Cop is crooked need help urgent

[fbluke]

CORRECTION : plead not guilty

 

[CdwJava]

a cop is always a cop we are talking about infraction and he got a call from alleged cop that want him to mee thim so he can issue him a ticket, even a person with no legal background at all would call bs. He was not pulled over at the time he commited alleged infraction.

It may depend on the state you are in, but in my state (CA) an infraction is a criminal offense and CAN be filed after the fact. There is NO requirement that says we have to catch them or lump it.

The key is the identification of the driver. if the driver cannot be identified, then the citation or the charge is just a tad difficult. But, if you know the driver or can identify him, there is nothing to prevent an officer from citing someone after the fact (subject to state law on the matter).

- carl

 

[ylen13]

CdwJava if what u saying is true, off duty cop can be parked, write down any people he observes speeding and then issue them ticket the next day.

edit: i see you posted whille i was posting, do you have a statue number or something that covers this, as its hard to believe a cop can really do that.

 

[CdwJava]

CdwJava if what u saying is true, off duty cop can be parked, write down any people he observes speeding and then issue them ticket the next day.

edit: i see you posted whille i was posting, do you have a statue number or something that covers this, as its hard to believe a cop can really do that.

The key woul dbe identifying the driver. If the oficer didn't make the stop at the time of the offense he loses the opportunity to identify the driver.

A crime can be filed at any time prior to the tolling of the statute of limitations. In CA, an infraction is a crime. It can be filed up to ... not sure of the exact time, but I believe it's 6 months to a year. However, the most I've waited is a few days. And those cites were mostly for things discovered after the fact - like a suspended license, no insurance, etc. after a crash or stop. And sometimes for another act observed while i was off duty.

- Carl

 

[ylen13]

The key woul dbe identifying the driver. If the oficer didn't make the stop at the time of the offense he loses the opportunity to identify the driver.

A crime can be filed at any time prior to the tolling of the statute of limitations. In CA, an infraction is a crime. It can be filed up to ... not sure of the exact time, but I believe it's 6 months to a year. However, the most I've waited is a few days. And those cites were mostly for things discovered after the fact - like a suspended license, no insurance, etc. after a crash or stop. And sometimes for another act observed while i was off duty.

- Carl

this is totally different "like a suspended license, no insurance, etc. after a crash or stop" i think i should have been more specific when i said infraction. I am talking specifically about speeding. Okay so a cop must be able to id the driver in order to issue a ticket, i can accept that then if are to take fluke case shoudn't he denied it was him in the car unless a cop can proof it some way?

 

[CdwJava]

this is totally different "like a suspended license, no insurance, etc. after a crash or stop" i think i should have been more specific when i said infraction. I am talking specifically about speeding. Okay so a cop must be able to id the driver in order to issue a ticket, i can accept that then if are to take fluke case shoudn't he denied it was him in the car unless a cop can proof it some way?

Sure. But, in a town my size, I KNOW most the people. In theory, if I see Johnny A. run a stop sign while off duty I can later write it up when I get to work. Or, I can have another officer stop him and then sign the citation. Mind you it is rarely done, but it is possible. The only time I have generally done it is for a misdemeanor. But it CAN be done for an infraction ... though I can't personally recall any that resulted from an off-duty observation. I DO know of officers that HAVE done so and they have been filed without a problem.

- carl

 

[ylen13]

thx for clarrification, totally makes sence now

 

[fbluke]

if i already admitted over the phone i was there but it was quick and vague, can i still play the identify the driver card

 

[Learning4free]

my understanding is if a cop observes someone breaking the law(ex:speeding) and whille trying to catch up the suspect loses him and sees him again in 2 hours he can't issue him a ticket. Unless i been taught wrongly how can off duty cop issue someone a ticket the next day when he observed him whille being off duty.

Not sure what fbluke would do but i would totally refuse the ticket and told the "cop" to take a hike.

A police officer has up to 30 days to issue a traffic violation for most traffic offenses. (in New Jersey) In a case like this it will just be harder to defend his actions in court as to how he can prove you were speeding. Pacing someone from behind is easy but if the vehicle he was in was at a stand still while he watch you go by is impossible to tell the EXACT speed. Good luck.

 

[edik]

This is very interesting.... sorry I am not a lawyer or a police officer so pardon my stupidity....

Theoretically .... lets say a police officer doesn't like me and wants to cause a little havoc for me for dating his daughter for instance. He can come in Monday morning to the station and say he saw me doing XYZ and write me citations and then put a nice burden on me to defend myself in court and prove my innocents in some states? I know it's far fetched but possible?

 

[CdwJava]

This is very interesting.... sorry I am not a lawyer or a police officer so pardon my stupidity....

Theoretically .... lets say a police officer doesn't like me and wants to cause a little havoc for me for dating his daughter for instance. He can come in Monday morning to the station and say he saw me doing XYZ and write me citations and then put a nice burden on me to defend myself in court and prove my innocents in some states? I know it's far fetched but possible?

It's also possible that he can say he saw you carrying the body of Jimmy Hoffa in your trunk. Anything is possible.

The burden of proof is still upon the state to show that offense occurred. Granted, this is generally minimal in the case of traffic violations, but he would still have to show that he was present, you were present, and the violation occurred. If he made it up out of whole cloth, he'd better make sure you weren't at home with the flu when he alleged he saw your vehicle.

- Carl

 

[edik]

It's also possible that he can say he saw you carrying the body of Jimmy Hoffa in your trunk. Anything is possible.

The burden of proof is still upon the state to show that offense occurred. Granted, this is generally minimal in the case of traffic violations, but he would still have to show that he was present, you were present, and the violation occurred. If he made it up out of whole cloth, he'd better make sure you weren't at home with the flu when he alleged he saw your vehicle.

- Carl

So why can't fbluke say he was at home in bed with the flu or simply does not remember where he was at the time of the accusationand have the off duty officer prove otherwise? How can the officier prove without witnesses that he actually saw fbluke much less observe him breaking a law? Doesn't it become his word against the officier's word? I guess I would personaly have a hard time with getting a ticket several days after the fact!

 

[CdwJava]

So why can't fbluke say he was at home in bed with the flu or simply does not remember where he was at the time of the accusationand have the off duty officer prove otherwise? How can the officier prove without witnesses that he actually saw fbluke much less observe him breaking a law? Doesn't it become his word against the officier's word? I guess I would personaly have a hard time with getting a ticket several days after the fact!

Nothing prevents you from alleging that on ANY traffic ticket or criminal accusation.

As I said, the burden of proof is on the state.

But, there is nothing magical about being in uniform and driving the police car. It does not all of a sudden grant an officer super powers and the ability to seek out criminal activity in a single bound.

Hence the reason it tends to rarely be done. Plus, it can be a slightly bigger headache as there IS the identification problem. Well, not in towns my size. But I still don't do it for infractions.

The best way to ID the driver is to stop him. But, as with ANY crime, the suspect can be identified in other ways, and the suspect does not have to be caught at the scene to be held to account for the offense.

- Carl

 

[Alchohol_Free]

If you not paying attention

to what you're doing a speed in a school zone, Law Enforcement is going to be allowed to use whatever means necessary to get you in trouble. After all, those are kids walking around there.

15 mph over a school zone speed limit puts those kids at risk in a big way.

 

[NWO]

You're an idiot. From your other erroneous posts, you clearly have NO legal experience or education.
As correctly noted by others, the officer (even off-duty) can still issue a citation. An officer is expected to uphold the law 24/7.

I'm glad you weren't my lawyer. I just beat a speeding ticket by a crooked cop radaring in uniform from an unmarked car ON DUTY. The OP should let the cop FIND HIM with no help from himself. Then if the cop manages to get him the ticket, fight it in court. If the law in your state is against you grill him on his ability to judge speeds by dropinging an object in court and ask him to tell you the speed of that object when it hits the ground.

This will help on the visual speed test:
http://www.norman-law.com/page25.html


This link might help too
http://www.jesbeard.com/s9.htm