Advice on disorderly conduct charge

[slaythebeast]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? I live in Kentucky..

I was arrested and charged with 2nd degree disorderly conduct a few weeks ago and have an arraignment court date that is a few days away. I was hoping to get an opinion or two on the situation so I know how best to go forward. I am very hopeful at the prospects of getting away scot free but that feeling is tempered by hearing how others I know personally have fared in court when they thought things would go well.

The arrest came after I was pulled over for not stopping completely as I turned right at a red light. This occured at around midnight as I was leaving work, no one on the road except the officer who was going the opposite direction on the four lane road (didn't pull out in front of anyone, wasn't anyone even over the horizon on the road). I work very hard for my money, I am very conservative and responsible when it comes to my finances as I make a modest amount yearly, and while I respect the need for enforcement of traffic law I have read many articles and essays on the phenomenon of the "traffic ticket system" and how it is used to fund state and local governments under the guise of protecting the public, i.e. public safety.

Anyway back to the case. I complied in an orderly fashion as I gave the officer license and registration information. I did comment that I really have a hard time getting by as it is without some $150 to $200 fine. Beyond that I had a short and pretty tame first encounter there. He went back to his car and I was pretty certain that I was going to get stuck with some $150-$200 ticket to fund the welfare rolls and otherwise p*ss away what I had worked hard for.

Aside from the ticket, I am pretty soured on the state of our civilization and nation as a whole. I am relatively happy with my life but I started doing some reading and researching into some things a few years ago and I am just so frustrated with how this civilization and nation has decayed in the past 50 to 60 years. I will keep it at that, but even though my own life is bearable and again I am happy, I still wear things on my shoulder when it comes to the terminal corruption of nearly every meaningful institution in this once great country. The "traffic ticket system" being one down the line of severity, but I was on this night personally affected by this.

Well I simply started to vent there in my car about the whole thing... The officer was back at his car, in his car I assume, just to let you know I wasn't shouting at the cop face to face. I was basically ranting truthful statements about how I saw no use in working when the welfare rats just do it the easy way and stay home while I get pulled over on the way from work so I can get hit up with a ticket to pay for their inactivity.

I will admit I was pretty loud, but I was in a closed store parking lot, no one around except the officer, and soon two more. Never did I threaten the officer, the only thing I ranted about police was that the traffic ticket system was a unofficial driving tax.

Here is the big thing. Never did the officer even warn me that if I didn't cease my venting that I would be arrested. And the thing is, I had no idea that simple venting could get me arrested, was very shocked when I was.

Obviously they can arrest you without warning you, but I have never seen an arrest of this nature on TV or anywhere without a warning first. Had he told me that further outbursts would result in arrest I would have reluctantly shut up.

This society is so backward, not only can they steal money from you in this matter, but you evidently have to be happy about it.

Funny thing happens after I go to jail, they let me out like 2 hours later on $150 bail, and then I walk back to my car, about 10 miles. The officer had accidently kept my keys after he parked my car after I was arrested. I had to call the police dispatch once I got to my car.

I wasn't expecting to then meet with the officer and have what was one of the best conversations I ever had. After the conversation, which was mostly our agreeing on many of the problems in the larger society, he actually apologized for arresting me. I apologized for having had vented in the presence of someone who was concerned with the same issues in the larger society as I.

He also admitted that he had not even thought of warning me first. I must admit I was ranting pretty loud and his first instinct might have been that it was the only option (arrest), but again it wasn't any type of threatening content or anything like that. And again it wasn't face to face with the officer, I would not have shouted like that to his face. I just figured the guy was wrting the ticket and hey I will blow off some steam, actually I didn't even think to do it, its just a rotten system, this traffic ticket system, and it made me mad to get caught up in it.

He then informs me that I should plead not guilty at the first hearing. He said that he would then back my claiming at the next hearing after that to him having had probable cause to arrest me but that the case should then be dismissed. Basically he was claiming that if I admitted that there was probable cause (I suspect to protect him and the department from liability) that he would help me to get it dismissed.

Now I have watched several videos on public access TV over the years and I know police are not your friend. They are looking to arrest and convict you. I saw that movie "Busted" that the ACLU put out. The thing is I really think this guy is legit, judging by the conversation I had with him, which was one hell of a sight after what had transpired only hours earlier. We stood there and talked for a good 30 minutes and I finally had to usher things along. Had the guy had a break coming I might have even asked the guy to join me for a meal at a resturant, it really was a good conversation about our frustrations with the state of society. The guy told me some things that I don't think he would have told me had he not considered me legit and not just kissing his ass. I mean there wasn't a thing to gain from him simply dropping my keys off and going on his way. The first thing I said as I approached his car after he apologized forst for taking my keys, was that I was glad he showed up I didn't want to walk another 5 miles home, this was in jest with a smile.

Anyway, I am planning to plead not guilty. I am pretty sure I can get off without anything on my record, and more importantly no fines or fees. Hell I would rather spend a day in jail than get stuck with some big fine.

Should I perhaps plead guilty if they offer to cut the fine to a bearable level $100-$150?? I especially would consider this if the max fine and sentence is much more severe if I am later found guilty. I have the upmost job security so I am not worrying about my record as much as a big fine. The only hiccup on my record was a menacing misdeomenor that occured 5 to 6 years ago. Anyone who knows what the sentence might be for 2nd degree disorderly conduct I would appreciate this knowledge as I can put it in consideration if I am offered a plea deal. I am confident in at least a good chance to beat it if I went to trial, but at the same time I wouldn't mind just being done with it in a few days if the conditions were right rather than waiting another 3 to 4 weeks.

Should I contact the prosecutor and the court appointed defense lawyer (that I assume I will be given) and inform them of what the officer had said he would agree to do. I would like to think I could do that rather than just wait until the day of??

Do I have an option for a jury trial or a trial before a judge, again if things go the way i would hope it wouldn't even go forward as it will be dismissed with probable cause determined??

This account has been immense and I apologize for that but you have all the story, so what should I do in your opinion??

 

[justalayman]

525.060 Disorderly conduct in the second degree.
(1) A person is guilty of disorderly conduct in the second degree when in a public place and with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm, or wantonly creating a risk thereof, he:
(a) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous, or threatening behavior;
(b) Makes unreasonable noise;
(c) Refuses to obey an official order to disperse issued to maintain public safety in dangerous proximity to a fire, hazard, or other emergency; or
(d) Creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act that serves no legitimate purpose.
(2) Disorderly conduct in the second degree is a Class B misdemeanor.

Class B Misdemeanor Up to 90 days imprisonment and/or fine up to $250, and up to $5,000 for corporations

I have to say I really got a good laugh out of this:

Had he told me that further outbursts would result in arrest I would have reluctantly shut up.

I can see a defendant in court now:

honestly judge, if I had known they could have arrested me for shooting somebody without warning me first, I would have not kept shooting people. I mean, geesh, if they had only told me they were going to arrest me for shooting those people, I would have reluctantly ceased shooting them.


So, what do ya think? Sound like a workable defense?


I didn't think so either.


Doesn't work in your case either.


Honestly, by your rendition of the situation, I would surely plead not guilty. You have not met the elements of the crime.

when in a public place and with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm, or wantonly creating a risk thereof

if there were no others around, how could you have the intent to cause public "anything"?

Now, if the officer was willing to help you so much, all he has to do is go to the DA and tell him he was wrong in his actions. It is a done deal but I'll bet he won't be calling the DA anytime soon.

You are allowed a jury trial. I can only guess but a bench trial may be possible if you do not want a jury trial.

He then informs me that I should plead not guilty at the first hearing. He said that he would then back my claiming at the next hearing after that to him having had probable cause to arrest me but that the case should then be dismissed. Basically he was claiming that if I admitted that there was probable cause (I suspect to protect him and the department from liability) that he would help me to get it dismissed.

Do you do a lot of drugs? Admitting there was probable cause means nothing. It isn't your decision. In fact, it basically is a statement that you believe the officer was correct in his actions. In other words, you are guilty.


I'm having problems really believing this story. It just doesn't sound quite right.

 

[slaythebeast]

Thanks for your response, though it appeared a bit abrasive at times, hey its better than nothing. Thanks for your information on penalties.

For a crime and an arrest that was based on his opinion of the situation at the time,being a relatively minor offense, I would have appreciated a warning. Again I have seen people be repeatedly warned before arrests of this nature in the past. Obviously murder, drug sales or usage should be known to all as illegal without a warning. Screaming at an officer while poking him in the chest, same way. But I was simply just venting frustration, alone in my car, at no one in particular. I am just saying I am not someone looking for trouble or to be arrested, it could have ended without an arrest with one warning.

It certainly didn't reach 1/4 the severity in this video, and this guy didn't even get arrested....Funny video, guy has some good points,except for supporting Clinton or any politician for that matter, and the officer was nice not to arrest him for simply venting, though he was really pushing it by making even minor contact with the officer and shouting directly at him face to face, using profanity while doing that. No officer has to tolerate that.

YouTube - Crazy Ass Video - Angry Motorist Gets Ticket

I guess he himself could have been annoyed,alarmed,and/or inconvieneced by it...lol..There was no one else around to do herein. I would really hate to try to argue that there was no one else around even though your point is valid, I am not sure that they would let that come between the state and my money.

I don't expect him to say he was wrong, and he never said it like that. He pretty much said that he would talk to the prosecutor, I assume that day, and come to an understanding I guess that as long as I agreed that there was probable cause that I would be able to get it dismissed. Again if I didn't acknowledge that then I could be some scumbag who would come back and sue for false arrest, I assume that is what he meant by admitting to probable cause.

He said not to plead guilty as then "I would be at the mercy of the court", his exact words. At very least i think I could reasonable expect him to be honest about not having asked me to cut my rant short and also about the pleasent conversation we had later on, which is certainly not common at all I can't assume. I assume that this being heard by the judge/jury would only help my case.

Then again with my luck he would go on vacation the week of the trial and one of the other two officers who came to the scene who I didn't speak with afterward would show up and lay waste to me without any understanding or mercy. Hell if I can get the $250 cut in half I would pay the $125 and consider myself as all in all coming out ahead as the ticket would have been something like $158, that is the minumum for anything around here. If the prosecutor refused to dismiss it I would probably just plead guilty I guess, your always screwed when its your word against the officer and if they won't give me any slack on the warning thing then I have nothing else to stand on, I am sure that they would consider me simply venting to myself in a loud voice as enough to convict me.

I really should just park my ass at home and live off the damn dole, that seems to be the one way to keep them out of your pockets, when you don't have anything for them to steal. The officer agreed with me when I said that, as a result of these economic times, your going to start hearing about people shooting or assaulting officers whjen they are in this situation, being given tickets they can't pay as a result of marginal violation. I told him that the real hell of it all is that officers like him are going to get the backlash from policies of government that are enacted by local,statem,and federal politicians who sit at home safe and sound and expect them to deal with it on the streets. The way things are going, the least they are going to worry about are guys like me who simply vent frustration verbally and at no one in particular.

No I don't do drugs..lol..I actually have never as much smoked a cigerette or drank a beer,lol, although some people I know tell me I should drink as I again wear many of the wrongs of the world on my sleeve and concern myself with things most people dismiss as "just the way things are and have become". I guess you could call me an uncompromising patriot. I can assure you that my story is 100% genuine, I sure as hell have better things to do than give you guys a fake account of events, that took a hell of a long time to write...lol. Again thanks for the insight and I would appreciate and read any others.

 

[justalayman]

For a crime and an arrest that was based on his opinion of the situation at the time,being a relatively minor offense, I would have appreciated a warning

.obviously my story is an extreme exaggeration but the meaning is the same. There is no duty to warn you. If they see you break the law, they can arrest you.

It certainly didn't reach 1/4 the severity in this video, and this guy didn't even get arrested..., though he was really pushing it by making even minor contact with the officer and shouting directly at him face to face, using profanity while doing that. No officer has to tolerate that.

actually, except for any physical actions and the littering, the office does have to tolerate that. You have a legal right to vent and voice your opinion. There was nothing illegal about the vocal utterances that I can see. Obviously, raising hell with an officer will often cause him to be more strict when considering other reasons for ticketing or arresting where he generally would be more lenient.

I would really hate to try to argue that there was no one else around even though your point is valid, I am not sure that they would let that come between the state and my money.

You would hate to argue it? That is your defense. If you don't want to argue it, then just plead guilty and take whatever they toss at you for punishment.

I don't expect him to say he was wrong, and he never said it like that. He pretty much said that he would talk to the prosecutor, I assume that day, and come to an understanding I guess that as long as I agreed that there was probable cause that I would be able to get it dismissed. Again if I didn't acknowledge that then I could be some scumbag who would come back and sue for false arrest, I assume that is what he meant by admitting to probable cause

. and like I said, if you admit there was PC, then you have simply plead guilty.

He said not to plead guilty as then "I would be at the mercy of the court", his exact words.

actually, if you plead guilty, you are at the mercy of the court. It is then up to the court to determine your punishment. By pleading not guilty, they then have to prove you were guilty.

At very least i think I could reasonable expect him to be honest about not having asked me to cut my rant short and also about the pleasent conversation we had later on, which is certainly not common at all I can't assume. I assume that this being heard by the judge/jury would only help my case.

I would bet million dollars (if I had that much spare money) that the jury will never hear the officer say anything of the sort to the court.

Then again with my luck he would go on vacation the week of the trial and one of the other two officers who came to the scene who I didn't speak with afterward would show up and lay waste to me without any understanding or mercy.

if he is the arresting officer, then he has to justify the arrest. The other officers can't do it for him.

Hell if I can get the $250 cut in half I would pay

it sounds like a plea bargain is in your future. It costs money to have a trial and unless you are not truthful about your record, a minimal fine and maybe probation would quite likely be a reasonable sentence.

n, I am sure that they would consider me simply venting to myself in a loud voice as enough to convict me.

You have to meet the elements of the crime to be convicted.

". I guess you could call me an uncompromising patriot

. then as an uncompromising patriot, I would expect you to fight an improper charge. After all, that would be the patriotic thing to do. Demand that the laws of the land be followed.

 

[dave33]

Do not be fooled by police manipulation, the prisons are full enough.In this case a plea of not guilty is a no brainer.At any arraignment not guilty is the way to go,even if you are planning on pleading guilty later.He knows this. Usually in my state anyway,unless its a felony,the prosecutor is an officer from the same district or county that arrested you.I say this because if he wanted to help you he easily could without you admitting anything.As a matter of pointing out the obvious-he could have never arrested you.I am confident that even if what you say is true,that isnt how the police report will read.He cant admit to the facts as you stated them, that would be borderline false arrest.Really before you can make any decisions,you need a copy of all evidence against you (discovery).Again,im sure his version of events will differ from yours.The other officers might even throw in a statement for good measure.dont be surprised.I can tell you feel strongly about this,and so do i.The fact is,to get this dismissed,or be found not guilty,you will have to prove him a liar.Hard with no other civilian witnesses.I guess the one good thing (i guess) about starting in a lower court is that theres plenty of room fo appeals.HA,HA good luck

 

[justalayman]

The fact is,to get this dismissed,or be found not guilty,you will have to prove him a liar

Not at all. All OP has to do is show that the elements of the crime were not fulfilled. That doesn't mean the cop was a liar, it just means he was wrong in his belief that the crime actually took place.

 

[dave33]

right.I agree.Although the same could be said about any criminal charges.What my point was, is that police are clever about the content of the report.I am confident that they will leave little room for interpratation as to whether a crime occured or not.They could simply add a few words that would lead you to believe that he made a threatening gesture.Thats just one of a thousand examples that would clarify to the judge that the elements of the crime were indeed met.Most are very good about proving the elements existed and/or probable cause existed.Thats their job.

 

[outonbail]

right.I agree.Although the same could be said about any criminal charges.What my point was, is that police are clever about the content of the report.I am confident that they will leave little room for interpratation as to whether a crime occured or not.They could simply add a few words that would lead you to believe that he made a threatening gesture.Thats just one of a thousand examples that would clarify to the judge that the elements of the crime were indeed met.Most are very good about proving the elements existed and/or probable cause existed.Thats their job.

So you're saying that their job is to falsify reports, so that the person arrested is eventually convicted regardless of whether or not they are guilty?

While I have no doubt that this does happen, it is certainly not their job and if it is discovered that they are intentionally submitting falsified and fraudulent information on their reports, they will find themselves on the unemployment line and hopefully facing criminal charges themselves.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that the purpose of this site is not to provide advice which assumes that the police have intentionally lied on their reports.
Without having access to the report and not having been at the scene where this event took place, there is no basis to suggest to an OP, that the police will be misleading and/or flat out lying on their report.

Advising an OP not to speak to the police is one thing, but to state that the officers report will include false information is not something you, I or anyone else here would have any way of knowing.

Save that nonsense for the anti-police websites.

 

[dave33]

dont mean to be anti-police.Let me put this in a more politically correct way.There job is to give the d.a. a prosecutable case.If maybe they made an arrest because of anger or another emotion because someone was yelling at them,(human error) than its unlikely at best the report would represent that fact.I absolutely wasnt there,all anyone here can go by is the above statement,and if it is 100 percent accurate than i feel the likelyhood of a little misrepresentation is certainly present.All i can go by is what i was told.Do not mean to be offensive.