So if they pull you over and you're naked wearing a tin foil hat, you could say guilty by reason of insanity?
The plea is "not guilty by reason of insanity" and it usually has to do with not knowing the nature of the crime committed as well as not knowing the consequences. So if you are pulled over and you're naked wearing a tin foil hat, you couldn't. But if you were pulled over and you're naked wearing a tin foil hat AND you failed to comprehend the act was wrong (whatever you were doing) THEN you could probably plea "not guilty by reason of insanity..." But you'll probably be sentenced to a mental institution because you'd be considered dangerous in some way... If I can dig up my term paper from last year, I can go into a little more detail (without going into politics. It was an informative paper)
I think just with speeding there's no room to reduce charges. Speeding is speeding, so to say--there's not a lesser version of the charge to reduce to. Other, more serious crimes certainly have lesser versions that they could be reduced to.
1. When you're pulled over, that is the equivalent of being arrested. And while police officers don't read you your Miranda rights, they're still in effect. So "anything you say can be used against you in a court of law." Keep that in mind. 2. I tried to contest a speeding ticket once. I was descending a ~45 degree hill, which was followed by another hill going up, also in the 30-45 degree range. Back roads, no traffic. It's one of those situations where it's easier and safer to coast down and then let the momentum carry you up the next hill. (Riding your brakes down a hill can potentially reduce the effectiveness of your brakes if you really need them.) The officer was using an estimate of my speed using the VASCAR system (timing a vehicle as it travels between two markers). Local police in Pennsylvania are legally not permitted to use radar. And the markers were very, very faint. I took photos of the faded markers and took photos from the vantage point of where the police officer's squad car was sitting to establish that the lines were barely visible and therefore the results of the VASCAR test could not be reliable. I brought said photos to the judge. The cop said he could see the lines. The judge wasn't so sure, but since the photos had no date stamp, he decided that the photos were not reliable either. I was found guilty. I had to pay the full fine and got 2 points on my license, too. Moral of the story: when you get a speeding ticket, you're guilty until proven innocent. If you are, in fact, not guilty, be prepared to prove it. The judge is going to side with the officer, largely because his pay likely depends on the money that comes in from speeding tickets. Don't count on officers to be lenient - while quotas are illegal in many states (including PA) that doesn't mean they don't happen. In fact, not long ago a Pennsylvania State Trooper got into a legal tussle with the Commonwealth because he reported that his barracks had an illegal quota and he was punished for reporting it. I don't want to offend anyone here who is in, or affiliated with, law enforcement...but really, the public doesn't really have much recourse if the police break the law. (How many times have you seen police cruisers violate traffic laws?) So, in conclusion - throwing yourself at the mercy of the District Attorney might be worth a try. Failing that, pay the ticket and get it over with. If you find that you have a problem with your gas pedal, think about investing in a radar detector (provided that they are legal where you live) and train yourself to not only control your speed, but also to look for speed traps.
I said I wasn't sure how far down the ladder it went. I'd imagine it's been used in assault cases, too (same thing only different)...
Uhhhh, not to be a dick about this, but I'm pretty sure it's your responsibility to make sure that your vehicle is operating correctly.
AMEN ! The police will lie in court to win - NOBODY can tell me otherwise. Pony up the dough, lesson learned $$$, now you know how not to get a speeding ticket.
Damn... How'd she pull that off? She's lucky she didn't get tagged by a Dane county sherriff. The minimumfine is like $165 and they can't reduce below that. Take it from someone that pays his "speeding tax" every year or so, there's nothing you can do to get them to drop the ticket. If you have the time, plead no contest and the judge will drop a point off and, if you're lucky, reduce the fine. Your other option is to plead not guilty. If you do, you'll have to try to settle it with a court official or pay to put it in front of a jury. I've never gotten very far by pleading not guilty so I always plead no contest.
Probation Before Judgment - a procedure whereby the defendant enters a plea of guilty or nolo contendere and the Court defers entry of a judgment of conviction and places the defendant on probation under the terms and conditions that the Court decides are appropriate. If the terms and conditions are met, no conviction is ever entered on the defendant's criminal record. If the terms and conditions are violated, the Court may enter judgment and proceed as if the person had not been placed on Probation Before Judgment. The program applies only to specified misdemeanors and violations. The prosecuting agency must consent to placing a defendant on probation before judgment and there are a number of additional eligibility criteria which apply. Probation before judgment is a term used in some states for a deferred adjudication, used by some states in sentencing certain first offenders. Laws governing probation before judgment are governed by state laws, which vary by state. The term and conditions of the probationary period is at the discretion of the judge. In some states, if the term of probation is successfully completed and there are no further violations, a sentence of not guilty will be imposed. Whether a probation before judgment counts as a conviction or is eligible for expungement varies by jurisdiction. The following is an example of a state law dealing with probation before judgment: “16-714. Probation for first time offenders. (a) A person who has not previously been convicted of an offense and who pleads guilty or no contest to a non-violent offense, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, if satisfied that it is in the best interests of the person and of the District of Columbia, may, upon the written request of the person and without entering a judgment of guilty, defer further proceedings and place the person on probation subject to reasonable terms and conditions set by the court. (b) By consenting to probation before judgment of guilt, the person waives the right to appeal from judgment of guilt to a court regarding the matter. The court shall inform the person of this waiver before permitting the person to consent to probation before judgement [sic] of guilt. (c) The terms and conditions of consenting to probation before judgment of guilt may include the following: * (1) Paying a fine or restitution of actual costs any victims may have suffered; * (2) Participating in an appropriate rehabilitation clinic or educational program; or; * (3) Performing community service. (d) Fines imposed as probation terms and conditions shall be within the amount prescribed by law for a violation resulting in conviction. (e) If the court places the person on probation for driving under the influence, the court shall, as a condition of the probation, require the person to participate in a driver safety and awareness program and either an alcohol treatment program, or an alcohol-related educational program unless the court finds and affirmatively states on the record that the interests of the District of Columbia and of the person do not require the person to participate in an alcohol treatment or alcohol-related educational program. (f) If the person violates any term or condition of the probation, the court may, enter a judgement [sic] of guilt and proceed as if the person had not been placed on probation. (g) If during the probation period the person does not violate any of the terms and conditions of probation, upon expiration of the probation period, the court shall discharge the person from probation and dismiss the proceedings against the person. Discharge and dismissal shall be without adjudication of guilt, but a non-public record of the probation before judgement of guilt proceedings shall be retained solely for the purpose of the court’s use to determine whether, in subsequent proceedings, the person qualifies for probation before judgement [sic] pursuant to this section. Then, discharge and dismissal shall not be deemed a conviction for purposes of disqualifications or disabilities imposed by law upon conviction of a crime. The effect of discharge and dismissal shall be to restore the person in contemplation of the law to the status the person occupied prior to arrest and all subsequent proceedings pursuant to this section. (h) Upon discharge and dismissal, the person may apply to the Court for an order to expunge all official records of the proceedings pursuant to this section, (not including the non- public record to be retained under section (g), all records relating to the arrest, indictment or information, and dismissal and discharge pursuant to this subsection. If the Court determines, after a hearing, that the person was dismissed and proceedings against him or her discharged, it shall enter an order dismissing the person. No person for whom an order of dismissal has been entered shall be held under any provision of any law to be guilty of perjury or otherwise giving a false statement by reason of failure to recite or acknowledge a prior arrest in subsequent proceedings in response to any inquiry made of him or her for any purposes."
This topic shows two things, 1. That the rules concerning fine drops or elimination/fixing of the ticket vary from county to county from state to state. 2. We're discussing speeding tickets like they were equal in criminal degree to grand theft auto. Evil evil speeders should do hard time for speeding.
I don't know how she did it. She was planning on going to court, and pleading innocent. I told her to just do "no contest" and pray for the best.
I dunno about other states, but here in Jersey, you can go to court for a ticket, and do one of three things. Plead Innocent. Plead Guilty. Plead Guilty with an explanation. The 3rd option is how a lot of folks get out of tickets, or get them reduced to just a fine and no points. As for me personally, I've got a clean record. Yeah, been pulled over a few time, but it helps having that gold "Family Member" card in your wallet Am I ever glad my Brother became an officer when I'm in those situations.
awesome, P_D_31, I love you man, just thought you should know as for the speeding ticket, good luck man
No one has anything to say about me suggesting Probation Before Judgement? Not that we know this is his speeding ticket ever, but I thought it was pretty sound advice...unless you've all ignored/blocked me @_@;
This exact policy of admiting it and not giveing the officer the run around has gotten me a warning twice, and trust me they were a good bit over the speed limit, in the range on 15 - 20 miles ana hour over it.
