View Full Version : Policeman on his own.
On saturday i got pulled over while being on the telephone, the guy gave me a ticket and asked me to submit my licence to the police station so it could get indorsed with 3 points.
Does anyone think if i rejected his claim i was on the phone a chose to take the court action route would his word against mine win in court, i would tell the court i was not on the phone?
cruise4
02-02-2009, 10:31 AM
Yes, he'd win unless you knew exactly what you were doing. Courts are scams in action and judges are some of the biggest crooks out there. He'll also be able to get a record of your call. What you should of done was run the cunt over. The time will come when everyone will wish they had I reckon.
localidiot
02-02-2009, 10:34 AM
Depends on what kind of jury you get, I would imagine.
Though depending on the fees associated with it, you may as well just go with it since you were on the phone.
If you show a track record of going along with convictions you feel were warranted, you'll get more attention if you contest a truly false one.
lynfowars
02-02-2009, 10:37 AM
Why do you want off the punishment?
Do you feel hard done-by? Or that not concentrating while driving is okay?
cruise4
02-02-2009, 10:40 AM
"Do you feel hard done-by? Or that not concentrating while driving is okay?"
Gordon Bennett, you are programmed to the hilt.
number_6
02-02-2009, 10:46 AM
Courts are scams in action and judges are some of the biggest crooks out there.
So even though the OP was on the 'phone, it is the Court and the Judges that are the crooks?
Depends on what kind of jury you get, I would imagine.
If this was in the UK, it will be magistrates, not a jury. Magistrates in 99% of cases believe the police over a defendant. It would be tricky to defend.
lynfowars
02-02-2009, 10:46 AM
I had a front-on with an ar5hole who was 'on the phone'
If he had anything bigger than that Corsa I'd be toast.
'nuff said?
Indeed it was a mistake but the original question was could i get off with it.
I know i did wrong but 3 points is harsh.
localidiot
02-02-2009, 11:03 AM
If this was in the UK, it will be magistrates, not a jury. Magistrates in 99% of cases believe the police over a defendant. It would be tricky to defend.
Ah, generally it's the same here with juries. The issue I've seen is generally the defendant digs themselves a hole while being questioned. (Last jury duty I pulled, the fellow was passed out drunk in his car prior to driving home, something he freely admitted.)
The best defense would be to state it was a emergency call.
However, if it clearly wasn't and you didn't state to the officer who gave you the ticket that the call was of extreme importance in some manner, then there's probably no way to contest it.
Since it is against the law, and the officer was fully within his station giving you the ticket, then I wouldn't recommend making life any more difficult for the either of you.
willard
02-02-2009, 11:06 AM
Don't give them a leg to stand on.
Ok people thank you for you advice today.
eric_blair
02-02-2009, 02:01 PM
sorry m0et but from my experience youve got 2 chances of getting off
none and fook all
They would firstly probably lie, bully you into admitting it, say you hit him/her add charges, threaten to put a "marker" on your car etc etc
Any judge or Magistrate will believe the rozzer 99.9% of the time over a defendant even if he says its raining pink Rottweilers
if it comes to it they will just ask for a copy of your phone records to prove you were using it and charge you for their time
all basically adding up to more hassle and financial cost than you would get for the 3 points
sometimes better to lose a battle to win the war ;)
godspeed
02-02-2009, 02:31 PM
you gave your power away by consent next time dont consent to the cop at all...but i think its a bit harsh that you get 3 penalty points too after all you never caused an accident or anything....therefor its tyrannical eh....:(
joy division
02-02-2009, 03:48 PM
get a hands free before you kill an innocent family.
That will haunt you forever.
number_6
02-02-2009, 04:47 PM
...but i think its a bit harsh that you get 3 penalty points
Not really, as everyone knows now that it carries three points.
haukipesukone
02-02-2009, 05:22 PM
Why do you want off the punishment?
Do you feel hard done-by? Or that not concentrating while driving is okay?
Not wanting to get punished due to some idiotic law you never agreed to sounds very natural to me. You're allowed to play with the radio, eat, masturbate or whatever while driving, but talking on the phone is a no-no, because they had to sell some hands-free crap-devices.
That's why Cruise's suggestion of running the cunt over sounds like a viable option.
orbandsceptre27
02-02-2009, 06:14 PM
get a hands free before you kill an innocent family.
That will haunt you forever.
- Here here!
The evil cop pulled you over to protect others (and yourself by the way) and now you want to lie about it in court - some people ehh...!
grannymoose
02-02-2009, 10:37 PM
Indeed it was a mistake but the original question was could i get off with it.
I know i did wrong but 3 points is harsh.
no chap it's not harsh!, it's better to have points then some ones head all over your window, some rules are there because they need to be.
cruise4
02-02-2009, 10:56 PM
"So even though the OP was on the 'phone, it is the Court and the Judges that are the crooks?"
You need to go further back and realise how transport policy, road policy, congestion, pipe laying, free energy, phone design, vehicle design, phones at all and a 1001 other things all come into the picture. All designed to produce simpleton responses to ever more draconian laws and enforced by criminals. The REACTION part of problem reaction solution is what you are currently doing. I'm seeing straight through it. It's another manipulation and you fall for it. Not helpful at all. As regards Courts and Judges... I'm afraid the whole setup is total tyranny, foolishness, nonsense and corrupt. First hand knowledge. You'll get it in the end and then you'll realise what's really going on.
3stepsahead
02-02-2009, 11:09 PM
On saturday i got pulled over while being on the telephone, the guy gave me a ticket and asked me to submit my licence to the police station so it could get indorsed with 3 points.
Does anyone think if i rejected his claim i was on the phone a chose to take the court action route would his word against mine win in court, i would tell the court i was not on the phone?
being a motorist you have a responsebility, and id rather see you behind bars or whatever than run me over caus you was chatting it off with your mate.
so you should probably learn by this. please say that you have.
:D
elysiumfire
03-02-2009, 01:23 AM
Personally, I think the 'OP' was caught fair-handed, which he admits, so take the punishment. If you don't want to have 3 points endorsed on your license, then perhaps you shouldn't break the punitive law, or if you must, then do it out of sight where you won't get caught.
Many people believe they can please themselves, do what they want, and to hell with the consequences. In this particular case, no one was injured apart from the 'OP's' pride, but we can rationalize a different scenario, one where the 'OP' knocks someone down whilst talking on his mobile. Yes, it's an extreme example, but what tears (if any) would the 'OP' shed for the victim. Perhaps, he would post to a forum and seek advice on how to escape feeling guilty for causing harm to a person whom had the misfortune to meet him?
"Oh! I didn't mean to!" He cries. "I'm not a bad person...Oh Shit! Jeez...oh Christ!...I'M DONE FOR! Me, ME, ME!" Forgetting all about the victim, almost blaming that person for causing the injury. With a warped and panicky rationale, he twists and sheds the blame and anger onto the victim, a classic case of guilt transference. It's sickening.
I tell you, this is one area of human behaviour that I fully support the law in protecting others from pricks like these. As for drink-drivers, it should be an automatic ban for life, and at least 3/5 years in prison. Perhaps then, others will get the message and drive responsibily. Perhaps, with 3 points on his license, the 'OP' won't be using his phone whilst driving? You reap what you sow...so don't scrike and blubber.
cruise4
03-02-2009, 02:35 AM
Why are pavements next to roads? You are entrapped into thinking this is all OK. So be it. Fascist dictatorship is your choice. It's not mine. Modern society is planned and people manipulated into allowing such nonsense scenarios. It's as simple as that. Bite it and regret it. Not me. I'll do what I want and adhere to harm no-one and no-thing. It's called personal responsiblity. No law necessary. What IS, shouldn't be, and what isn't should be. I like what isn't. You judge on what might have been. On that basis you could all be judged. I suspect we will be. Especially when invited in. How about wait until something actually HAPPENS and then serve JUSTICE? You will all learn the hard way.
How about everyone who has ever worked and brought us to the point of ruin facing your law? How about car inventors facing the penalty for death machines? How about charging voters? How about Mobile phone inventors and distributors as accessories? How far do you people want to go into this fascism, control and dictated bollocks? You see it never stops. We are ALL guilty in pre-crime on a whim. Once there were accidents. There is precious little moving forward in perception here. The Aborigini was MORE advanced than we are. Can anyone actually understand this? (I know some can).