| RayVega |
08-03-2006 11:22 AM |
Ok, since I am the only (or one of the only few) people on this board who has spent several years as a sworn law enforcement officer with the NYPD, I can tell you exactly what happened. I'm going to base this on NY law, but I bet it is very similar where you are.
To give a Ticket for a violation (red light, stop sign, speeding up 20 mi over) a cop can never leave your line of sight. In other words he cannot see you run a red light, lose you but see you later and give you a ticket. He must be in visible pursuit until he stops you for a violation. Of course cops often stretch the truth on the report about this...:winkwink:
However, this officer just articulated that your driving was reckless, bumping it from a violation to a midermeaner charge. Whith a reckless driving (Misdemeanor) charge a cop can engage in an investigation to find you (ex: going back to the restaurant, running you plate,or name from the receipt etc. to get an address) make a visual determination once he finds your house, that it was your car and issue a DAT (Desk Appearance ticket) which is not the same as a speeding ticket, it is a summons to appear in "criminal" court in lieu of arrest rather than traffic court like a speeding ticket. He can do that based on his (or a credible) witness' testimony meaning he literally does not have to see it, a "good solid" witness is enough.
Now the DA can get this info and immediately knock it down to a violation speading and send that to you in the mail which would explain getting it in the mail if it is considered a violation (and not a "criminal, misd) where you live. Since the investigation was done in finding you under the pretense of a misdermeanor it is ok that you left his line of sight since up until the point you where charged with it, it was going to be a Misd. in the Officers investigation. in this case he used Good faith in his attempt to get the summons to you and it will stand in court if he testifies.
You friends defense is to inject doubt in the judges eyes that the officers witness of the incident is credible. He needs to talk about it being far away from the officer, that there was sand on the road causing him to "peal out", that there were no intersections nearby and that he was never out of control of the car. In otherwords make it seem that from the cops point of view it may have looked like he did something dangerous, but he only slipped on some sand and never broke the speed limit, the sand blown up must have blocked out the lights of the cop car... That doubt will most likely get it thrown out. Of course past driving history will either help or hurt him.
Good luck to him
|
