Went to traffic court today

TinBoats.net

Help Support TinBoats.net:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Popeye

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2007
Messages
4,873
Reaction score
16
Location
Nowhere near any plaid
A while ago I got a ticket for Avoiding a Traffic Control Device by driving through a city park. I publicly asked about it on another site and some of them told me to just pay the ticket and not fight it... To them (and all Nay-sayers), I say MALARKEY.

The charges were dropped. The prosecutor asked the issuing officer if there were any signs posted to indicate that thru traffic was prohibited through the park and the officer said there weren't. The prosecutor then told the Judge that he was moving to not prosecute. The Judge dropped the charges and told the officer they need to stop writing tickets for a non-offense. I'm a free man... WOO HOO!!!

Now, I wonder how many people paid the city the fine and ended up with points on their drivers license because they blindly just went along with the system.
 
Good thing you didn't just pay. Lots of people like myself don't want to take the time off of work and deal with the hassle of going to court, so we just pay the fine. Last time I went to traffic court, I was there for 6 hours....and they did drop the charges.
 
I never miss a court appearance if I can help it... with that being said - I did pay one $75 fine a few months ago because I failed to pay $4 for a pass to fish at a local marina... I was in my car and didn't know they would still fine you even if you weren't fishing. Should have made a few calls, but for some unknown reason I got stupid and just sent in the money..
 
Popeye said:
A while ago I got a ticket for Avoiding a Traffic Control Device by driving through a city park. I publicly asked about it on another site and some of them told me to just pay the ticket and not fight it... To them (and all Nay-sayers), I say MALARKEY.

The charges were dropped. The prosecutor asked the issuing officer if there were any signs posted to indicate that thru traffic was prohibited through the park and the officer said there weren't. The prosecutor then told the Judge that he was moving to not prosecute. The Judge dropped the charges and told the officer they need to stop writing tickets for a non-offense. I'm a free man... WOO HOO!!!

Now, I wonder how many people paid the city the fine and ended up with points on their drivers license because they blindly just went along with the system.

OK I will ask, DID YOU DO IT???? If you did not then I am glad it worked out for you, if you did do it then just one more reason the system is broke!!!
 
glad to hear you got out of it. if theres no signs posted how is a man supposed to know not to do it

last time i was in traffic court it took almost 4 hours just to go threw the line, talk to the magistrate and go pay the clerk.
 
dunk50 said:
Popeye said:
A while ago I got a ticket for Avoiding a Traffic Control Device by driving through a city park. I publicly asked about it on another site and some of them told me to just pay the ticket and not fight it... To them (and all Nay-sayers), I say MALARKEY.

The charges were dropped. The prosecutor asked the issuing officer if there were any signs posted to indicate that thru traffic was prohibited through the park and the officer said there weren't. The prosecutor then told the Judge that he was moving to not prosecute. The Judge dropped the charges and told the officer they need to stop writing tickets for a non-offense. I'm a free man... WOO HOO!!!

Now, I wonder how many people paid the city the fine and ended up with points on their drivers license because they blindly just went along with the system.

OK I will ask, DID YOU DO IT???? If you did not then I am glad it worked out for you, if you did do it then just one more reason the system is broke!!!

Did he do what ??? Obey the existing law ??? Yes, according to the judge. Break or violate any ordinance or someone's private property ?? Nope, drove through a public parking lot.

What's broke about the system is the enforcement side. A good arrest or ticket and the offender will pay. Sloppy police work or arrogance on the part of the officer toward the public that he is supposedly serving contribute more than a little to the problem.
 
If he drove through a parking lot to avoid a light then it was wrong IMO I have seen many accidents because of careless driving like that.
Bad ticket maybe smart driving no way. If you are in that much of a hurry leave an few mins early next time
 
It's none of my business, but since Popeye asked me privately about the ticket, I feel like I can respond. He got an ordinance violation ticket for driving through a park (NOT a gas staion or something similar) a long drive trhough a park which, in fact, was a short cut to where he was going - but clearly not cutting across private property to avoid the traffic light. We talked at length and he called the City to get some further explanation. The City said that they had received complaints about the traffic driving through the park and were enforceing the "avoiding a traffic signal" law.

Clearly, this was not his intent, nor was it a flagrant violation such as whipping into a 7-11 or gas station to get around a red light. I told him to further inquire sine I believed that a park road is maintained by a taxing body (the park district) and was not neccessarily considered private. He had no luck with that argument, and the last I heard, he was going to just pay the $100 and be done with it. I'm glad he perservered and went to court. Actually, now there is a clear case for a class action suit from all those who got tickets fo this violation which is not a valid charge - based on the written ordinance or Illinois State Stautes - certainly not in keeking with the intent of the law - to stop drivers from cutting through gas stations, etc. to "avoid" a traffic control signal.

So, in my humble opinion (based on 30 years a as police officer and 24 years head of patrol/investigations/crime prevention divisions, and a trainer of tactics, and Illinois law), I believe my perspective was correct and that was proven out by the court decision. While, it is not neccessary to post signs at all private property, I believe the judge mad a correct decsion about no signs, since this was a park roadway, not a gas station next to a traffic light.

As stated in my earlier response, I'm glad Andy took the time to go to court and prevailed. This was simply a case of the local police being over-zeolous and/or sucombing to the whims of the local polotitions (chief, park district commisioneer whoever). It was a BAD ticket ----- wouldn't have happened under my watch :)

Sorry - too long and too personal -just had to say it......
 
FishingCop said:
It's none of my business, but since Popeye asked me privately about the ticket, I feel like I can respond. He got an ordinance violation ticket for driving through a park (NOT a gas staion or something similar) a long drive trhough a park which, in fact, was a short cut to where he was going - but clearly not cutting across private property to avoid the traffic light. We talked at length and he called the City to get some further explanation. The City said that they had received complaints about the traffic driving through the park and were enforceing the "avoiding a traffic signal" law.

Clearly, this was not his intent, nor was it a flagrant violation such as whipping into a 7-11 or gas station to get around a red light. I told him to further inquire sine I believed that a park road is maintained by a taxing body (the park district) and was not neccessarily considered private. He had no luck with that argument, and the last I heard, he was going to just pay the $100 and be done with it. I'm glad he perservered and went to court. Actually, now there is a clear case for a class action suit from all those who got tickets fo this violation which is not a valid charge - based on the written ordinance or Illinois State Stautes - certainly not in keeking with the intent of the law - to stop drivers from cutting through gas stations, etc. to "avoid" a traffic control signal.

So, in my humble opinion (based on 30 years a as police officer and 24 years head of patrol/investigations/crime prevention divisions, and a trainer of tactics, and Illinois law), I believe my perspective was correct and that was proven out by the court decision. While, it is not neccessary to post signs at all private property, I believe the judge mad a correct decsion about no signs, since this was a park roadway, not a gas station next to a traffic light.

As stated in my earlier response, I'm glad Andy took the time to go to court and prevailed. This was simply a case of the local police being over-zeolous and/or sucombing to the whims of the local polotitions (chief, park district commisioneer whoever). It was a BAD ticket ----- wouldn't have happened under my watch :)

Sorry - too long and too personal -just had to say it......


Very well said! =D>
 
FishingCop said:
It's none of my business, but since Popeye asked me privately about the ticket, I feel like I can respond. He got an ordinance violation ticket for driving through a park (NOT a gas staion or something similar) a long drive trhough a park which, in fact, was a short cut to where he was going - but clearly not cutting across private property to avoid the traffic light. We talked at length and he called the City to get some further explanation. The City said that they had received complaints about the traffic driving through the park and were enforceing the "avoiding a traffic signal" law.

Clearly, this was not his intent, nor was it a flagrant violation such as whipping into a 7-11 or gas station to get around a red light. I told him to further inquire sine I believed that a park road is maintained by a taxing body (the park district) and was not neccessarily considered private. He had no luck with that argument, and the last I heard, he was going to just pay the $100 and be done with it. I'm glad he perservered and went to court. Actually, now there is a clear case for a class action suit from all those who got tickets fo this violation which is not a valid charge - based on the written ordinance or Illinois State Stautes - certainly not in keeking with the intent of the law - to stop drivers from cutting through gas stations, etc. to "avoid" a traffic control signal.

So, in my humble opinion (based on 30 years a as police officer and 24 years head of patrol/investigations/crime prevention divisions, and a trainer of tactics, and Illinois law), I believe my perspective was correct and that was proven out by the court decision. While, it is not neccessary to post signs at all private property, I believe the judge mad a correct decsion about no signs, since this was a park roadway, not a gas station next to a traffic light.

As stated in my earlier response, I'm glad Andy took the time to go to court and prevailed. This was simply a case of the local police being over-zeolous and/or sucombing to the whims of the local polotitions (chief, park district commisioneer whoever). It was a BAD ticket ----- wouldn't have happened under my watch :)

Sorry - too long and too personal -just had to say it......

Thanks for the response Joe, I would have responded earlier myself but was out on the lake breaking in my new kicker motor (3 hours down, 7 to go).

The street I drove on (yes, a named street with a street sign) did cut through the park. By taking that route I did avoid having to sit through 2 short green arrows. This would be no different than taking a different route home from work because you didn't want to tavel through a certain section of town or a particular intersection. The citation was for avoiding a traffic control device and the wording in the statute says: It is unlawful for any person to leave the roadway and travel across private property to avoid an official traffic control device. If you think that what I did by driving on a public, named street, through a public park, during its operating hours, instead of going to the intersection supported that statute, then more power to you. The Prosecuter didn't think so, he asked to dismiss. the Judge didn't think so, she dismissed the charges. Only the Police Officer thought so, or he wouldn't have written the citation. If the Park district was that worried about it, then they should have the city put up a NO THRU TRAFFIC sign.

The thing that gets me, is just because you get a ticket, doesn't mean you are guilty. Officers make mistakes. I could have gotten it dismissed because of a technicality anyhow. The wrong statute was written on my citation and after the Judge dismissed the case I mentioned it to the Prosecuter and he concured that this Judge would have dismissed it for that reason as well. I feel better that it was dismissed for the right reason and not a technicality, but I would not have lost sleep over beating a ticket on a technicality either, sorry about that. That's just the way I am.
 
Justice prevails (most of the time :)

Nothing against the other posts that indicated they thought otherwise - they just didn't know the facts like I did from our PM's....

Oh yaeh, when we going fishing on the Fox Chain again???? =P~
 
Glad it worked out as you did nothing wrong. My wife got a ticket earlier this year for failure to yield to an emergency vehicle. A police officer had somebody pulled over and my wife was in the right hand lane on a hwy and had a semi next to her and one behind her so basically couldn't get over and couldn't slam on breaks with the other semi on her tale. Anyway she decided to just let off the gas and slow down as much as possible. Officer pulled her over and gave her a ticket and she told him her reasoning and that she had two kids in the back and wasn't going to put them in jeopardy. He told her to save it and here is a court date if you want to fight it, but you won't get off. Well she drove the two hours to court and they then set a court date. Had to go back again and had a trial. She told her side and the officer could not remember many of the details and they said they would let her know w/in 45 days. She got the official letter no guilty last week in the mail.
 
alumacraftjoe said:
Glad it worked out as you did nothing wrong. My wife got a ticket earlier this year for failure to yield to an emergency vehicle. A police officer had somebody pulled over and my wife was in the right hand lane on a hwy and had a semi next to her and one behind her so basically couldn't get over and couldn't slam on breaks with the other semi on her tale. Anyway she decided to just let off the gas and slow down as much as possible. Officer pulled her over and gave her a ticket and she told him her reasoning and that she had two kids in the back and wasn't going to put them in jeopardy. He told her to save it and here is a court date if you want to fight it, but you won't get off. Well she drove the two hours to court and they then set a court date. Had to go back again and had a trial. She told her side and the officer could not remember many of the details and they said they would let her know w/in 45 days. She got the official letter no guilty last week in the mail.

Officers are human too, and all to often the new (and usaully younger) officers only see things as black or white. Until they mature a little, they tend to enforce based on the law, rather than the totality of the circumstances. Also, city cops are different than County cops are different that State cops (Troopers). Also, many have quotas (which they might not admit to), so a violation is a ticket, no matter what the circumstances??? Just the way it is. That's why there is a check & balance (the court system) but, sometimes drivers don't take advantage of it. In Popeye's case, it's a good thing he did - bad enforcement for the wrong reasons in his case.

Oh yeah, I've had many a good ticket thrown out for no good reason except for a liberal judge - pisses me off the same as a cop writing a bad ticket - but, hey, we're only there to enforce the law and present the facts - can't worry about the final outcome in court - not our problem, not our job.....

One more thing (before I get off my soap opera) - a lot of tickets are written for revenue and/or because it is a traffic cop (like troopers who basically do nothing but traffic enforcement) as opposed to City cops who handle anything and everything from domestics, to hostage/barrricade, to robberys, to bar fights, etc., etc., etc., - so, my point is, the cops that only do traffic enforcement, aren't neccessarily generalists who deal with the multitude of police work and don't always get the maturity that comes with being a generaist officer. All they know is traffic, and they are expected to enfocre in an unbiases manner - thus, no discretion, no rational/mature reasoning - just a violation - a ticket.....

Whew, I'm done - hope I didn't ruffle featers, just my opinion :|
 
I stand corrected.... I miss read park and thought the cutting the corner parking lot deal.... that goes on all the time here
 
Unfortunately stuff like this happens all teh time - but there is no class action suit here, this woudl not form teh basis for such an action
 
Captain Ahab said:
Unfortunately stuff like this happens all teh time - but there is no class action suit here, this woudl not form teh basis for such an action

Why not Capt?? A lot of tickets were written unlawfully here? Just like a speed zone that doesn't meet the warrants or a stop sign that doesn't meet the warrants (as set forth in the IDOT manual (Illinois Department of Transportation) for traffic volumes, road sized/width, number of residents spaced a certain distance apart, etc., this is a clear case of a police department arbitrarily enforcing an incorrect statute because they decided they wanted to (because the Park District complained) without justification. What is missing for a class action? All those illegal tickets written with no justification? I'm certainly no lawyer, but it seems to me that this situaion would apply to a class action? If it is not too lengthy, please elaborate. Just curious. Thanks.
 
Popeye said:
A while ago I got a ticket for Avoiding a Traffic Control Device by driving through a city park. I publicly asked about it on another site and some of them told me to just pay the ticket and not fight it... To them (and all Nay-sayers), I say MALARKEY.

The charges were dropped. The prosecutor asked the issuing officer if there were any signs posted to indicate that thru traffic was prohibited through the park and the officer said there weren't. The prosecutor then told the Judge that he was moving to not prosecute. The Judge dropped the charges and told the officer they need to stop writing tickets for a non-offense. I'm a free man... WOO HOO!!!

Now, I wonder how many people paid the city the fine and ended up with points on their drivers license because they blindly just went along with the system.

Fishingcop and popeye, This was the origonal post. It actually had very little information, however the information that was there was that a citation had been issued for Avoiding a Traffic Control Device by driving through a city park. I simply asked in an earlier post if that was your / his intent (to avoid the device). I, like Fishingcop spent 34+ years as an inner city officer and watched thousands, yea thousands of people walk that were guilty. From murder to rape to minor traffic charges. It was merely a question, not intended to rile anyone. As stated if you weren't guilty then great, the legal system worked. One point guys, we all see stuff on TV that shows cops beating suspects and suspects getting away with crime due to loopholes but, BUT BUT unless you have walked in a cops shoes for 30+ years you really have no clue. It is worse than you think. If apologies are in order consider them rendered, no malice was intended.
 
[/quote] I, like Fishingcop spent 34+ years as an inner city officer and watched thousands, yea thousands of people walk that were guilty. From murder to rape to minor traffic charges. It was merely a question, not intended to rile anyone. As stated if you weren't guilty then great, the legal system worked. One point guys, we all see stuff on TV that shows cops beating suspects and suspects getting away with crime due to loopholes but, BUT BUT unless you have walked in a cops shoes for 30+ years you really have no clue. It is worse than you think. If apologies are in order consider them rendered, no malice was intended.[/quote]



None taken Dunk (and no apologies are in order from my perspective) it just looked like the whole story needed to be posted and the facts needed to come out. Once they did, I think everyone understands that this was a wrong deal for Popeye.
 
dunk50 said:
I simply asked in an earlier post if that was your / his intent (to avoid the device).

Regardless as to whether or not my intention was to not sit through two slow green left turn arrows by going through the park really shouldn't matter, should it? The road is a public road. If you drive home from work every day and have to make a left turn at a particular intersection, but one day you turn left a block early and then a right at the next block and then turn left onto your street and if these were all public streets, was there a violation? Both the Prosecuter and Judge in this case didn't think so. The fact that this road goes through a park is clouding the issue I think.
 

Latest posts

Top