Irish Male2 - Excellent point
[QUOTE=Irish Male2]It's interesting and intriguing that 1) an attorney would actually let us all know that he or she is an attorney, and even more interesting and intriguing that 2) an attorney would actually let us all know that he or she worked in the DA's office and would go even further and let us all know that it was 3) in the Pinellas County DA's office. But, hey, stranger things have happened.
[/QUOTE]
Most excellent point. In my capacity as a layman and Internet rat, I googled the following phrase (with quotes) - "License Plate Scanners" - quite a few links are found. JW states "A law enforcement officer can not look up a vehicles tag without probable cause, even if they follow you for 20 blocks."
Nonsense. If that were true, the companies who make the automated LPSs wouldn't be able to sell their product. I noticed that JW also did NOT specifically reference statute or case law that says otherwise.
Civil libertarians are concerned about what LE will do with the collected info. The answer is NOTHING. There is simply too much data.
Here's one of the links that I found: [url]http://www.wikio.com/article/99624865[/url]
Note the last sentence: Police have emphasized the scanning system does not run a full background check on every tag, as it would overload the database system.
I've been in the computer field for over 20 years. I've been a data analyst, programmer analyst, data center manager, and network administrator. I can vouch for the database overload. LE just does not have the budget to do more than selectively process a minimal amount of data.
I look forward to reading the statutes and case law as soon as JW provides them.
Malabar
Traffic Stop - Traffic Court
A little off the beaten path but worth the read. Had reason to be in SC for traffic court and made the following observations.
1-The uniform traffic ticket used by SC clearly states on the back you can request a jury trial in writing before the appearance date on your ticket. This will release you from having to go to court on the date designated on the ticket.
2-The judge said in opening remarks that defendants will be asked how they plead. He also said you can plead guilty, not guilty and have a single judge trial, or not guilty and request a jury trial. He advised those who would consider a jury trial to consider seeking legal representation for such a trial.
3-In some instances, after the judge listened to the ticketing officer testify to what happened he then asked the defendant what their side of the story was. He conveniently forgot in a few occasions to ask how they plead first. After the defendant told his side of the story the judge found him guilty and issued a fine that was often reduced from the maximum fine he could issue. I guess they think this takes the sting off being found guilty.
4-In one instance the ticketing officer asked, after the defendant gave his side of the story, for permission to cross examine the defendant. The judge of course granted permission. This does not happen often. However, the defendant has the right to cross examine the officer too but no one asked for that opportunity. This is too often overlooked by defendants in traffic court.
5-Every single defendant responded to the judge’s inquiry about his or her side of the story. Not one said I plead not guilty and request a jury trial. One defendant in a group of four pleaded not guilty and then proceeded to tell his story. He didn’t realize, as the rest who appeared that day didn’t realize, that if you plead guilty and begin telling your story, you are testifying and have acquiesced to a single judge trial. When he was fined, he said incredulously, “but I pleaded not guilty your honor.” The judge said, “I know, and I found you guilty based on your testimony and that of the officer.” End of story. Should have said I plead not guilty and request to be placed on the jury trial docket.
6-There are reasons to request a jury trial in a traffic case but if you do not, listen very carefully to the judge’s opening remarks and remember them. Then use them to your advantage.
7-Reasons for requesting a jury trial are you will be able to ask for discovery. You may find out there is no tape of the alleged violation or of the stop. You may find out that the vision of the camera was impeded by larger vehicle if you are charged with something that may have occurred while the officer was behind the larger vehicle and you were ahead of it. This is especially important if you have witnesses who disagree with the officer’s testimony.
8-Based on what I saw in SC, do not think that you will receive much if anything in the way of a break. Not from the officer and not from the judge.
9-Read the front and back of your ticket carefully. Be sure the date and day are correct, even if it doesn’t help your case. In a jury trial it may help in closing to prove the officer is sloppy in his or her work so how can you (the jury) be certain beyond a reasonable doubt that anything else he did or has said is reliable. Also, be alert to how the weather or condition of the pavement is described on the ticket. If it had rained at 7 in the morning but when you are stopped at, say, 10 AM and the pavement is barely damp but the officer describes the weather as rain or the road as wet versus damp, find a way to prove the description is wrong. The local paper, radio station, TV station can probably provide you with this information. Start preparing your defense as soon as the stop is over. Get witness statements right away.
10-Look up the law you are charged with having violated. Some laws are so ambiguous as to give ticketing officers probable cause for just about anything. For instance, Chapter 56-5-1900 is ambiguous enough to give an officer probable cause to pull you over for changing lanes. That can lead to a lot of other things.
11-It’s been posted many times here before but be very careful what you say when stopped if you say anything at all. Be cooperative and respectful but don’t be tricked by a friendly officer who asks you how you are doing today, then asks where you were going, then says in a very friendly voice can you tell me why you rolled through that stop sign, or why you changed lanes without signaling? Answering those questions, especially if the stop is being recorded, could amount to an admission of guilt. You may not have rolled through the sign and you may have signaled but the officer didn’t see it. By the time you get to court you may very well have forgotten just whether you did or did not stop or did or did not signal.
12-Being firm in standing your ground may be uncomfortable and may raise the ire of the officer. It will be up to you to decide if you want to say in a respectful way that you prefer not to answer any questions without an attorney present. You will probably be met with the response “what do you have to hide?” You can say you have nothing to hide but you have just answered a question without an attorney present and that can lead to further answers you did not intend to give. You can also answer that question with the same response that you prefer not to answer any questions without an attorney present. Be prepared for a lengthier stop and even some pressure and intimidation by the officer, so you need to be sure you really want to do this.
Going to traffic court can be frustrating and one can feel they can do nothing even if they are convinced they are not guilty. But before you decide that, read the ticket front and back, determine if you think a jury trial is the better forum, and most of all determine if you need legal representation. The cost of representation may be more than the fine but it’s a right we all have and we have the freedom to choose or not choose legal representation. Most of all be very careful what you say during a stop.
Miranda warning (right to remain silent) cops are not required to give warning
Miranda warning (right to remain silent) cops are not required to give warning
([url]http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20100603/OPINION01/306039980[/url] )
The US Supreme court ruled that cops no longer have to inform you of your right to remain silent. The cops can also try and question you repeatedly after you request a lawyer.
I was wondering how successful people have been in fighting intent to solicit cases.?
Loitering with intent to solicit 653.22 case outcomes?
I was wondering how successful people have been in fighting intent to solicit cases. Some lawyers have told me that the the will usually drop the case when they see that guys are willing to take the case to a jury trial.
Human trafficking task force funds
i think the federal human trafficking task force [url]https://www.ovcttac.gov/taskforceguide/eguide/default.aspx[/url]) money is being misused by local police dept's. the money is supposed to be used for combating human trafficking / human slavery and minors involved in prostitution. the documents refer primarily to women that are brought into the us for prostitution. about 99. 99% of the sw's are us citizens. now there are some **** prostitutes on the streets. so if this the problem why isn't the cops and the feds targeting these people. la has a estimated 120, 000 gang members ([url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/gang_population[/url] ). we often here how the cops are undermanned. so why are they wasting so much resources on working girls. the answer is because it's a much more low risk crime to enforce. prostitutes do not carry guns. very rarely do you hear of a sw pulling a gun.
