Reckless in Seattle

What is the name of your state? Washington State.

All right I already posted this once and, through the miracle of technology, lost it all, so here is the abridged version:

On my way home, I wanted to take a left but there were too many cars going that way already. Instead I took a right, planning on making a U-turn at some point a 1/4 mile or so down the road. Traffic in that left lane let up and I realized I had a window to "turn and burn" before the next wave of that lane's traffic hit. So I pull my car next to the right side curb, come to a complete stop, rev it up, turn the wheel left, and let out the clutch enough so that my car spins around. The tires stop spinning after about a 130 degree turn--enough to complete the turn and get in the left lane.

Dumb move? Absolutely.

Well, as luck (and poor judgment) would have it, there was an entire police motorcycle division a few hundred feet up the road, just out of sight. A stray cop sees my stunt and comes sprinting up to my car. Anybody on the receiving end of a moving violation knows the drill: "You're a moron, do you know how stupid you are, here's a ticket, you idiot." That's what happened here.

The relevant law here is R(evised) C(ode) of W(ashington) 46.61.500:

(1) Any person who drives any vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving. Violation of the provisions of this section is a gross misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment of not more than one year and by a fine of not more than five thousand dollars.

(2) The license or permit to drive or any nonresident privilege of any person convicted of reckless driving shall be suspended by the department for not less than thirty days.

Click to expand...

Is there any way to get out of this or reduce the charge? My angle is this: The law says "wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property" constitutes reckless driving. But at the time there were no cars, persons or property in any direction for at least 30 feet, and I had complete control over the car for the duration of the maneuver. At any given point in the turn I had at least 30 feet between my car and the nearest physical obstruction.

I know it was irresponsible and I should have just gone to the end of the road, but in reality the maneuver never came close to endagering anyone or their property. So I'm wondering: Is this a legitimate defense or will it get me laughed out of court?

If anyone has any other suggestions whatsoever they are warmly welcomed. I am selling the car (a 450hp Trans-AM) and replacing it with a low-powered Econobox to avoid the temptation of pulling less-than-wise stunts like this.

By the way, I heard you can be arrested upon conviction of an RD... is it likely that I could be arrested at the end of my court date?

My bad, I didn't realize my last post had in fact gone through. Sorry about that.

My angle is this: The law says "wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property" constitutes reckless driving. But at the time there were no cars, persons or property in any direction for at least 30 feet, and I had complete control over the car for the duration of the maneuver. At any given point in the turn I had at least 30 feet between my car and the nearest physical obstruction.

Click to expand...

Your angle will be irrelevant. Unless the judge is willing to allow exemptions for crimes that don't exist in the codes, your actions are going likely fall within the section cited.

I have never heard of a state allowing an exception for safe driving simply because there was not someone who was actually in danger at the instant of the act. If that were the case, then why have red light violations at night when traffic is light ... stop signs ... speed ... etc.? We'd have to enact caveats to all traffic violations to include language such as, "void if no other drivers within 300'".

I'd recommend speaking to an attorney if you wish attempt to get the charges reduced in some way.

- Carl

Okay, that's understandable. I just wanted to know if I had a chance of proving that my actions were NOT in fact demonstrative of a wanton disregard for persons or property. I was thinking that in order to show wanton disregard for persons or property I would first have to somehow endanger them. My line of reasoning was that if I was far away from them I could not have been shown to have endangered them, and in turn could not have been proven to have acted with wanton disregard for their safety... but what you're saying makes sense, I suppose.

As for an attorney--I wish I had the money. Unfortunately, I don't, so I'll just have to take whatever hit they dish out on me.

What's even more unfortunate is that I know a few people with RD's, and they all got them for genuinely reckless offenses. One was drunk and driving the wrong way on the freeway, another was going over 160 mph on the freeway, and there are others. I absolutely hate to be subject to the same punishment and the same treatment from law enforcement for something as comparatively petty as burning the tires around in an empty street. It may not have been a mature decision but the fact that, depending on how the court appearance goes, I could be subject to license suspension, exorbitant fines, imprisonment, skyrocketing insurance, and a criminal record among other things, just seems a bit unfair for a "crime" so petty. But that's life, I guess.