Can cops speed without their lights/siren on?

[newtothis]

Appearently you also have a Reading Handicap...

I like Cops, just not bad ones...
I have no issue with speeders, well I don't like those speeders that are using chemicals (Meth Heads for those here that are a little on the slow side)...
The only farging then you said that was even correct was I don't like those that Abuse their Authority, and who really does like that grouping of Persons?!

How about before you attempt to correct someone you at least read what they have posted.

I read your posts. Regardless of what you may have meant, it can be easily perceived that you are a negative nancy in regards to the three groups I listed. Perception in many instances is reality.

As for the reading handicap... its a protected disability, right? In all seriousness, I took the time to read what you wrote and found it to be ridden of gripes and groans.

I read, and responded in a manner deemed appropriate. Thanks for comin out to play.

 

[SirRealism]

I read your posts. Regardless of what you may have meant, it can be easily perceived that you are a negative nancy in regards to the three groups I listed. Perception in many instances is reality.

As for the reading handicap... its a protected disability, right? In all seriousness, I took the time to read what you wrote and found it to be ridden of gripes and groans.

I read, and responded in a manner deemed appropriate. Thanks for comin out to play.

I've been reading his posts for years, and although I've never met him, I'm guessing he's about as even-handed as they come. I doubt he gives two ****s about perception.

You must be new to this.

 

[jeremy]

I read your posts. Regardless of what you may have meant, it can be easily perceived that you are a negative nancy in regards to the three groups I listed. Perception in many instances is reality.

As for the reading handicap... its a protected disability, right? In all seriousness, I took the time to read what you wrote and found it to be ridden of gripes and groans.

I read, and responded in a manner deemed appropriate. Thanks for comin out to play.

You remind me of a Howler Monkey...

Loud as Hell...
And you throw a lot of Feces around...

 

[joslar15]

I've been reading his posts for years, and although I've never met him, I'm guessing he's about as even-handed as they come. I doubt he gives two ****s about perception.

You must be new to this.

Well he's only been here since July and 369 posts ... Gotta love that noobie swagger!

 

[IndianaGTI]

Traffic infractions only require a good faith belief on the part of the officer to be found guilty. The proof beyond a reasonable doubt criteria is reserved for crimes.

Traffic infractions do not require a good faith belief on the part of the officer to be found guilty. Traffic infractions require proof by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant was actually speeding.

 

[phylodog]

Traffic infractions do not require a good faith belief on the part of the officer to be found guilty. Traffic infractions require proof by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant was actually speeding.

Mmmkay. I've heard those words come from the mouth of a traffic court judge while explaining to someone why they did not win their argument. The good faith belief of the officer is a preponderance of the evidence since nothing else is required in most instances.

 

[newtothis]

You remind me of a Howler Monkey...

Loud as Hell...
And you throw a lot of Feces around...

Thanks for comin out, chief.

 

[ryanbr]

Simple he new his speed because the officer paced him after he was passed. Perfectly legal, you dont have to be clocked by Radar.
to the OP, do you have points on your license already? dont believe your ins. will go up for one citation. if you are worried about that contact the prosecutor and request pre trial diversion. going to cost a little more but you are going to be paying anyway the way I see it. just my thoughts.

 

[jeremy]

Thanks for comin out, chief.

Took you a whole month to come up with that little jewel...



P.S. I am not a Chief, I work for a living...

 

[snowman46919]

Simple he new his speed because the officer paced him after he was passed. Perfectly legal, you dont have to be clocked by Radar.
to the OP, do you have points on your license already? dont believe your ins. will go up for one citation. if you are worried about that contact the prosecutor and request pre trial diversion. going to cost a little more but you are going to be paying anyway the way I see it. just my thoughts.

if you dont think your insurance will go up for one citation your sorely mistaken, my premiums just jumped because of one citation.

 

[Fargo]

Mmmkay. I've heard those words come from the mouth of a traffic court judge while explaining to someone why they did not win their argument. The good faith belief of the officer is a preponderance of the evidence since nothing else is required in most instances.

That wouldn't have been Judge Young up at the Marion Co. traffic court would it? He was recently suspended from his position and disciplined by the Indiana Supreme Court in part for saying exactly what you said. As such, I'd take that statement with a grain of salt.

IndianaGTI is correct, the standard is preponderance. Good faith belief is what is required to make a stop, not get a conviction.

Best,

Joe

 

[Denny347]

That wouldn't have been Judge Young up at the Marion Co. traffic court would it? He was recently suspended from his position and disciplined by the Indiana Supreme Court in part for saying exactly what you said. As such, I'd take that statement with a grain of salt.

IndianaGTI is correct, the standard is preponderance. Good faith belief is what is required to make a stop, not get a conviction.

Best,

Joe

51% is what is needed...just like a civil case...which is what a "vanilla" traffic infraction is.

 

[Kutnupe14]

That wouldn't have been Judge Young up at the Marion Co. traffic court would it? He was recently suspended from his position and disciplined by the Indiana Supreme Court in part for saying exactly what you said. As such, I'd take that statement with a grain of salt.

IndianaGTI is correct, the standard is preponderance. Good faith belief is what is required to make a stop, not get a conviction.

Best,

Joe

Judge Young is an AWESOME judge. Back in his days in Court 20, he put a guy on probation and that was their ONE chance at getting their act straight. If they messed up, off to prison they'd go. How he goes from a high felony court to traffic has always baffled me.

 

[Fargo]

51% is what is needed...just like a civil case...which is what a "vanilla" traffic infraction is.

Yes, preponderance of the evidence is normally described as a "more likely than not" or >50% standard. However, it is most certainly not interchangeable with "good faith belief by the officer."

It is set by IC 34-28-5-1(e):

e) The plaintiff in an action under this chapter must prove the commission of an infraction or ordinance violation by a preponderance of the evidence.

The below link is to how Judge Young got a 30 day unpaid suspension in part for misrepresenting this very burden of proof:

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/02141101per.pdf

Judge Young is an AWESOME judge. Back in his days in Court 20, he put a guy on probation and that was their ONE chance at getting their act straight. If they messed up, off to prison they'd go. How he goes from a high felony court to traffic has always baffled me.

While I have heard good things about him in his felony days, he was a horrible traffic judge and brought both the judiciary and Law Enforcement in general into disrepute.

Read the above opinion. He admitted to misstating the law, ignoring mandatory sentence considerations, imposing penalties for exercising constitutional rights, and prejudging cases.

That is all aside from the Hollingsworth case in which his behavior was despicable at best.

Heck, there are multiple statute's now on the books regulating traffic courts and fines for the sole reason that his behavior was so outrageous.

IMO, he should have been removed from the bench and lost his license to practice. There are few things worse than a judge who dishonors his oath.

Joe

 

[Kutnupe14]

While I have heard good things about him in his felony days, he was a horrible traffic judge and brought both the judiciary and Law Enforcement in general into disrepute.

Read the above opinion. He admitted to misstating the law, ignoring mandatory sentence considerations, imposing penalties for exercising constitutional rights, and prejudging cases.

That is all aside from the Hollingsworth case in which his behavior was despicable at best.

Heck, there are multiple statute's now on the books regulating traffic courts and fines for the sole reason that his behavior was so outrageous.

IMO, he should have been removed from the bench and lost his license to practice. There are few things worse than a bad judge.

Joe

You could be 100% correct, I haven't kept up with him since my probation days, and honestly I was just starting to understand criminal law at that time. As a young man just out of college, I just enjoyed seeing him stand by his word in that if you messed up the chance you were given (probation) you were toast.

 

[Fargo]

You could be 100% correct, I haven't kept up with him since my probation days, and honestly I was just starting to understand criminal law at that time. As a young man just out of college, I just enjoyed seeing him stand by his word in that if you messed up the chance you were given (probation) you were toast.

Don't get me wrong, I love a judge who keeps his promises on probation violations and I love a judge who holds his probationers accountable. In that regard, I applaud him.

That said, he did a terrible amount of damage to both the judiciary and Law Enforcement with his antics in traffic court.

Traffic court is where the majority of good citizens have their ONLY interaction with the courts and law enforcement as witnesses. When you treat people the way Judge Young did and require very little accountability of Law Enforcement, you alienate all those good people whose only offense was some petty traffic violation.

Then, when it comes to sitting on a felony jury or helping the police or law enforcement out, those citizens view everything through the lens of how they were treated in that court. They don't trust the judge, they don't trust the police, and they don't trust the legal system.

As a former Marion Co. homicide prosecutor once told me, Marion County has a huge problem with getting quality jurors. However, that is in some ways a self-created problem.

Best,

Joe