Hearing by mail??

[AARRGG]

What is the name of your state? Washington

I received in the mail yesterday my hearing date. As an alternative, they included an option to have a hearing by mail instead of taking time off from work and using the courts time. I would instead write out my defense and a determination would be made based on that alone.
Now I know that I could best explain things in writing so this seems to be the best option for me. Has anyone else done this and which way to you think is my best chance for getting out of this ticket?
Thanks!

Please veiw thread below to get caught up on what my violation was:
https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=131128

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

What is the name of your state? Washington

I received in the mail yesterday my hearing date. As an alternative, they included an option to have a hearing by mail instead of taking time off from work and using the courts time. I would instead write out my defense and a determination would be made based on that alone.
Now I know that I could best explain things in writing so this seems to be the best option for me. Has anyone else done this and which way to you think is my best chance for getting out of this ticket?
Thanks!

Please veiw thread below to get caught up on what my violation was:
https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=131128

My response:

Do not proceed in this manner. It's a slam dunk loss if you do.

Additionally, by doing this, you're giving up a fundamental constitutional right to "confront your accuser" - - the cop.

Go to the hearing if at all possible. Plead "not guilty". A trial will be scheduled. You don't need to subpoena the cop (which would be ridiculous to do). The State has an obligation to prove it's case against you and that includes making sure your accuser is present at time of trial. If your accuser is not at the trial, the judge MUST dismiss the case against you.

IAAL

 

[racer72]

IAAL, Washington state law does not require the citing officer to automatically appear in court. You must subpeona the officer or he is not obligated to appear. Many defendants are surprised when they show up for court and the officer is not there. About a third of those that show up in traffic court ask for extensions and subpoenas because the officer is not there.

Aaargh, unless you have a slam dunk defense, appear in court.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

IAAL, Washington state law does not require the citing officer to automatically appear in court. You must subpeona the officer or he is not obligated to appear. Many defendants are surprised when they show up for court and the officer is not there. About a third of those that show up in traffic court ask for extensions and subpoenas because the officer is not there.

Aaargh, unless you have a slam dunk defense, appear in court.

My response:

Racer, it makes no sense to me. If I was the defendant, why would the burden of having my accuser appear at trial be on me? That requirement would appear to be a violation of my 5th Amendment rights; i.e., my right to not cause testimony against myself - - and a subpoena in this regard would be tantamount to "self incrimination". I don't want to "cause" it - - let the State "cause" it!

If the officer isn't at trial, who's going to "authenticate" the ticket for admission into evidence? Who's going to accuse me? Who's going to be there for cross-examination?

The State is the party who has the burden of proof, and if the State fails to supply all witnesses and evidence, then their proof fails.

Please show me your legal authority for your proposition, and the automatic waiver of constitutional rights to require the State to have my accuser present at trial.

Unless you can show me some lawful authority - - statute, regulation, code, or otherwise, I'm going to presume you're operating under a misunderstanding of State law and Constitutional law.

IAAL

 

[AARRGG]

Did you read my previous thread? Is this a good enough defense? I don't doubt the radar was working right, I know for a fact though that I was not the car doing the speed the officer said the radar picked up. It had to of been the car infront of me as he was pulling away from me and then slammed on his brake as the patrol car came over the hill.
Oh yeah... we don't get trials or preliminary hearing here in Washington either, this hearing is it, period, one chance only.