“The judge took a moment and declared that I was not guilty, but he had an unusual statement that followed. To avoid any misinterpretations about his ruling, he chose to clarify his decision by citing the lack of evidence on the officer’s part. He mentioned that he was not familiar enough with GPS technology to make a decision based on my evidence, but I can’t help but imagine that it was an important factor.”
I dont think the GPS on the phone was all that big of a factor…
I dont think the GPS on the phone was all that big of a factor…
It opened the door. Once he raised a plausible evidence-based defense, the officer had the burden of disproving it. The officer failed to provide any rebuttal evidence, so it was presumed true.
Or, to put it another way, once you present a plausible defense, the burden is on the prosecution to prove that defense wrong. The author did, the cop didn’t.
I think the judge’s statement was simply to clarify that if the officer had presented evidence supporting his claim the judge would have found him guilty – but without that evidence and with the evidence in the defendant’s favour, he had to find him not guilty.
He would have been better served recording the conversation- usually they say you were going 57 in a 35 but they are only going to write you up for 45 in a 35….thereby conspiring and then presenting a false document in a court of law….which means the evidence is then tossed.
Or: Plead not guilty. Ask for jury trial. Be enthusiastic about getting to help pick a jury. Ask for discovery like mad-(Maintanence and log on the radar, personel file of the officer, all recordings electronic or otherwise including radio traffic during your encounter, last 50 tickets written by officer for stat analysis.) and have them dismiss charges due to “Judicial time and resources.”
It’s just a money machine. Put up a fight and they will go bother someone else.
February 28th, 2011 at 3:17 pm
“The judge took a moment and declared that I was not guilty, but he had an unusual statement that followed. To avoid any misinterpretations about his ruling, he chose to clarify his decision by citing the lack of evidence on the officer’s part. He mentioned that he was not familiar enough with GPS technology to make a decision based on my evidence, but I can’t help but imagine that it was an important factor.”
I dont think the GPS on the phone was all that big of a factor…
February 28th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
It opened the door. Once he raised a plausible evidence-based defense, the officer had the burden of disproving it. The officer failed to provide any rebuttal evidence, so it was presumed true.
Or, to put it another way, once you present a plausible defense, the burden is on the prosecution to prove that defense wrong. The author did, the cop didn’t.
I think the judge’s statement was simply to clarify that if the officer had presented evidence supporting his claim the judge would have found him guilty – but without that evidence and with the evidence in the defendant’s favour, he had to find him not guilty.
February 28th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
They believe the police. They don’t believe you.
He would have been better served recording the conversation- usually they say you were going 57 in a 35 but they are only going to write you up for 45 in a 35….thereby conspiring and then presenting a false document in a court of law….which means the evidence is then tossed.
Or: Plead not guilty. Ask for jury trial. Be enthusiastic about getting to help pick a jury. Ask for discovery like mad-(Maintanence and log on the radar, personel file of the officer, all recordings electronic or otherwise including radio traffic during your encounter, last 50 tickets written by officer for stat analysis.) and have them dismiss charges due to “Judicial time and resources.”
It’s just a money machine. Put up a fight and they will go bother someone else.