About thirteen years ago when I was in school in Michigan:
The exhaust system on my bright red '91 Dodge Spirit R/T (the one pictured
here; blisteringly fast and quick) needed work. The muffler had holes and the catalytic converter was rattling. I was on my school's Solar Car engineering and race team, and there was a guy at the shop who's good with a cutting torch, so I did the work with his help. One thing I didn't have (couldn't get) was a new "doughnut" gasket. This is a sintered metal ring that fits between the exhaust headpipe and the exhaust manifold outlet, and forms a "ball joint"
so the engine in a front-drive car can rock back and forth without breaking off the pipe, as it would with a flat gasket joint. The old one wasn't in bad shape, BUT it squeaked when the engine would rock—very common with certain FWD Mopars. So before reinstalling the old doughnut gasket, I slopped (probably too much) antiseize compound on it. Anti-seize is made out of microfine graphite flakes suspended in oil-based
grease.
It was about 11:30 at night when we finished-up with my car, and I headed home. Almost immediately on starting the engine, the exhaust system got hot and all that extra anti-seize began to put out a lot of white smoke. I let it run in the parking lot for a few minutes to burn off most of it, but eventually just HAD to go home. It smelled pretty bad (burning grease usually does) but the volume of smoke was down. But the car had an electric radiator fan which was not yet on (engine cold). So when I would stop for a red light, smoke would build up under the hood/under the car (no wind that night) and would get left behind when I left the light. Can you see this coming yet?
Two lights in succession I accelerated from rapidly, BUT safely and legally. I never exceeded the posted limit. I never exceeded a speed safe for conditions. There were no vehicles in front of me in either direction. I never broke traction at any wheel. I was in full control of the vehicle at all times. This was spirited but safe acceleration, got the picture? The speed limit was 45, and that's where I settled-in between lights.
After the second light, there were headlamps right on my tail. I glanced back and saw it was a Crown Vic. With a light bar that wasn't turned on. He was REALLY riding my tail, so I figured either he wanted to get past or he wanted to talk to me, so I signalled and pulled to the right, at which point he lit me up. I pulled over, put on the hazard blinkers and interior light, rolled down my window, took the keys out of the ignition and put them on the dash, and put my hands atop the steering wheel.
Officer: What's your hurry tonight, sir?
Daniel: No hurry, officer.
O: How much have you had to drink tonight?
D: None. I don't drink.
O: On any medications?
D: No, sir.
O: You sure squealed your tires away from two traffic lights in a row!
I was way back there--I had to really work to catch up with you after you
left those lights! Why did you do that?
D: Officer, I just did some work on my car, and it runs much better. I
guess I got carried away and forgot myself.
(Oops, I wasn't paying attention to what he said. I never squealed my tires, and I only use that phrase casually, as in, "Let's squeal the tires outta here and go get some lunch!" I just thought/assumed he was objecting to my rapid acceleration.)
O: Well, that's fair enough. Let me see your license, registration and
insurance.
He took them back to his cruiser and I waited for about 25 minutes (what
was he DOING back there???)
He came back and gave me a ticket. He said "I wrote you up for doing it once, I'm giving you a warning for doing it the other time. You have an out-of-state license, which means I have to take it away until you pay the ticket, unless you want to pay it right now in cash. If anyone asks for your license, you show them the ticket. DRIVE MORE SAFELY!"
It was the end of a long day and I was tired, and I didn't put two and two together and figure out what had happened until after I got home. He said he was "way back there". He said I squealed the tires (s.5.09 is "Excessive noise: Squealing tires"). YIKES! He was way back there, saw a big cloud of white smoke, and a bright red car move away rapidly from the light. He assumed—or pretended to assume—that it was tire smoke.
I had a nice mountain of evidence: a receipt for exhaust parts, the tube of anti-seize, the tech service bulletin talking about squeaking doughnut gaskets, photos (taken the next day with the car up on a rack) of the headpipe with rivers of melted antiseize running down it and more photos of a steel plate with a blob of anti-seize on it and a torch below it, with smoke pouring off the anti-seize. I had the old, cut-off muffler and pipe assembly complete with holes. BUT even with all that, c'mon, is a judge REALLY gonna buy this, if he knows nothing about mechanics?
And I had an even bigger problem. About a week later, I was in the same car in the same area (different street), the light turned green, I went ahead. Again, rapidly but legally, safely, and in control. Half mile down the road, flashing lights in my rearview. Caramba! Different officer. He said "You sure accelerated away from that light back there! What's your hurry?"
D: No hurry, officer.
O: Gimme yer license and papers.
D: Here you are, officer. (handed him insurance, rego, and...ticket for "squealing tires".
O: WELL, WELL, WELL!!! So it's YOU! I remember hearing about YOU! Wait here.
He kept me waiting for nearly half an hour (what was he DOING back there?) came back, THREW the papers back at me and said "I'm not writing you for anything tonight, but if you try to fight that other ticket, I'm coming to court and testifying against you!" and stormed back to his cruiser.
Um, something smells funny, and it's not burning anti-seize. In the first place, he didn't write me for anything because I didn't do anything wrong. For those keeping score at home, that's two infractions I did not commit. And even if I had done something wrong the first time, I don't believe guilt by association is legal yet in courts. In the third place, what on earth would he testify? "I saw the same guy accelerate rapidly a few nights later"? Right. No, it was pretty clear that I was targetted by an eager-beaver young cop because I had a red car that could go fast and I had out of state tags.
Some time later, my hearing date came up. I showed up in sharp clothes and brought:
-The Shop Manual showing an exploded view of the manifold outlet/seal ring/spring bolts/headpipe
-The photos
-Empty new spring bolt boxes
-The old muffler/tailpipe assembly, with holes
-The tube of antiseize, on a paper plate, double-bagged.
-Joe, the coworker with the oxyacetylene torch who was helping me do the exhaust work (Who came to court looking--as always--as if he just came off a 10-hour shift of nothing but oil changes and exhaust work!)
The magistrate seemed like a nice guy--he wasn't taking any BS from obviously guilty people, but seemed willing to listen to explanations. My turn came, and the magistrate asked the cop to explain the case.
Cop sez:
"His light turned green and he squealed his tires quite loudly--extremely loudly--away from the light, and fishtailed. He got to another light and when it turned green, he did it again. I pulled behind him and he pulled over before I could initiate a traffic stop. I asked why he did that, and he said 'I did something stupid, and I figured you, being a police officer, would want to talk to me about it.' I asked him why he squealed the tires and he said 'I just put new spark plugs in the car and I wanted to see what it would do.'"
Magistrate sez:
"Mr Stern? Would you like to explain?"
I sez:
"Yes, your honor. My version is different from officer Williams'. All of the locations are correct. However, at *neither* traffic light did I squeal the tires. At *both* traffic lights I accelerated rapidly but safely and legally. At no time did I exceed the posted limit. At no time did I break traction with any wheel. At no time did I exceed a safe speed
for conditions. And I was in full control of the vehicle at all times. I would like to explain how Officer Williams could have gotten the mistaken impression that I broke traction. However, this is a front-wheel-drive car, which cannot be made to fishtail even if traction is broken at one or both of the drive wheels."
I got permission to approach the bench. I showed the magistrate the shop manual, which helpfully explained that a Dodge Spirit is a front-drive car and has an illustration of the manifold outlet and seal ring, pointed out the spring bolts, then showed him the tube of antiseize ("contains graphite in an oil base grease"), pictures (including obviously-new spring bolts) of the headpipe with melted antiseize, and pictures of smoking/burning antiseize on the hot metal plate. I said "I take great pride in keeping my vehicle in perfect repair. Because I maintain the vehicle out of my own pocket, I cannot afford to burn up the tires." I went back to the defendant stand. The magistrate said "What about your conversation with Officer Williams?" I said "I'd like to address a few points there. When I saw headlamps very close to my rear bumper and noticed it was a Crown Victoria with a light bar, I reasoned it was a police car and figured he either wanted to talk to me or to get past me, so I pulled over. And finally, just to clarify, when officer Williams said "What's your hurry?" I did not say I wanted to 'see what the car would do'. I said I had just done some work on it and must have gotten carried away."
Magistrate says "Well, you've got lots of evidence, and the conversation's in dispute. The court finds you not responsible; you're free to go. Officer Williams…try to remember your conversations a little more clearly, please."
(No sign of the bully second cop, of course.)
So okeh, I got out of a bogus ticket and I didn't get skeered by a bully just because he was in uniform. Great. And I can even pretty much understand why the first cop stopped me based on what he thought he saw. But then to go to court, take an oath, and break it by lying through his teeth? I've got a problem with that. That's not acceptable. It wouldn't be acceptable by you or me, and it sure as hell is not acceptable from Officer "To Serve And Protect" Williams or any other LEO.
(And before any LEOs here start excusing Officer Williams because a traffic cop's job is really hard: I know. Go read
this what I wrote about the utterly impossible job of enforcing lighting violations.)
