Street Racing Ticket update

For those of you interested. I went to court this morning by my self(without an attorney) just to see what I can do without an attorney. got the charges down to an infraction(instead of misdermeaner speed contest) speeding. total fine of 400 and 2 year summary probation. The DA originally wanted me to plead guilty to the misdermeaner charge w/ 400 fine and 2 year summary probation. Spoke to the judge and ask if it's possible to lower it to an infration. DA took 2.5 hours to consider it while I waited and waited and waited. I was the last one left in court when the DA lowered his offer to make the charges to an infraction ( althought not before he went on and on about what is on the police report such as 90mph on a local street and 2 cars side by side speeding, etc.... and I disputed everything he said.) for those of you that don't remember the originall post. https://rennlist.com/forums/showthre...=STREET+RACING Peter

congrats! Great news... So they ended up taking your baby away from you for an infraction...

Did you end up having to pay the impound fees for whatever number of days your car was impounded up to the maximum of 30 days?

I wasn't reading this board until late Feb when I got my p-car, so missed your thread, but I think you did yourself a disservice by not getting a lawyer. Or you got some really bad advice. Personally, a decent lawyer should have gotten you off of this completely clean, no infraction. Regarding your impounding, I refer you to CA Senate Bill SB 1489, which passed in Sep 2002 to amend CA VC 23109.2 ( http://www.lacp.org/AskBill/AskBill-2b.html ) Specifically, taking things backwards from where you are today - contrary to some postings, the law is clear regarding the validity of impound. It's an ACLU nightmare, but this is one of those examples in which prior to proof of guilt, you are subject to loss of life, property, or freedom. So as far as seizing your vehicle just on the word of the officer, you have no immediate recourse (see storage hearing below though). There are a number of exceptions to serving the period of impound, for example stolen vehicle, but you qualify for none of them. From VC 23109.2. (a) (1) Whenever a peace officer determines that a person was engaged in any of the activities set forth in paragraph (2), the peace officer may immediately arrest and take into custody that person and may cause the removal and seizure of the motor vehicle used in that contest in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 22650). A motor vehicle so seized may be impounded for not more than 30 days. The minute you are charged with any of the four definitions under this code - including what you told us you were charged with, motor vehicle speed contest, the police officer may, at his discretion, impound your vehicle. Please note that this Senate Bill and approved vehicle code does not say must impound, but may impound. However, I asked above about whether you paid the impound fees because based on what you said about getting the charge knocked down to a regular moving violation, you are liable for $0, repeat zero costs, for the impound towing, storage, and any other related fees. If you paid to get your car out of impound, you just got screwed. To wit, 23109.2, section (e), para (4) - The owner shall not be liable for any towing and storage charges related to the impoundment if acquittal or dismissal occurs. AND 23109.2, section 2(e), para (6) - The impounding agency is responsible for the actual costs incurred by the towing agency as a result of the impoundment should the registered owner be absolved of liability for those charges pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 23109.2. Notwithstanding this provision, nothing shall prohibit impounding agencies from making prior payment arrangements to satisfy this requirement. Your motor vehicle speeding charge was dismissed in favor of the moving violation - you owe zero impound charges. Any suggestion to the contrary is just simply another case of a local municipality choosing to incorrectly interpret/enforce a quite clearly worded legislative act, because frankly they know most people don't bother to read the law, and that includes lawyers. They're just people - some are scum, some are dumb, and some are good. What you get without a good referal is as good as a shake of the Magic 8-Ball. Furthermore, a loophole of the law is that even if you were charged and an impound duration set, if your car was released prior to serving the full 30 days, you also owe no fees. 23109.2, section 2(c), para (3) - If, pursuant to subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) a motor vehicle is released prior to the conclusion of the impoundment period, neither the person charged with a violation of subdivision (a) of Section 23109 nor the registered owner of the motor vehicle is responsible for towing and storage charges nor shall the motor vehicle be sold to satisfy those charges. As far as your storage hearing, good news and bad news - good news is indeed you are right and will be legally owed the hearing. Bad news is that you are not owed this right until Jan 1, 2007. Specifically, the VC 23109 section 3 was ADDED to the code to include these refinements, but was specifically worded in SB 1489 that g) This section shall become operative on January 1, 2007. The somewhat inane reason this SB was based on - SEC. 4. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are: Within the last two years, three deaths have occurred in one county alone as a result of persons engaged in reckless driving. Therefore, to ensure public safety, it is necessary for this act to take effect immediately. p.s. even if there had been a radar gun, the beam dispersion is directly proportional to distance and angle of measurement. Given two cars side by side under a presumed speeding contest, or as in your stated case, two cars side by side only for the moment in which the CLK blazed past you, unless the officer was right behind you, the foundation to argue that the reading was from the CLK and not you is well placed assuming he was some distance behind you, and if you are alleged to have taken off from the light to reach 90mph, it would be self evident that you are some distance away when the speed measurement was taken. Same with laser but for different reasons - the angle of deflection is quite small, and a small amount of jostling can misinterpret who the tagged culprit was. Given no physical evidence, your refutal as to tire tracks, or a positive match as to who laid them down even if there were, and no citation to speed on the ticket, a good lawyer would have had a field day with the police officer's testimony in court. And by the way, it is your right to ask the officer to recite his police report from memory and not read directly from it when in court. The only reason officers routinely read back automatically what they wrote without having to really remember and therefore truly enter testimony as to what they personally recollected happened is because people and judges let them. However, if you exercise your right to have your accuser provide direct testimony, there are a lot of potential contradictions which you can bring to the court's attention. All a moot point as you've now settled this, but again, I think you should have gotten a good lawyer and beaten it clean.

Good news!!

You broke the law, got caught, and got the charges diminished. What I am I missing here? I'm having a difficult time trying to relate or feel sympathetic. If you EVER happened upon a motor vehicle accident occurring at the speeds you indicated, I absolutely guarantee you would lose your lunch. I get tired of hosing down accident scenes. Sorry,

Fred, He broke a moving violation law, but that's not what he was charged with. Assuming the facts related are truthful and all there is, I'm always sympathetic to anyone falsely or undeservedly charged with a crime not committed. If the police officer had charged him with speeding and he was arguing it, then sure, what's the point. He broke that law and got caught as you say. But it seems like what you're saying is if someone commits legal violation A, but is charged with legal violation B, you don't care because they're guilty of A? Weren't you also the one riding shotgun in Tysons GT2 this weekend on our 'spirited' drive up to and back from SB? Are you saying you've never done or would condone anyone else hitting the 75mph speed admitted to by Peter? Whether street or highway, there are appropriate places where you can easily hit 75mph with no more or less inherent danger than if you were going the posted limit, in my opinion. I agree speeding accidents are bad, but come on - you're automatically linking 75mph to hosing down accident scenes without adequate context to this specific 75mph occurence. A lot of people believe any speeding above posted limit = accidents and that's fine, statistics would say you're completely right. But we're not the average collection of a statistical data point - presumably we're better, more aware drivers. A lot of other people would say good/bad in this case would be all in context to vehicle involved, driving skill, condition of the road/weather, and relevant surroundings like how much traffic, etc. You seemed like a nice guy on the run and it was enjoyable meeting and talking with you. I think you'd certainly want our sympathy if you were doing 47mph in a 45 zone and was charged with 'Exhibition of Speed' under this same vehicle code Peter was charged with and had your p-car impounded for 30 days before proof of guilt was even established. For that matter, even if you say you've never exceeded the legal limit, that's irrelevant. 'Exhibition of speed' can be charged even if all you got up to was 30mph in a 45 zone but in the officer's sole opinion "too fast" or "with intent to display speed".

Mozhacker, Very good point! I'd hire you. ;-)

Moz, I agree with everything you've said in response to Fred's post. With regard to Peter's situation, you are right, the first thing to do was to hire a lawyer, especially given the gravity of the charges. Anyways, I thought you were a software hacker, not a litigator...? Sunday was a fun drive, I'd never been through Ojai. I didn't get to enjoy the scenery as much as I may have liked given the "spirited" driving

Mozhacker: We need you in Florida! Our legislature has recently converted our peace officers into revenue agents in an attempt to balance the budget. HELP!

Yes, that was $1100 bucks. Peter

[No author-written text remains after quoted material was removed.]

Fred: Nothing to be sorry about. I agree w/ you if I was going the 90mph that the police claimed, but I was going somewhere in the 70's and even 60's on a 7 lane major road. And I defintely was'nt racing w/ the CLK, I did'nt even notice him until he blast passed me at which point, I actually slowed down more. I have no problem w/ the charges if I was in fact guilty. It's the fact that I am not guilty of that charge" speed contest " that pissed me off. Peter

Cogent arguement Moz............very cogent. Nice to have such clear thinking here on what is otherwise often an emptional subject. my compliments

mozhacker: One finall point I like to make is that I've spoke to several lawyers regarding this case. And the general reaction is that " okay, what would you like to plead this down to???" or " I can plead this down to ????" for 1500 to 1800. 2 would actually consider taking this to the trial but the fee's they're talking about range from 9g to 11g. I decided to go to court and see if I can do what they say they were going to do for 1500 bucks which is plead it down to an infraction and I did that. If I was'nt happy w/ what the DA was offering, I can always ask for an continuonce to get an attorney at that point. My thoughts are I am guilty of speeding anyways and I am fine w/ the penalty that comes w/ that. If I would have try to fight this to get off it clean, I would've racked up a 10g lawyer fee which would seriously **** off my wife. I guess it's just the matter of how much justice can you afford to buy, and this is a fair resolution for in this case for me. Other then the impound that is. Peter

It seems like you were racing to me and I'm pretty mad that you got away with it. Get on the ****ing raceway or track and compare your cocksize with others on a legal basis. If I ever see you in court in Chicago or Cook County, I'll take your license and have no problem with it. Bobby

oooops, wtf bob, bad day at the office?

I enjoy racing and driving hard in places where I can. Not in places where innocent people can get killed. Nobody wants to kill anyone but that is why its called an accident. However, when someone makes the conscious choice to race, that isn't an accident anymore, and if someone dies, that homocide. That's the stuff you see in fast and the furious, and i hope that the people on this forum realize this and are more mature than this. Bob

I was/am a software hacker. But I have a fairly weird educational past - I received a JD but never took or passed the bar exams. To avoid the rewriting, this is a copy/paste from another thread here - http://www.6speedonline.com/forums/s...&threadid=7765 "Ron, I'm not in any line of work right now. Hence my location description. What it should say is Homeless and Unemployed. I quit the silicon valley rat race in late 2001, travelled/lived around the world for about a year and a half, then returned to the states wondering what to do next. Settled on hanging out and experiencing life down in SoCal for awhile, and other than helping out a few hours a week for a friend's company, I mainly spend my time volunteering at a youth tutoring center ( http://www.bresee.org ) and figuring out what I want to do next. My background is a bit odd - went to college pretty early and did a double degree undergrad in Economics and Molec/Cell Biology, decided I really didn't want to follow in mom/dad's footsteps to be a doctor as they fervenly wished, and instead stayed in school to complete a Master's in Comp Sci. Thought about going to work as a software engineer but this was 1991, and the economy sucked for engineers and I was only 21, so for the hell of it I did a combo MBA/JD program. Never took or passed the CA Bar exam, had no interest then and no interest now. I just thought having a good fundamental understanding of the law would help me in whatever career I went into later, and it was a good way to fend my parens off. Parents caught me at a weak moment, and actually started in a grad program for Molec/Cell Biology - convinced me if I didn't want to go be an MD, I could follow in half of pop's footsteps as he's an academic researcher with both MD/PhD. But thankfully I started playing around with the first early JDKs from Sun, 1994 came around, and I dropped out after the first semester in true silicon valley folklore fashion to go work for a little company called Mosaic Communications. Fast forward 7 death march years, I go on sabbatical, 9/11 happens, and some close friends go up in smoke with the rest of the thousands in the WTC. I quit the next day and said i wasn't coming back from sabbatical, and spent the next year and a half following the sun in a weird homage to that old movie Endless Summer. p.s. given I've never taken or passed the bar, I am neither legally qualified nor allowed to give legal advice or act in any capacity as counsel. take whatever I say as the rantings and .02 cents from any private citizen."

You know what Bob: I am not going to start a pissing contest w/ you. I have no reason to lie to the people here on the board. I simply came here to ask for advise on the first post. And posted the update because a couple of people have emailed me asking me how it went. Peter

Peter - re: the DIY court decision; fair enough, and you're right, it's often the justice you can afford, not the justice you deserve. Regarding the fees quoted though, that's outrageous. Even assuming research hours that were billable, and the presumption is that an attorney specializing in traffic cases shouldn't really need much extra billable research hours, you're talking at most a few billable hours for filing paperwork, the intial consultation, and the actual court time. Even if you're paying high end at $225/hr, you should only be looking at 8-10 billable hours. $9k-11k is about what it takes to fight a DUI where physical evidence is against you.

Moz: I don't shop for attorneys on a regular basis, so when I heard not 1, but 2 attorneys quoted me prices in that neighborhood. I decided that the outcome was good. Maybe I should've shopped around more, but after describing the whole situation to about 6 attorneys, I got sick of explaining the whole situation again and again. Peter

Its because its a losing case. He was racing, and the amount of work it would take any competent lawyer, even a talented laywer costs that much. Your looking for a silver bullet that will sink the entire prosecution's case and there is none. I don't really care for a pissing contest. If I am caught speeding and I am speeding, I'll try and get out of it but will not bitch about any fine I get. If your caught doing something, the law is the law and as talented as a lawyer is, he won't be able to get you out. Bob

Well Peter, I for one am glad that you got off and that it's behind you now. So, how about a track day? I'm itching to exercise my car.

Leon: Would love to. But I think I need a couple of driving schools and a suspension upgrade just to keep up w/ you. You pretty much left me in the dust last time at Buttonwillow. Thanks, Peter

Peter, I'm glad this event is over for you. Did you put all those upgrades that you had in your garage?

Apparently it was not such a losing case if he got a favorable result on his own. Any decent lawyer having a rapoire with traffic court can easily get deals worked out on something like this. I got a ticket once at speeds I wont mention and got out of it even without paying court costs. My lawyer/friend who is also a retired judge spent all of 30 minutes on my case and refused my money. I sent him a nice basket of food/goodies to his house. Glad you got this ordeal behind you.

Bob, Any particular reason you keep saying Peter was racing as if that was an already established fact? He freely admitted he was exceeding the posted limit, but that he wasn't racing, aware of, or engaged in an exhibition of speed contest with the CLK. Or is he guilty in your eyes simply because he was accused of the greater charge? By the way, just curious but you said if he ever came to Chicago or Cook County you'd take his license. Are you a judge or ADA/DA for that area?

I hope Bob isn't a judge! I thought judges are supposed to be objective and unbiased. Of course I'm not sure how much Bob knows about Peter's case....

Peter, Glad it kinda worked out for you. Although it would have been better sans all the fees. Hope we can get together at the track again soon. Although it seems some misinformed people on this forum think you're nothing but a street racer. I'll bet everyone here has broken the law by speeding a bit, no?

Geeez...... Bob, lighten up!

Thanks Jake: Looks like the trip to China is unavoidable so I can't join you at that class. Have a blast and let's do buttonwillow soon. Peter

Charles: Yep, GT3 seats, red brakes, sports techno wheels, Aluminum trim rings. ALL IN. Wasted no time. Now if I can find time to put that licence plate frame you got for me on. BTW: Email me your phone number again, like to finally meet you like we were going to. Peter

Mozhacker, Just a final note, and I'll drop this. As a volunteer fire fighter I came upon several "bad incidents" before I decided I no longer had the stomach to answer the calls ands stepped down. Imagine your conversation with the medical examiner on the scene as to which items must go in the body bag, which items need to be collected and placed in a sealed bio-hazard plastic bucket, and a which items you can hose down the storm sewer. Try comforting an accident victim while your buddies try to cut the roof off in order to extricate the victim, all the while trying to distract said victim from the fact that all the other passengers perished in the crash. Try walking through a farm field on a snowy night with just your flashlight trying to find a passenger ejected after impact. After these experiences, I just have a hard time with folks who drive 75 in a 40, and complain that they have been somehow maligned but law enforcement and the justice system. If the "bad" experience of having your car impounded and having to pay a fine stops one from doing something so selfishly stupid in the future and prevent some family from suffering a terrible tragedy, that it was an extremely valuable lesson learned at very low cost. I'm sure that the driver in question is a nice person and I'm thankful that he will never be haunted by an accident every time he starts his car. Be smart....stay safe, PS Mozhacker.......we have never met and I assume we are separated by half of the continent.

Fred - my error. I met a Fred on a drive this weekend that was wearing what I could swear was a shirt that said the same thing on your sig - Wait for Me racing.

Any of you laying into Peter for "street racing" back off!! I know Peter, and he isn't the steet racing type, so get to know the guy before bashing him. Also, last I checked this is the Porsche forum not the Safety **** forum so maybe you are lost?

The Safety **** Forum, hahah, you're right, some of the comments are downright ironic given the nature of this site

Gee. Coming in late on this thread. It reads heavy as hell man. Anyway. the main thing is Pete you got your car back and looks like you got off with a small kick up the but. You can handle that Good to hear your back on the road.

I lost a friend several years ago when a couple kids decides to go street racing after watching the fast and the furious. He was pulling out of a McDonalds when one car T-Boned him at about 75 mph. The crash was so bad that it was a closed casket funeral. Long story short, street racing is a very sensitive spot for me. I apologize for voicing such a strong opinion but when I read the initial post, it looked like there was a race going on and the question posed was the best way to avoid the penalty. If I interpreted it wrong, my apologies but was not my impression. Bob

You know, the irony here is that despite some broad ranges of opinions, we're most likely all pretty aware and good drivers - so the accident the majority of us will be involved in the future is some idiot in an SUV cutting us off in gridlock traffic or the man trimming his beard / woman doing her makeup rear ending us at 15 mph.

You forgot to mention the cell phone using idiots that can do all the above and more becuase they are not paying attention to their driving whoops sorry rant off

Nice stand down and explanation chitownbob........Takes a man to do it. I have good friends who are cops and see a lot of ugly stuff, but they are real people too, and suffer from the few cops who are real control freak jerks. Looks like you are perhaps the former rather than the latter......