Driving automobiles

Help! New Approach to Speeding Ticket

Well I have collected alot of input from my last post, thanks to everyone
who e-mailed and posted with your advice. I did learn few things.

I cannot fight the ticket on the grounds that it was a DD maneuver. I
violated the speed limit.  Guilty.

I cannot fight the ticket on the grrounds that it was a ‘speed trap’ since
the traffic survey was done 4 years, 11 months, and 15 days prior to the
violation (the law says within 5 years).  Lawful evidence.

So I am left at the mercy of the court with a guilty plea.

Now my question is, what are the chances of getting out of the ‘point’ on
my DMV record. Does anyone have experience with pleading guilty and asking
for lienincy so that h/she will not loose their insurance.  I currently
have 3 pts due to previous traffic violations and I have already used my
Traffic School option within the last 18 months. The exta point could
cause my insurance company (20th Century) to drop me.

I can afford to pay the ticket, but the cost of changing insurance
companies, under duress, is beyond my means. (I have shopped around, my
priemium would double even without the extra point)

Thanks in advance to all those who respond, and for readiing this far, for
that matter.


____________________________________________________________________________
  Lee Bailey at MDA-HB  | E-mail: bailey%ssdvax.dec…@mdcgwy.mdc.com
                        |     or: bai…@ssdvx1.mdc.com
     Space Station      | I can’t speak for MDA and MDA can’t speak for me.

cbd oil benefits israel research .
posted by admin in Uncategorized and have Comments (10)

10 Responses to “Help! New Approach to Speeding Ticket”

  1. admin says:

    Lee Bailey (bai…@uh17524.mdc.com) wrote:

    : Well I have collected alot of input from my last post, thanks to everyone
    : who e-mailed and posted with your advice. I did learn few things.

    : I cannot fight the ticket on the grounds that it was a DD maneuver. I
    : violated the speed limit.  Guilty.

    : I cannot fight the ticket on the grrounds that it was a ‘speed trap’ since
    : the traffic survey was done 4 years, 11 months, and 15 days prior to the
    : violation (the law says within 5 years).  Lawful evidence.

    : So I am left at the mercy of the court with a guilty plea.

    : Now my question is, what are the chances of getting out of the ‘point’ on
    : my DMV record. Does anyone have experience with pleading guilty and asking
    : for lienincy so that h/she will not loose their insurance.  I currently
    : have 3 pts due to previous traffic violations and I have already used my
    : Traffic School option within the last 18 months. The exta point could
    : cause my insurance company (20th Century) to drop me.

    : I can afford to pay the ticket, but the cost of changing insurance
    : companies, under duress, is beyond my means. (I have shopped around, my
    : priemium would double even without the extra point)

    : Thanks in advance to all those who respond, and for readiing this far, for
    : that matter.

    : —
    : ____________________________________________________________________________
    :   Lee Bailey at MDA-HB  | E-mail: bailey%ssdvax.dec…@mdcgwy.mdc.com
    :                         |     or: bai…@ssdvx1.mdc.com
    :      Space Station      | I can’t speak for MDA and MDA can’t speak for me.

        Check the local colleges… I know the state colleges here in
    N.Y. offer Defensive Driving courses which will take points off a license.

  2. admin says:

    In article <1994Jun5.035630.11…@penny.cs.fredonia.edu> stei0…@mary.cs.fredonia.edu (Jon N. Steiger) writes:

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -

    >Lee Bailey (bai…@uh17524.mdc.com) wrote:
    >: Well I have collected alot of input from my last post, thanks to everyone
    >: who e-mailed and posted with your advice. I did learn few things.

    >: I cannot fight the ticket on the grounds that it was a DD maneuver. I
    >: violated the speed limit.  Guilty.

    >: I cannot fight the ticket on the grrounds that it was a ‘speed trap’ since
    >: the traffic survey was done 4 years, 11 months, and 15 days prior to the
    >: violation (the law says within 5 years).  Lawful evidence.

    >: So I am left at the mercy of the court with a guilty plea.

    >: Now my question is, what are the chances of getting out of the ‘point’ on
    >: my DMV record. Does anyone have experience with pleading guilty and asking
    >: for lienincy so that h/she will not loose their insurance.  I currently
    >: have 3 pts due to previous traffic violations and I have already used my
    >: Traffic School option within the last 18 months. The exta point could
    >: cause my insurance company (20th Century) to drop me.

    >: I can afford to pay the ticket, but the cost of changing insurance
    >: companies, under duress, is beyond my means. (I have shopped around, my
    >: priemium would double even without the extra point)

    >: Thanks in advance to all those who respond, and for readiing this far, for
    >: that matter.

    I can’t guarantee that it will help you in this situation, but there
    is a book available in most Ca. bookstores called "Fight your Ticket"
    where they discuss many of the legal loopholes in getting out of a
    speeding ticket.  Unfortunately, as I remember, most of these ploys
    have to be started when you actually receive the ticket.  It is
    a lot of fun to read, especially if you are in the habit of receiving
    speeding tickets often.

    -M

    (Californian in exile)

  3. admin says:

    You might want to question the judge about deferred adjudication.

    tim bosley           tbos…@bnr.ca, tbos…@cse.uta.edu

  4. admin says:

    In article <2so8rm$…@lynx.unm.edu>, bai…@uh17524.mdc.com (Lee Bailey) writes:

    (yup, I deleted alot of the original post)
    |>So I am left at the mercy of the court with a guilty plea.
    |>
    |>I can afford to pay the ticket, but the cost of changing insurance
    |>companies, under duress, is beyond my means. (I have shopped around, my
    |>priemium would double even without the extra point)
    |>

    Lee –

    your best option, which may or may not work, it to walk in, look at
    the judge and appear to be 100% honest –

    (this has worked for me, more than once)

    Yes, I was speeding.

    I was doing so in order to get out of what I thought was a dangerous
    situation. (how badly did you exceed the limit, btw?) (elaborate on
    the situation – type of road, conditions, traffic, etc…)

    I am fully prepared, and willing to pay the fine, but the insurance
    repurcusions will probably result in my loosing my insurance, my
    driving privelages, and my job (good to lean on this one, esp if no
    public transport is available, and you have a long commute).

    Is there any way that I could pay the fine and not have it show up on
    my record?

    My only other advice is to do this after the officer has said his half
    – I have had the officer walk in, look at the ticket and tell the
    judge that he did not remember the incident.  

    good luck,

    clark.

  5. admin says:

    In article <2so8rm$…@lynx.unm.edu>,

    Lee Bailey <bailey%ssdvax.dec…@mdcgwy.mdc.com> wrote:
    >Well I have collected alot of input from my last post, thanks to everyone
    >who e-mailed and posted with your advice. I did learn few things.

    >I cannot fight the ticket on the grounds that it was a DD maneuver. I
    >violated the speed limit.  Guilty.

    >I cannot fight the ticket on the grrounds that it was a ‘speed trap’ since
    >the traffic survey was done 4 years, 11 months, and 15 days prior to the
    >violation (the law says within 5 years).  Lawful evidence.

    >So I am left at the mercy of the court with a guilty plea.

    Well, I didn’t read what everyone else posted but this is what I would try:

    The cop did not have probable cause to stop you because:

    1) The courts have held that as soon as the lights come on it is
    considered an arrest (don’t have the cite handy for that one).

    2) The only power to arrest without a warrant under CVC (sec 40300.5) is
    when you have caused an accident or are drunk AND blocking the road.

    3) You have a constitutionally recognized right of natural liberty which
    is defined by blacks law fifth as:

    The power of acting as one thinks fit, without ANY restraint or control,
    UNLESS by the law of nature (i.e. had you redlined out yet?  Ed.).  The
    right which nature gives to all mankind of disposing of their persons
    and property after the manner they judge most consistent with their
    happiness, on condition of their acting within the limits of the law of
    nature, and so as not to interfere with an equal exercise of the same rights
    by other men.  1 Blackwells Commentaries pg 125. (emphasis mine)

    Natural rights you are born with.  Civil rights are privileges granted
    by contract exclusivly or nonexclusivly (i.e. you may grant away your
    right to negoiate with outside parties in a partnership arrangement
    by contract).  Certain natural rights cannot be granted away permenantly
    (i.e. UNalienable {not INalienable, IN is conditional}).  Bottom line,
    go for the natural rights unless you are being discriminated against
    by the government (for example: would the cop have given another cop
    a ticket for doing the same thing?  Civil rights violation!  Equal
    protection under the law against the 14th amendment).  

    Make sure they have a bonafied contract that you have signed away
    your right to travel unrestrained.  They will claim the drivers
    license is that contract.  It is not because you can claim there was
    no meeting of the minds, there is no consideration in it for you,
    the signiture was coerced (call the DMV, get them on tape telling you
    that if you travel alone in your car without getting a license you will
    be arrested and thrown in jail, i.e. coersion and threat of kidnapping),
    etc…  Also the drivers license is a bill of pains and penalties as
    specifically outlawed in the Constitution (bill of attainder).  Ask questions,
    do not answer.  The burden of proof is on them, not you

    IF you have these natural rights (which you know you do because the
    Constitution says you do) and IF they know you didn’t ACTUALLY harm
    anyone thereby violating natural law then could it be that either
    they are misinterpreting the law or the law doesn’t apply to you?

    Could the CVC be a CIVIL CODE?  I.e. a guidebook to determine who is at
    fault when a civil case arises?  Sec 40300.5 would seem to indicate so.
    Could the CVC apply to a different kind of person?  There is natural,
    artificial, alien, state citizen, and United States citizen.  (hint: you
    want to be the state citizen which is the only one with recognized natural
    rights).  The burden of proof is on them.  Make them show you the authority
    they have to override the constitution that guarentees natural liberty
    to state citizens.  Make them prove you are not a state citizen. (BTW, you
    can have dual citizenship and can be acting as one or the other just about
    any time).  You have natural rights as a state citizen and civil rights
    to be treated reasonably and fairly when dealing with person with a significant
    government nexus (contract).

    Could the CVC only apply to commercial drivers hauling other peoples
    goods and bodies for hire?  Being negligent (i.e. speeding) could be bad
    especially when transporting those civil servants (i.e. U.S. citizens with
    all those civil rights/govt granted privlidges) around while the govt
    pays you to do it with those funny little Federal Reserve Note coupons.

    4) The cop did not have a verified complaint (i.e. an actually injured
    party complains and someone who has reason to believe the party is
    actually injured signs a sworn affidavid to that effect).  The ticket is
    not a verified complaint UNLESS YOU PLEAD GUILTY TO IT!!! (CVC 40513, 40603)
    Anyone who signs or affirms a complaint without injury is falsely
    accusing someone ("Thou shall not bear false witness").

    Make them prove everything INCLUDING the definitions of the words they
    use.  Be especially carefull of: drive, vehicle, person, etc…  What
    is the exact meaning; because if they think a state citizen has to get a
    license to travel then the whole CVC may have to be thrown out for being
    unconstitutional and we wouldn’t want that, now would we?  We paid good
    money for that book!

    "The Fourth Amendment forbids stopping a vehicle even for the limited
    purpose of questioning  its occupants unless the police officer has a founded
    suspicion of criminal conduct." U.S. v. Ramirez-sandoval, 872 F2d 1392

    "Founded suspicion must exist at the time the officer initiates the stop."
    U.S. v. Thomas, 863 F2d 622, 625.

    "In evaluating whether founded suspicion exists, the totality of circumstances
    should be considered." U.S. v. Sokolow, 490 US 1, 8; U.S. v. Hernandez-
    Alvardo, 891 F2d 1414

    "Personal liberty is a fundamental interest second only to life itself,
    protected under both California and United States Constitutions." Re S (1977)
    19 Cal3d 921, 141 Cal Rprt. 1286

    "Thus, [the] first issue to be determined by trial court was whether the
    police officer’s initial stop bas reasonable within the meaning of the Fourth
    amendment, for if it was not, the Fourth Amendment violation might infect
    any purported consent …" US v Mendenhall (1980) 446 us 544,557,

    Also you might try having a few of your friends with you when you
    appear.  When they call your case you and your friends stand up and
    each say "I am here by special invitation in the case of <name>." then
    each sit down.  Only the injured party can ID you at this point
    (you are proving that somehow "society" was injured by your actions
    because you are a member of society and you know you were injured when you
    ID yourself!)  If they file a bench warrant for you, you have a civil
    rights case against the judge (title 42 USC 1983) under equal protection
    under the law ("everyone else doesn’t get a bench warrant issued for them
    when they appear as promised in court, why me?  Must be descrimination!").
    When you leave have all your friends sign a sworn affidavid that you
    appeared as promised and file them with the court.

    Also remember the judge, cop, and every employee in the building with
    knowledge is participating in a ‘covine’ and is a felon under Title 18 USC 242.

    Bottom line: Government either acts through contract or by mere force
    or arms.  Since all men are supposed to be created equal no one man has
    the right to force another unless that other man has first forced him.

    Make them prove they have a contract to stick it to you!  Would you ever
    knowingly sign such a contract?  Would any sane man?  Social good and
    all the other claptrap excuses are merely rationalizations for using
    force.  The next bully with a gun may come along and say men from Pluto
    told him to do it rather than "society".  If society really told them to
    do it then prove it.  Get a jury in here and let’s explain the whole thing
    to them and see if they all agree.  Then *maybe* they have a case!

    I don’t know about you but that is what *I* would do  ;-)

    -Kevin
    f…@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu

    ——-
    There are no complex problems; only complex solutions!
    ——-
    Bureaucracy:  The process of turning energy into solid waste.
    ——-
    "A politician is a person who can make waves and then make you think
    he’s the only one who can save the ship."   —  Ivern Ball

  6. admin says:

    Kevin Haddock (f…@ecst.csuchico.edu) wrote:

    : 1) The courts have held that as soon as the lights come on it is
    : considered an arrest (don’t have the cite handy for that one).

    : 2) The only power to arrest without a warrant under CVC (sec 40300.5) is
    : when you have caused an accident or are drunk AND blocking the road.

    : 3) You have a constitutionally recognized right of natural liberty which
    : is defined by blacks law fifth as:

    : The power of acting as one thinks fit, without ANY restraint or control,
    : UNLESS by the law of nature (i.e. had you redlined out yet?  Ed.).  The
    : right which nature gives to all mankind of disposing of their persons
    : and property after the manner they judge most consistent with their
    : happiness, on condition of their acting within the limits of the law of
    : nature, and so as not to interfere with an equal exercise of the same rights
    : by other men.  1 Blackwells Commentaries pg 125. (emphasis mine)

    This all seems a bunch of hooey.  There is no right to drive
    outlined in the constitution.  When you sign for a license, you’re
    accepting a privilege which the state grants you; in return, you’re
    granting them certain rights regarding your passage on public
    roads.  Find me any court in the land which would uphold the "legal
    theory" this post contained.

  7. admin says:

    Kevin Haddock (f…@ecst.csuchico.edu) wrote:

    :…
    : The cop did not have probable cause to stop you because:
    :…
    : 2) The only power to arrest without a warrant under CVC (sec 40300.5) is
    : when you have caused an accident or are drunk AND blocking the road.

    Ha ha ha…  That’s *not* what CVC 40300.5 says.
    It does *not* say the only power to arrest without a warrant is (etc).
    It says that not withstanding any other provisions in the code, the officer
    may arrest without a warrant in those cases. It is making sure the officer
    has this right, without addressing any other cases where a warrantless
    arrest may be made.

    : 3) You have a constitutionally recognized right of natural liberty which
    : is defined by blacks law fifth as:
    :
    : The power of acting as one thinks fit, without ANY restraint or control,
    : UNLESS by the law of nature …

    You’re obviously not talking about the U.S. Constitution here.
    In fact, I don’t notice any specific law you’re talking about.
    Well, you can talk about non-law issues all you want. I’ll just ignore you.

    : … Could the CVC be a CIVIL CODE? …

    The California Vehicle Code is a criminal code.

    : 4) The cop did not have a verified complaint (i.e. an actually injured
    : party complains and someone who has reason to believe the party is
    : actually injured signs a sworn affidavid to that effect).  The ticket is
    : not a verified complaint UNLESS YOU PLEAD GUILTY TO IT!!! (CVC 40513, 40603)
    : Anyone who signs or affirms a complaint without injury is falsely
    : accusing someone ("Thou shall not bear false witness").

    Sorry, guy. A speeding ticket is a complaint verified by the officer
    that you have broken the law. Since this is not a civil case, issues
    of injury are not involved.

    : "The Fourth Amendment forbids stopping a vehicle even for the limited
    : purpose of questioning  its occupants unless the police officer has a founded
    : suspicion of criminal conduct." U.S. v. Ramirez-sandoval, 872 F2d 1392
    :
    : "Founded suspicion must exist at the time the officer initiates the stop."
    : U.S. v. Thomas, 863 F2d 622, 625.
    :
    : "In evaluating whether founded suspicion exists, the totality of circumstances
    : should be considered." U.S. v. Sokolow, 490 US 1, 8; U.S. v. Hernandez-
    : Alvardo, 891 F2d 1414
    :
    : "Personal liberty is a fundamental interest second only to life itself,
    : protected under both California and United States Constitutions." Re S (1977)
    : 19 Cal3d 921, 141 Cal Rprt. 1286
    :
    : "Thus, [the] first issue to be determined by trial court was whether the
    : police officer’s initial stop bas reasonable within the meaning of the Fourth
    : amendment, for if it was not, the Fourth Amendment violation might infect
    : any purported consent …" US v Mendenhall (1980) 446 us 544,557,

    Traveling faster than the posted speed limit is reasonable cause to believe
    that the crime of speeding has been committed.

    : (irrelevancies deleted)

    Bottom line: Speeding tickets are criminal cases.


    David Forthoffer               NEC Technologies Printer Division
    dav…@lpd.sj.nec.com          110 Rio Robles, San Jose CA 95134
        "I’m not speaking for NEC unless I explicitly say so."

  8. admin says:

    In article <2tq6cl$…@elvis.syl.sj.nec.com>,

    David Forthoffer <dav…@atherton.com> wrote:
    >Traveling faster than the posted speed limit is reasonable cause to believe
    >that the crime of speeding has been committed.

    [...]

    >Bottom line: Speeding tickets are criminal cases.

    Maybe in California, but sure as hell not in New York!

    Speeding is a violation, for which the penalty is a fine and/or loss of
    license.  There is no penalty of jail time, and no trial by jury.

    -JPC


     -<=>- Just say NO! to Budmilloors…   Support your local MICROBREWERY -<=>-
     John P. Curcio        (j…@philabs.philips.com)         (914) 945-6442, 6159
     Philips Laboratories     345 Scarborough Road     Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510
         "If nothing beats a Bud, given the choice, I’d take the nothing…"

  9. admin says:

    John P. Curcio (j…@philabs.philips.com) wrote:
    : In article <2tq6cl$…@elvis.syl.sj.nec.com>,
    : David Forthoffer <dav…@atherton.com> wrote:
    :
    : >Bottom line: Speeding tickets are criminal cases.
    :
    : Maybe in California, but sure as hell not in New York!
    :
    : Speeding is a violation, for which the penalty is a fine and/or loss of
    : license.  There is no penalty of jail time, and no trial by jury.

    I’m sure you know more about New York speeding tickets than I do,
    though I know more about California speeding tickets than you.  *smile*

    I was talking about California because the original article
    was about Lee Bailey’s speeding ticket in California.


    David Forthoffer               NEC Technologies Printer Division
    dav…@lpd.sj.nec.com          110 Rio Robles, San Jose CA 95134
        "I’m not speaking for NEC unless I explicitly say so."

  10. admin says:

    In article <1994Jun16.200345.1…@philabs.philips.com> j…@philabs.philips.com (John P. Curcio) writes:

    }In article <2tq6cl$…@elvis.syl.sj.nec.com>,
    }David Forthoffer <dav…@atherton.com> wrote:
    }
    }>Traveling faster than the posted speed limit is reasonable cause to believe
    }>that the crime of speeding has been committed.
    }
    }[...]
    }
    }>Bottom line: Speeding tickets are criminal cases.
    }
    }Maybe in California, but sure as hell not in New York!
    }
    }Speeding is a violation, for which the penalty is a fine and/or loss of
    }license.  There is no penalty of jail time, and no trial by jury.

    Doesn’t mean it isn’t a crime.  The USSC has found a convenience
    exception to the Constitution which, despite the Sixth Amendment’s
    explicit guarantees of trial by jury in all criminal cases, says that
    no trial by jury is necessary if the penalty is less than 6 months in
    prison.  In MD, traffic offenses can get you up to $1000 fine, no jail
    time– but they are criminal cases, and the citation states quite
    clearly that you are accused of a crime.


    Matthew T. Russotto     russo…@eng.umd.edu
    Some news readers expect "Disclaimer:" here.
    Just say NO to police searches and seizures.  Make them use force.
    (not responsible for bodily harm resulting from following above advice)