Ok I see what you are saying now. No I don’t think it is good practice to write tickets for something that did not occur. Some do that but I won’t. Too much oppurtunity to have someone fight it and try to ruin my career. But there is nothing wrong with writing for a lesser offense that did occur.
Ah, definitely a different question than what I answered. I agree with you that writing a ticket for an offense that didn’t occur is a bad thing. My impression is that cops often have a multiple number of possible offenses that they could charge you with but I’m sure that’s not always the case.
Loach, can you reduce the observed speed when writing a ticket if you are using a radar gun? Or are you stuck using the number that shows up on the readout?
I don’t but one could.
I’m going to step outside of the main train of thought here and suggest that the cop likely didn’t cut you a break at all.
When I was a teenager, me and a friend took a short day trip to the mountains in his land yacht. On the way home my friend got a bit inattentive and between being driving downhill in such a heavy car with a big block V8 and there not being any other cars to pace, he ended up getting pulled over by a cop in an unmarked car doing about 115mph as we entered Phoenix.
The cop said all the usual stuff, do you know why I pulled you over, do you know how fast you were going, do you know what the speed limit is, etc. My friend was very calm and polite but didn’t admit to anything. The cop said he clocked him at over 90mph and he should arrest him and take him to jail but since he’s such a nice guy and he had other things to do that night he’d write him up for 19mph over, 84mph, which is not a criminal ticket. He added the caveat that if my friend tried to fight the ticket he would retroactively write him a ticket for 95 and come to his house to arrest him for criminal speeding.
My friend had fully intended to just go to traffic school and be done with it until that point. The whole idea of punishing someone for exercising their right to due process under the law made him pretty mad. When he took the ticket home and looked at it, there was nothing checked in the section for how the cop had measured the speed. We blew past the cop, he wasn’t stationary so he couldn’t have used radar or lidar or anything. He didn’t have time to pace us, we blew past him and he turned on the lights without catching up to match our speed first. By the time he was near us again we were driving way under the speed limit on an offramp to pull over somewhere safer than the shoulder.
My friend requested a court date and the cop didn’t do anything, including showing up at court. The ticket was dismissed.
Gotcha, that makes sense.
I’m not approaching it from the perspective of a speeder who thinks the cop is trying to screw him, by the way. I’m approaching it from the perspective of someone who doesn’t want speeders endangering his life on the highway, and who appreciates cops stopping speeders and deterring them. Notice Lazlo’s post about being a chronic speeder who keeps getting warnings. They don’t sound like they’re having nearly the deterrent effect on him that a couple of by-the-book tickets would have.
That kind of cop is trash. If he attempts to get a warrant approved on that basis, I seriously doubt any reputable Judge or authorized person would sign one.
Most states mandate for a warrantless arrest to take place for a Misdemeanor, the offense not only must be committed in the presence of the officer, but it must be contemporaneous.
For the record, I don’t think proper citations would either. 
No, I did not miss the point, not even nearly. The point is that the OP was ticketed for inattentive driving. Presumably, the ticketing officer could defend that decision in court. The ticketing officer, according to the OP, decided to cut the OP a break on what offense would be listed on the citation. The break cut was for a cheaper ticket, and apparently one that will not jack up his insurance costs and place points on his license.
Agreed. It may have cost you a little more money on the fine, but he cut you a big piece of slack on the back end by not jacking up your insurance rates.
Let me clear up a couple of mistakes. I will not comment on the cops motivation because I can not know it. But I will tell you for certain that the cop does not have to be stationary to measure your speed. Radar units have moving modes. It measures the speed of the police car and the speed of the approaching car and shows the result. So it was likely that he knew exactly how fast you were going. And as I say in almost every speeding thread, do not count on a ticket being dismissed because the cop does not show up. In my department we are not allowed to show up on your first appearance. We are only ordered in when there will be a trial. Which will be your second or third appearance.
Okay, since I’ve gone ahead and paid the ticket, hence “admitting guilt,” I’ll cop to the speeding.
Yes, I was going faster than the speed limit of 35 on a divided 4-lane boulevard. I don’t know about the 49 he wrote on the ticket, but whatever.
My point, and concern when starting tis thread, was that I was charged with an offense that was categorized as an “accident” when there was clearly no such thing, and that the associated fine was significantly higher than the straight-up fine for speeding, by 27%, in fact.
So yes, sure, he was “saving me money” in the long term, but he was also, and more likely primarily, maximizing the revenue stream for the municipality.
I have no problem taking my medicine, I’ve paid every ticket I’ve ever gotten because I earned them fair and square (except this one, 'natch), but don’t claim that the police officer was only interested in an act of kindness to a stranger and that there was no incentive to rack up cash by way of elevated fines.
I know this always falls on deaf ears but I’ll try it again. I have no idea where you live. I do know that around here it has nothing to do with the revenue stream of the municipality. The state takes such a disproportionate amount of the revenue there is no pressure to write bigger fines. You are talking about pennies. No one cares how much money the state makes, we see very little of it. I’m not saying that is exactly how it is where you live but I’m just pointing out your assumptions may be way off base.
As to if he was correct legally to use that statute I am assuming he is because it made it through the court. I could read the statute and make assumptions from that but I really wouldn’t know if it was correct without knowing the precedents. That is much harder to find. For example we had a statute very similar to that one. The prosecutors across the state used it to make plea bargains. It was perfectly fine for years. Then one day the state assignment judge said it wasn’t ok and the statute could no longer be used that way. When it comes to things like this the answers are often not easily found on the Internet.
WRONG!
The FIRST thing to note is: “Free REIN”
Not having unchecked authority is the SECOND thing to note.
Could you write REIN a little bigger, I can’t read it.
Every HUMAN has free will, the comparison you pose is nonsense.
As Monty already pointed out, driver inattention does not imply that there was an accident. It only means that there is evidence the driver was inattentive. It could result in an accident, but it could also result in a near miss, or going over the speed limit without realizing it.
I’m pretty sure that if the offense had been categorized as an accident you would have gotten more points rather than none.
Then the offense should be listed under Violations either additionally, or instead. If you look at the link I provided in the OP, you’ll see that it is only included under Accidents. You’ll also note that of any and all other possible offenses there are, Inattention tied for the most expensive, direct-cost wise.
Your link is meaningless. It was a cost guidline that some local court clerk threw together. It has no legal standing. What is the actual statute? Does the statute say you can only write for accidents? Did you officially plead guilty to the statute that was originally written? In addition and more important than the wording of the statute, what are the legal precedents for the statute? Even without court rulings (if there wasn’t an appeal to a sufficient level there won’t be) there are often Attorney General guidlines for statutes which lay out how the statute is to be enforced. All that is important. The link you provided is not.
And FTR in my state the difference between the two fines would mean less than $2 to the town here. No idea what it is in Ohio. It may be much different. But I can assure you I have never been pressured to write tickets so the town can make pennies on each ticket. Red light cameras are a different story.
I’m afraid I don’t understand this post at all. Is it just me, or is it because it doesn’t actually make any sense?
Can anyone explain it to me?