In Mass., it will now cost you $25 to fight a ticket. by Wulfenstar

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

In Mass., it will now cost you $25 to fight a ticket.

POSTED BY: WULFENSTAR
UPDATED: Thursday, July 2, 2009 08:05
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 383
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, July 2, 2009 6:31 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

http://www.telegram.com/article/20090702/NEWS/907020697/1116

So, even if its shown that you are not guilty, the state will still take money from you.

Wow. Great going.

You know, it occurs to me that this is all of our fault. We elect (or reelect) these corrupt politicians, and then we get what we deserve.

Reap what you sow, chickens coming home to roost, ect ect.

Americans, my countrymen, we really need to start caring who is in power and WATCHING what they do. We need to stop these bastards.

Before its too late, and we HAVE to fight.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 2, 2009 7:22 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Don't whine about it, DO something.

I got thrown out of court yesterday, by a jewish judge who says "a weekly public access TV news show broadcasting a court trial is not TV news". Never mind that I already broadcast several hours of court hearings in this same case, that I'm featured monthly on History Channel, won 2 awards in Hollywood, and found the 5-million missing White House emails.

That was the redlight camera sniper trial of Clifford Clark, where all ballistics evidence was destroyed by police and prosecutors with apprival of the judge. All audio recordings were destroyed by police and prosecutors, to allow cops to testily about non-existant confessions and consent to search car and home. The defense lawyer has proof that Knox County deputy sheriffs are the real redlight snipers, since deputies are confessing to these crimes (good for them). WBIR TV was allowed to stay in the courtroom, since the judge knows they will censor the "news" into 15-second soundbites, rather than my TV broadcast of entir court hearings without edit. WBIR News Director refused to sell me a copy of their tape.
www.piratenews.org/kill-robocops.html

I'm also campaigning for city judge in the next selection.

I'll enforce the constitutions, to dismiss all traffic tickets sui sponte. Then it will cost the city municipal corporation $600 appeal bond to sue each ticket in a real court. With 200,000 annual traffic tickets sued against the 160,000 residents of Knoxville TN, that's gonna cost em $120-million ante per year to gamble on traffic court.

75% of all judges are not licensed lawyers in USA:
http://piratenews-tv.blogspot.com/2009/03/constitutional-right-to-trav
el-without.html

Murdoch CEO Labels Bloggers “Political Extremists”
www.infowars.com/murdoch-ceo-labels-bloggers-political-extremists/

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 2, 2009 8:01 AM

HERO

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20090702/NEWS/907020697/1116

So, even if its shown that you are not guilty, the state will still take money from you.

The article refers to Civil or Administrative tickets.

In these hearings you are given a "civil penalty" which works like a judgement in a civil case. In such a case you can appeal the ticket, but in doing so you are found "not responsible" rather then "not guilty". You can't be guilty in a civil case, because you are not charged with a crime...in this case you are being assessed a penalty for failure to comply with an administrative rule, such as a zoning violation or having a sign that's too big.

There is case law that would prevent you from being fined or made to pay costs in criminal/traffic cases. Civil cases have no such prohibition. Thats because traditionally civil processes were never used to enforce traffic laws.

I never agree with PN about anything. So believe me when I tell you that I believe this is an abuse of process. I would not pay such a ticket and would take it to the Supreme Court (of Ohio). Why?

In a traffic case (speeding for example) I, the Prosecutor, must prove the Officer was on duty, in uniform, in a marked cruiser, that the offense was observed in my City, County, and State, that officer had training, that the speed measuring device was being operated properly by someone trained to use it, that it had been tested that day prior to the stop, and that the Defendant was the person driving.

In Akron they have those camera speed traps where they measure your speed, snap a photo of the car and send a ticket to the registered owner. They require NONE of the proof I mentioned above because it is an administrative process. If you want to appeal you get to talk to an administrative judge appointed by the City, rather then a neutral magistrate, who most often finds against you. There is no further appeal.

Some argue this is no different then Mayor's Courts, where the magistrate is appointed or the Mayor sits and decides cases. The difference is a Mayor's Court is a part of the court system. The same evidenciary standards apply, with a right to appeal to the local Municipal Court, Circuit Court of Appeal, and Ohio Supreme Court.

It is an abuse and certainly unconstitutional to deny a person the protections of the Criminal Rules of Procedure, the Rules of Evidence, a neutral magistrate, and routine review of the process by an appellate court.

Administrative proceedings have their role...traffic enforcement isn't one of them.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, July 2, 2009 8:05 AM

CHRISISALL

Wow, thanks for that most important info, Hero!

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE