Ok...Trial of the century in 60 to 90 days. I elected to get the bench trial. The prosecutor wouldn't do anything.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
The saga concluded today with a dull thud.
The court had scheduled my trial to be held on October 24th. About a month ago I was told, "You need to go to a vendor convention in Phoenix", by my boss. So I booked my travel for departure on October 22nd and return on October 25th. I had completely forgotten about my court date.
I realized the conflict a little before Harlan, so while I was in Harlan I called the court to reschedule the trial. The clerk said, "We normally don't reschedule due to work conflicts, but send me some proof and I'll take it to the judge to see what he says." I sent her my travel plans and information about the convention. She called me back the next day and said they wouldn't reschedule it. I had asked if I could still just pay the ticket, and the clerk said I could (whew, I wasn't going to be forced to go to court). So I had a decision to make: Go to the convention, or go to court. The convention will be fun, but I really wanted my day in court. I elected to go to the convention.
Today I went to the courthouse to pay the fine. I went there to ensure two things: 1) I could pay with cash so I wouldn't have to pay the $25 convenience fee; 2) I could ensure my name was removed from the trial docket/schedule, so a bench warrant wouldn't be issued. Number 2 was more important than number 1.
I met with the clerk, ensured she pulled me from the docket/schedule, and broke out the wallet to pay the fine (still $225). She looked at the ticket and said, "Do you have a CDL?" To which I responded in the negative. She said, "And he wrote you a ticket for a left lane violation?" I affirmed that statement. She said, "I've never seen a non-CDL get this ticket." I said, "Yeah, the law is very unclear, which is why I wanted to have a hearing." She said she knew her husband had pulled a trailer in the left lane before. She told me to hold on so she could go talk to the judge, since he was in the building.
She came back and wouldn't smile, nor frown, as she stood near some other lady at a different desk. It turned out that lady was pulling my record. When she came back to me she informed me that the judge wouldn't change the ticket since the officer knows more about this law than him! However, she said if my history didn't come back without 5 DUIs in the last 3 years, then they would allow me to plead "nolo contendere", but I would still have to pay the fine, I just wouldn't get points. Then she told me that even if I had gone to court, I would very likely have had to still pay the fine. She said, "Even if we reduce infractions to help with points, fines are never reduced." So, it's all about the money.
She looked at my driving record and said, "you like to drive fast, don't you" and "you had a problem in '96" (that one sent me to jail for a night). I said, "Yes, Alabama always gets me with speeding". Then she said, "and a ticket in 92, oh, one in 93, and...the 90's were a bad driving decade, huh?" I said, "Well, the 2000s weren't great either!" A little nervous laughter later, and she let me plead NOLO and just pay the fine. Hell, it would have been only 1 point.
So, I made the right call to just pay the fine, and go on the boondoggle. What I learned was, next time I'll request a jury trial. The whole point of having a judge is to JUDGE whether the law applied to me, not to default to the officer's 'knowledge' of the law...WTF??? Sure, a jury will freaking hate me for making them listen to such a petty case, but I have a better chance of getting a true judgment than with the actual judge.
Judges back up officers pretty strongly...which explains why all of these cops get away with murder of innocent, unarmed black men. I saw it in 3D today....well, something pretty close.
Topic: Morning Coffee (Read 177328 times)
