Unnecessary ticket from a jerk Cop

-
That's the point. You say this simply a story about common sense, but when other's don't take the carefully planted bait it becomes about social morality. This article was specifically created to that effect (not saying you thought it so).

In September 2015 when this story was created, Police conduct was the most polarizing and revenue efficient avenue for the media. Do a search for "Nick Berlin Denver Glass" and you will see all the usual suspects spinning their side of this story to maximum effect.

Personally, I think the Deputy should have just let it go and told the guy he's a dumbass for driving that car to the shop instead of sitting on his couch while a mobile tech did it in his driveway.
 
With a little knowledge of the Colorado traffic laws as a retired trooper. All of the minor traffic infractions as they are referred to these days have been decriminalized. In other words they are infractions rather than offenses. With the decriminalization of these "minor" violations many of the rights have been removed. If the ticket was written into the Adams County court then he has the ability to appear and not guilty, the case will then be set for trial and the officer will be required to appear and present the people's case. He can be cross examined by the defendent or his attorney and the officer has the opportunity the cross examine the defendent if he testifies.

There is the possibility the officer won't show for the trial and the case will either be dismissed or continued, depending on the officers reason for not being able to show. The actual obscured vision statue if they have adopted the model traffic code and not a municipal elections code I'd that any crack, chip or obscure meant that would inhibit the drivers vision in any way is considered to be obscured vision.

Agreed there are some officers that enforce the letter of the law but as I discovered over 32 years and as the commander of a 30 man/women field troop office, it is usually much better to operate from what the intent of the law is rather than the letter. However some agencies train officers in traffic enforcement to the letter and let the judges define what the intent is.

Some of the issues in today's society is that people and the media rush to judgement without having all of the facts and circumstances. As such with the Tulsa, OK officer that was recently found not guilty of shooting and killing a black unarmed man. But when you look at the video from the media it looks pretty 1 sided.

With that said I will say based on what we know I would not have written the ticket, but let's just say that this vandalism happened a week or a month ago and the officer happens to know this because he took the report? Just saying.
 
parishpbs said:
With a little knowledge of the Colorado traffic laws as a retired trooper. All of the minor traffic infractions as they are referred to these days have been decriminalized. In other words they are infractions rather than offenses. With the decriminalization of these "minor" violations many of the rights have been removed. If the ticket was written into the Adams County court then he has the ability to appear and not guilty, the case will then be set for trial and the officer will be required to appear and present the people's case. He can be cross examined by the defendent or his attorney and the officer has the opportunity the cross examine the defendent if he testifies.

There is the possibility the officer won't show for the trial and the case will either be dismissed or continued, depending on the officers reason for not being able to show. The actual obscured vision statue if they have adopted the model traffic code and not a municipal elections code I'd that any crack, chip or obscure meant that would inhibit the drivers vision in any way is considered to be obscured vision.

Agreed there are some officers that enforce the letter of the law but as I discovered over 32 years and as the commander of a 30 man/women field troop office, it is usually much better to operate from what the intent of the law is rather than the letter. However some agencies train officers in traffic enforcement to the letter and let the judges define what the intent is.

Some of the issues in today's society is that people and the media rush to judgement without having all of the facts and circumstances. As such with the Tulsa, OK officer that was recently found not guilty of shooting and killing a black unarmed man. But when you look at the video from the media it looks pretty 1 sided.

With that said I will say based on what we know I would not have written the ticket, but let's just say that this vandalism happened a week or a month ago and the officer happens to know this because he took the report? Just saying.
Click to expand...
To put it in a shorter version, My buddy had a saying, " There is always three sides to a story, one side, the other side, and the truth somewhere in the middle!"
 
Back in Time said:
That all makes sense and is just like most places EXCEPT...Paying a fine and court costs before you defend yourself. That makes no sense what so ever. So do you go ahead and spend 30 days in jail so you can fight the sentence.?
Click to expand...

If you're arrested and accused of a crime dont you generally have to post bail, hire a lawyer or get a public defender.

This is a traffic ticket. So like I posted earlier. Plead guilty and pay it. Plead not guilty, pay it and hope to win in court. It's set up just like anything else pay to defend yourself.
 
Old man ray said:
If you're arrested and accused of a crime dont you generally have to post bail, hire a lawyer or get a public defender.

This is a traffic ticket. So like I posted earlier. Plead guilty and pay it. Plead not guilty, pay it and hope to win in court. It's set up just like anything else pay to defend yourself.
Click to expand...

You don't serve the sentence before the conviction...only after.
 
jimmer said:
One more thought.
Who's to say the guy wasn't running late for appointment and speeding ?
Cop pulls him over says I'll let you go on speeding and site you for windshield?
Cop might have been giving him a break already ?
Click to expand...

appointment was at 3.30
ticket was written at 3.39
 
It's a crap ticket. If he has an appointment to get it fixed he obviously isn't neglecting it. And he obviously wants to get it taken care of.

The only time I could see this not being a crap ticket, is if his windshield had been like that for some time. And he had been given a warning in the past already to get it fixed.

And to everyone saying "well it's dangerous to drive it like that, so he deserved the ticket". Do you know how badly damaged it was? Maybe his FOV (field of vision) was clear of any major obstructions and it was safe enough to drive there. And even if there was major damage and it did obstruct his view. He still has to get it fixed. Maybe driving there was his only option? What if there was no mobile glass people available in his area? OR what if there was, but they wouldn't be able to fix it till next week. But hey, he's gotta get to work for that week. In that instance isn't it more prudent to drive the vehicle to the shop and get it fixed so he can SAFELY make his way to work the next day?

Or are you guys suggesting that he should not get his vehicle fixed asap and instead he should park it. And should find alternative transportation for however long. Say a taxi, or walking, or some other inconvenience/expense. Until he is able to get a mobile technician to come. Or maybe have his vehicle towed to the shop? An expense that's probably higher than the ticket itself? How many hoops does the average citizen have to jump through just to get a windshield fixed?

C'mon guys. This is common sense. It's a crap ticket.
 
Three pages of mostly bull ****, The guys window got broke he made an appointment to get it fixed he didn't harm anyone on the way to the shop, made his appointment on time and the cop could see it written down and ticketed him any way. The cop is an ***.

Jeff
 
The real crime in this story is that mullet.
Nick-Berlin-KUSA-800x430.png
 
Bail vs paying for a ticket guilty/not guilty are not the same thing! Philly sucks for tickets, forgot how deep the Mob runs, pay before we figure out who's right or wrong? Glad I can contest my case in court in Minnesota and if the officer doesn't show, I don't pay, (except court fees, everyone pays win or lose). The guy with the Mullet was an idiot, the cop was an idiot, and I've been an idiot for reading all this whining about something that doesn't directly affect any of us!
 
Back in Time said:
That all makes sense and is just like most places EXCEPT...Paying a fine and court costs before you defend yourself. That makes no sense what so ever. So do you go ahead and spend 30 days in jail so you can fight the sentence.?
Click to expand...
A traffic citation/summary offense is just as Old man ray says, there are times the pre-pay of the fines are waived, but that is strictly at the discretion of the Magisterial
District office. Such was & still has been the case on appeal of My fight w/the Twp. over My collection of cars, it was not the case with any of the moving violations I've
received,....You pay the fine in advance of the hearing & receive a full or partial refund if You are found Not Guilty or get a reduced judgement............It don't have to make
sense, that IS the law in the Commonwealth of PA. It is done to keep motorists from skipping out on the hearing, officers have to make time on the taxpayers dime to
attend these hearings, I have only had one no-show, & that was a "favor" so it doesn't count...........every other time I sat across from the officer & plead My case.
With fairly decent results with some tossed & some reduced, I stay away from freakin' Pgh if I can help it. You ARE guilty, period, money mill..........................
 
Killer6 said:
A traffic citation/summary offense is just as Old man ray says, there are times the pre-pay of the fines are waived, but that is strictly at the discretion of the Magisterial
District office. Such was & still has been the case on appeal of My fight w/the Twp. over My collection of cars, it was not the case with any of the moving violations I've
received,....You pay the fine in advance of the hearing & receive a full or partial refund if You are found Not Guilty or get a reduced judgement............It don't have to make
sense, that IS the law in the Commonwealth of PA. It is done to keep motorists from skipping out on the hearing, officers have to make time on the taxpayers dime to
attend these hearings, I have only had one no-show, & that was a "favor" so it doesn't count...........every other time I sat across from the officer & plead My case.
With fairly decent results with some tossed & some reduced, I stay away from freakin' Pgh if I can help it. You ARE guilty, period, money mill..........................
Click to expand...

This is going to be my last post on this. Apparently you guys out East do things differently.I know for a fact because of lots of personal experience growing up in Colorado that's not how it works there. If you are written a summons there is a set fine and point assessment listed. You may choose to pay the fine in advance in which you are accepting guilt..they take your money give you the points against your licence and that's it ( until you get your next insurance bill :) ) If you don't do that there is also a date to appear listed. Then and only then, once it has been adjudicated, do you pay your fine and court costs and get your points accessed . Jailable offences such as DUI are handled differently as they should be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top