Witness bias

[Zigner]

Looks like I stuck a stick in the ant hole with my initial question.

Just so you are aware of my situation and why I feel I should impeach the officer's testimony.

here are the facts.


Officer measured my speed via LIDAR.
There were about four other officers working this same spot.

Officer stopped me by calmly walking into center lane of four lane highway, placing his body in the direct path of my vehicle and placing his hands above his head.

There was only one other vehicle on the road which ended up beside me when I stopped.

Officer FALSELY marked heavy traffic on citation. Why did he do this? To bolster his case.

Would any of you (the prudant ones) walk into the middle of heavy traffic?

This also helps my case in proving that the officer was convinced beyound any doubt that I was driving safely. Otherwise he would not put himself in the path of a driver who was driving "at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property". [CVC 22350]

Since my wife was going to meet me at the auto dealer down the road, she witnessed everything at the intersection at the bottom of the hill.

I plan to subpeona the tickets from the other officers to see if they marked LIGHT traffic, which would be the actual truth. I also plan to use any other victims of the officer as witnesses as to the volume of traffic on that street.

Now don't get me wrong. I have nothing against police officers. (my father was in the force for years). I just don't like it when they falsify documents.

How does the volume of traffic have any bearing on the offense you were charged with?

 

[CdwJava]

Officer measured my speed via LIDAR.
There were about four other officers working this same spot.

Why is that a problem? And, actually, he visually estimated your speed and then confirmed it with LIDAR.

Officer stopped me by calmly walking into center lane of four lane highway, placing his body in the direct path of my vehicle and placing his hands above his head.

A dumb way to make a stop, but no legal issue appears to exist as you yielded to his authority.

There was only one other vehicle on the road which ended up beside me when I stopped.

Officer FALSELY marked heavy traffic on citation. Why did he do this? To bolster his case.

That can certainly be your contention, but it's a non issue unless you were cited for 22350 and challenge the prima facie (posted) speed and use the lack of traffic to make an argument that your actions were not unsafe. In which case the issue for a trier of fact to discern whether the traffic was "heavy" and whether that was a relevant issue or not, not one of "bias".

This also helps my case in proving that the officer was convinced beyound any doubt that I was driving safely. Otherwise he would not put himself in the path of a driver who was driving "at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property". [CVC 22350]

It's not a "bias" issue, but you can certainly raise the issue at your trial to bolster any claim you might want to make.

What was the speed limit, and what speed were you cited for?

Since my wife was going to meet me at the auto dealer down the road, she witnessed everything at the intersection at the bottom of the hill.

Then bring her along, too.

I plan to subpeona the tickets from the other officers to see if they marked LIGHT traffic, which would be the actual truth. I also plan to use any other victims of the officer as witnesses as to the volume of traffic on that street.

Good luck getting all that info and getting anyone else cited to come in and testify against their will.

Now don't get me wrong. I have nothing against police officers. (my father was in the force for years). I just don't like it when they falsify documents.

"Heavy" traffic is a subjective opinion, it is NOT "falsifying" a document.

I would urge you to avoid making such accusations against the officer in front of the judge and instead just challenge the prima facie speed with an argument to show that your speed was not "unsafe". Most courts frown upon groundless accusations against officers and this one is weak.

If you have exceeded a posted speed limit for which a valid survey exists to support it, the legal presumption will be that you were driving in violation of 22350. It is now incumbent upon YOU to make the case that given the totality of circumstances your actions were NOT unsafe. You can raise the issue of the traffic, etc., but to argue that the officer is biased because he lied by writing "heavy" for traffic will do your case more damage than good, I believe. Just explain that you saw only one or two cars pass, or whatever, and use the light traffic to bolster your argument.

Arguing that the officer is a liar is not going to be as effective as a cogent and reasonaed argument in your defense.

- Carl

 

[mdiaz1328]

Carl, I’ll consider your advise regarding my accusations against the officer. It depends on whether he does this habitually, which I will try to ascertain when looking at the other tickets written on that day.

You were asking or implying as to what I was cited for. As I mentioned in one of my previous posts 22350. This is why traffic is quite relevant in my case.

In case you are not familiar with 22350.

22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.

As you can see, there is clause in here that prohibits anyone from driving faster than the posted speed limit.

Back to you question “why is that a problem”?

Its not a problem for me. It’s a problem for the prosecution. His actions prove that he was convinced that I was driving safely, otherwise he would not put his body in the path of my vehicle.

 

[CdwJava]

Carl, I’ll consider your advise regarding my accusations against the officer. It depends on whether he does this habitually, which I will try to ascertain when looking at the other tickets written on that day.

Well, if you insist upon calling him a liar, you will alienate the court. Whether traffic is "light" or "heavy" is entirely subjective, so that's an almost pointless avenue to pursue.

In case you are not familiar with 22350.

22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.

As you can see, there is clause in here that prohibits anyone from driving faster than the posted speed limit.

Yes, I am VERY familiar with CVC 22350.

And now, so that YOU can become more familiar with it, here is the REST of the story ...

Per CPOLS (published by the CA Attorney General):

The speed of any vehicle upon a highway not in excess of the limits specified in section 22352 (prima facie speed limits) or established as authorized in the Vehicle Code is lawful unless clearly proved to be in violation of the basic speed law (reasonable or prudent).

The speed of any vehicle upon a highway in excess of the prima facie speed limits in section 22352 or established in the Vehicle Code is prima facie unlawful unless the defendant establishes by competent evidence that the speed in excess of said limits did not constitute a violation of the basic speed law (Veh. Code, § 22350) at the time, place and under the conditions then existing.

In cases where the driver was not exceeding a posted speed limit, the arresting officer must prove both the speed and that it was a speed greater than was reasonable or prudent under the conditions.

In cases where the driver was exceeding the posted speed limit, the arresting officer must only prove the speed. The burden of proof then shifts to the defendant who must prove that the speed was safe at the time, place, and under the conditions existing. You should be prepared to overcome this defense by your notes containing the number of cars passed, intersections traversed, lane changes, pedestrians, other hazards and conditions.
​

So, the burden shifts back to you in order to prove that the speed you traveled was not unsafe for the conditions. THAT is when you can argue that traffic was light, or non existent and the officer will have to articulate the traffic and cannot resort to an adjective such as "heavy" - he'll have to define it and the other conditions present in order to counter any claims by you that traffic was light.

Its not a problem for me. It’s a problem for the prosecution. His actions prove that he was convinced that I was driving safely, otherwise he would not put his body in the path of my vehicle.

No, it proves he was foolish ... I wouldn't put my body in front of even a SAFE moving vehicle. It doesn't prove you were driving safe or within she posted speed limit, it shows he was foolish. It might also show that you had slowed considerably between the time he hit you with LIDAR and the time he made contact. It doesn't prove he believed you were driving safe. But, you are free to articulate that when you argue that while your actions exceeded the prima facie safe speed, your actions were not unsafe. I don't know how much weight it will have, but that will depend on the officer and the judge.

- Carl

 

[I_Got_Banned]

22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property.
As you can see, there is clause in here that prohibits anyone from driving faster than the posted speed limit.

You mean there isn't...