be fined for not showing up to > testify. I would think that's part of their job, just as it is for the > civilian CSUs. I bet my daughter would be in serious trouble, maybe to the > point of losing her job, if she ignored a subpoena. > > Linda The real problem here is the city's method of processing tickets and collecting fines. In this city, there is but one huge auditorium-sized traffic court for that large city, and over a third of tickets are tossed out (and fines uncollected) because police officers choose to avoid it. In comparison to another city in another state, the officers set the court date according to their schedule (usually but 10-14 days from the date of issuance) in a small court (sometimes just a trailer), and very few tickets are tossed. In Indy, the city's inefficient approach to settling traffic tickets is the problem, and they are now adding additional fines for the ticketed because of their system's weaknesses, when all those appearing are just utilizing their constitutional rights. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
Cliff and Linda Griffith wrote: > > I don't have a problem with fining the citizen in these cases. I do think, > though, that police officers should *also* be fined for not showing up to > testify. I would think that's part of their job, just as it is for the > civilian CSUs. I disagree. A police who fails to show up for court should be treated the same as his victim. He should be arrested, jailed for an indefinate period, photoed, printed, have his DL and veh. reg. suspended, and be smacked with a "criminal record". If showing up to honor a subpoena, which is a court order, is too hard, then I have the solution. Do serious useful work and leave motorists alone. SP Cook |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
Cliff and Linda Griffith wrote: > "Dave" > wrote in message > reenews.net... > > > > > wrote in message > > > "This is all because officers didn't show up, and now the court wants > > > to infringe on a defendant's right to have a trial," Indianapolis > > > attorney John Fierek said. "That's the wrong approach." > > > > > > > Well what do you expect? People fighting corruption are interfering with > > the money flow. A solution had to be found, somehow. -Dave > > > I don't have a problem with fining the citizen in these cases. why not? It's essentially a fee for exercising your right to trial. > I do think, > though, that police officers should *also* be fined for not showing up to > testify. I would think that's part of their job, just as it is for the > civilian CSUs. I bet my daughter would be in serious trouble, maybe to the > point of losing her job, if she ignored a subpoena. ah, but this is not a criminal case... the normal rules don't apply. Besides, they're better than we are. nate |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ticketed drivers fined extra if using constitutional rights
SP Cook wrote: > Cliff and Linda Griffith wrote: > > > > I don't have a problem with fining the citizen in these cases. I do think, > > though, that police officers should *also* be fined for not showing up to > > testify. I would think that's part of their job, just as it is for the > > civilian CSUs. > > I disagree. A police who fails to show up for court should be treated > the same as his victim. He should be arrested, jailed for an > indefinate period, photoed, printed, have his DL and veh. reg. > suspended, and be smacked with a "criminal record". > > If showing up to honor a subpoena, which is a court order, is too hard, > then I have the solution. Do serious useful work and leave motorists > alone. While in principle I agree that cops should be treated no differently than ordinary citizens, I seem to recall learning in traffic school that missing traffic court on a civil offense will not lead to the issuance of a bench warrant (which is for criminal offenses). Hence if you miss your civil court date, the next time you are stoped by the police they take you down to the station, but you are free to go once the fine is paid. There is no criminal record thereafter. I do think, though, that in the interim your license is automatically suspended (without necessarily receiving a notice), and I also believe that usually means so is your insurance. Jason |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is it time to take the keys away from our teenage drivers? | Mike T. | Driving | 2 | March 2nd 06 01:38 PM |
Millions of illegals on roads, but let's screw US citizen teen drivers instead | arminius | Driving | 3 | September 24th 05 08:35 PM |
The Nation's Worst Drivers | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 22 | May 31st 05 01:56 AM |
Drives me crazy | MidnightDad | Driving | 35 | April 26th 05 03:05 AM |
Flashpoint Racing Series begins tonight! | [email protected] | Simulators | 34 | February 18th 05 01:37 AM |