• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Confession?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Itchytoe

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? LA

Long story made short: Someone ran into me on the interstate, cop responded, cop lied on police report, cop gave me ticket, everyone left.

Long version:
Some idiot ran into my car on the interstate. Don't know why, but he just didn't stop in time and hit me. He flashed his lights at me, and rear-ended me. Go figure. While talking with my insurance company I found out that the police report says as follows:
"Driver of vehicle 2 stated he was traveling on I-10 W/B, in the left lane. He passed a truck (vehicle 1) that was in the left lane. After he passed the truck he moved back in the left lane. There were some vehicles in front of him, so he began to slow down. A gray truck (vehicle 1) was tailgating him. He tapped his brakes. He tapped his brakes again and the truck hit his vehicle in the rear. I asked the driver how hard did he apply his brakes. He looked at me with a blank stare on his face. I told him "You and me both know that you slammed on your brakes harder than you are telling me." He looked at me and nodded his head yes."

It's true that I stated I was traveling on I-10 W/B, and that the cop said "You and me both know that you......" but the rest is complete BS. It's not even close to what I said happened.

I have a ticket for 32:104C "Stop Suddenly" which says "No person shall stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided herein to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear when there is opportunity to give such signal." To me, this looks like a ticket for a burned tail light, because section 105 says
"Signals by hand and arm or signal lamps
A. Any stop or turn signal when required herein shall be given either by means of the hand and arm as provided in R.S. 32:106 or by signal lamps, except as otherwise provided in Paragraph B.
B. Any motor vehicle in use on a highway shall be equipped with, and the required signal shall be given by, signal lamps when the vehicle is so constructed, loaded or operated as to prevent the hand and arm signal from being visible, both to the front and to the rear." Even if I did slam on the brakes, my tail lights would have light up giving the driver behind me warning and satisfying the provisions of 32:104C.

My vehicle had a current inspection sticker, no previous damage of any kind, and the tail lights worked perfectly after the guy hit me. It seems like the cop's only evidence would be a confession, which if I'm not mistaken would have to be recorded or signed at an absolute minimum to be put into evidence. I found out today that the conversation at the scene when I told the cop what happened was not recorded so he obviously can't submit it into evidence since it doesn't exist (and wouldn't because it would prove him wrong). Without the alleged confession being recorded in any way or signed and in writing, he can't claim to have a confession right? How do you keep a cop from lieing on the stand and using the typical "Well I'm a cop, I don't lie" excuse?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?
 


CdwJava

Senior Member
The officer can testify as to what you said, it IS "evidence." His observations are generally admissible. It will be up to the trier of fact (the court) to decide upon the credibility of what the officer heard. Are you going to take the stand and submit yourself to cross examination just so you can state that you never told the officer what he says you did?

I suspect the driver behind you claims not to have seen any tail lights?

It may also be that case law has allowed this statute to be used in this situation where the brake lights alone provide for insufficient notice as required under the statute.

§104. Turning movements and required signals

A. No person shall turn a vehicle at an intersection unless the vehicle is in proper position upon the roadway as required in R.S. 32:101, or turn a vehicle to enter a private road or driveway, or otherwise turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety.

B. Whenever a person intends to make a right or left turn which will take his vehicle from the highway it is then traveling, he shall give a signal of such intention in the manner described hereafter and such signal shall be given continuously during not less than the last one hundred (100) feet traveled by the vehicle before turning.

C. No person shall stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided herein to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear when there is opportunity to give such signal.

D. The signals provided for in R.S. 32:105(B) shall be used to indicate an intention to turn, change lanes or start from a parked position and shall not be flashed on one side only on a parked or disabled vehicle, or flashed as a courtesy or "do pass" signal to operators of other vehicles approaching from the rear.​
Personally, I would have considered citing the other guy for following too closely and I suspect the officer would have done that had you not been tapping your brakes attempting to either scare him off or draw him in to a rear-ender. Since you apparently braked intentionally, it turns the blame onto you to some degree.

If there is no more specific code section in LA then you may be out of luck. You may want to consider engaging an attorney to address this if you intend to fight the accusation.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top