Bogus stop by DPS

[Jaguar]

I need to vent a little tonight.

About 6:30 this evening my wife requests that I rent a DVD for us and pick up some fast food. So I hop in my car and head towards town. As I get to a stop sign for a FM road, about 1/2 mile from my house, I stop and look to the left and see a vehicle topping the hill about 1/2 mile down the road. The speed limit on the FM road is 60, so since my car isn't fully warmed up and I'm turning right I sit there and let them go by. As the truck goes by, I see another vehicle just topping the hill so I go ahead and pull out, going down hill my Chrysler 300 accelerates to 60 with plenty of room to spare for the vehicle behind me.

As I start going back up hill, I noticed the car behind is gaining on me rapidly. I take a closer look and it is a cruiser with a light bar on top. I check my speed, only doing about 58, and since the speed limit slows to 55 ahead, I start slowing down. By this time, the trooper is on my bumper and he hits his lights. I pull over in a area where there are piles of gravel stored for road work, and roll down the window and pull out my wallet.

The Trooper steps to the window and asks if I know why he pulled me over and honestly answer I have no idea. He tells me that when I pulled out on to the FM road, I did not stop at the stop sign and he was going to issue me a warning for that. At that point I hand him my DL and POI (I wasn't armed) and as an afterthought I hand over my CHL and he says "thanks for that" as he hands back my CHL and POI without asking anything about a weapon. I then look at him and say, "Sir, I did come to a complete stop, the truck in front of you was topping the hill when I got to the stop sign and I sat there for 15 - 30 seconds waiting for him to go by." He tells me that is not what he saw and he could issue a citation for the infraction. I replied, "I know the side of the road is not the place to argue, I'll take the warning." He walks back to his car and within a few minutes brings back my DL and a warning ticket I had to sign.

What bugs me about this whole thing is if he was in the citation issuing mood there would be no recourse for me. I could fight it in court, but really, my word against his, who would the judge side with? I know for a fact that I did not violate the law, I was wondering if I had a tail light was out when he got behind me.

Anyway, I was flabbergasted by the whole episode. What would you guys do if issued a citation for a law you know didn't break, plead your case in front of a judge and hope for the best? Pay up - and then keep paying higher insurance? This really bothers me.

[mrvmax]

Yep, not much you can do, even State Troopers are wrong sometimes. I had a motorcycle cop freak out on my for no reason when he was escorting a funeral (long story but he felt I should have backed away from a stop light when the funeral procession drove by so he commenced to yelling at me) . Although I was angry at the way he acted there was nothing I could do about it, some things are better left alone.

[ffemt300]

Take the warning... In my experience that is one generous trooper.

[Excaliber]

You handled the situation in the best way possible, and I think what actually happened is a bit more complex than you realize.

I suspect that the officer saw you beginning to pull out as he topped the hill and assumed you had not stopped at the sign and stopped you on that basis. When you told him you had waited at the sign for the truck to pass, he had an "oops" moment. At that point it dawned on him that you must have stopped and waited as you said because there would have been no other way for you to know if there was a vehicle was that far in front of him or whether it was a car or a truck.

A bit of ego likely came into play here, and instead of admitting he stopped you for a violation he now knew you didn't commit he issued a warning to save face without hurting you.

This obviously wasn't the best way to handle it, and he'll likely reconsider the wisdom of stopping folks under ambiguous circumstances, but the good thing is he wasn't willing to falsify a citation that might have gone to court and given him a choice between admitting a mistake there or committing perjury.

This was a learning experience for the officer and a confirmation for you that behaving properly during a stop, even when the officer is wrong, pays off in the best possible outcome more often than not.

[sjfcontrol]

You handled the situation in the best way possible, and I think what actually happened is a bit more complex than you realize.

I suspect that the officer saw you beginning to pull out as he topped the hill and assumed you had not stopped at the sign and stopped you on that basis. When you told him you had waited at the sign for the truck to pass, he had an "oops" moment. At that point it dawned on him that you must have stopped and waited as you said because there would have been no other way for you to know if there was a vehicle was that far in front of him or whether it was a car or a truck.

A bit of ego likely came into play here, and instead of admitting he stopped you for a violation he now knew you didn't commit he issued a warning to save face without hurting you.

This obviously wasn't the best way to handle it, and he'll likely reconsider the wisdom of stopping folks under ambiguous circumstances, but the good thing is he wasn't willing to falsify a citation that might have gone to court and given him a choice between admitting a mistake there or committing perjury.

This was a learning experience for the officer and a confirmation for you that behaving properly during a stop, even when the officer is wrong, pays off in the best possible outcome more often than not.

According to the story, the officer says he's issuing a warning before the OP mentions the other vehicle.

[Jaguar]

You handled the situation in the best way possible, and I think what actually happened is a bit more complex than you realize.

I suspect that the officer saw you beginning to pull out as he topped the hill and assumed you had not stopped at the sign and stopped you on that basis. When you told him you had waited at the sign for the truck to pass, he had an "oops" moment. At that point it dawned on him that you must have stopped and waited as you said because there would have been no other way for you to know if there was a vehicle was that far in front of him or whether it was a car or a truck.

A bit of ego likely came into play here, and instead of admitting he stopped you for a violation he now knew you didn't commit he issued a warning to save face without hurting you.

This obviously wasn't the best way to handle it, and he'll likely reconsider the wisdom of stopping folks under ambiguous circumstances, but the good thing is he wasn't willing to falsify a citation that might have gone to court and given him a choice between admitting a mistake there or committing perjury.

This was a learning experience for the officer and a confirmation for you that behaving properly during a stop, even when the officer is wrong, pays off in the best possible outcome more often than not.

According to the story, the officer says he's issuing a warning before the OP mentions the other vehicle.

Correct, the conversation started, "know why", "no", "you failed to stop, I'm issuing a warning"

But you are correct, he probably saw me pulling out as he topped the hill and thought I didn't stop. When the mind's eye sees something, it sees it, and it is hard to tell the mind that it did not happen the way it thinks. I believe the trooper believes he saw me roll the stop sign, and would testify in court that I did, it is how the mind works sometimes.

Maybe his dash cam, if it was running as he was traveling down the FM road, could be used had it gone to a ticket. At the very least it would show he could not see me until I was pulling out, at the most it would show me stopped. I don't know if they keep the dash cam on full time or not.

[The Annoyed Man]

I could fight it in court, but really, my word against his, who would the judge side with? I know for a fact that I did not violate the law, I was wondering if I had a tail light was out when he got behind me.

Anyway, I was flabbergasted by the whole episode. What would you guys do if issued a citation for a law you know didn't break, plead your case in front of a judge and hope for the best? Pay up - and then keep paying higher insurance? This really bothers me.

I had exactly such a thing years ago back in California when I got a speeding ticket on my motorcycle while going 10 mph under the speed limit, because at the exact moment I came up on their radar, I was being passed by a of other guys on bikes who were speeding about 20 mph over the speed limit. The other bikes blew past me and went on up the road and got pulled over after they had rounded the next corner. I came up the road a minute later, NOT speeding, and definitely NOT part of the same group, but the cop stepped into the road and flagged me down and wrote me a 20 mph over the limit ticket, insisting that I was with that other group.

I went to court, and I put the cop on the stand and asked him why he had pulled me over when I was A) not speeding, and B) not even riding with that other group of people wom I'd never even met before. I explained that i had known that the officers were ahead up the road and was intentionally trying to avoid getting a ticket. I explained how the others had come up behind me, blown past me, and raced one another up to the point where they got popped, while I deliberately hung back. He sat there and lied on the stand, and said "no sir, you were with that group, and you were speeding." I looked at the judge and said, "Your Honor, that is just simply not true, but I have nothing else by way of evidence."

You see, I just naturally expected that the officer would tell the truth, but he didn't, and it turned out that there was another agenda in play. The alleged violation took place on Mulholland Highway, a twisty 2 lane country road, and local residents along that road were tired of getting nailed by speeding bikers as they tried to back out of their driveways, and hosing blood and body parts off of the road out in front of their homes. So they got the CHP and the local courts involved, and they basically set about doing everything they could to discourage bikers from riding on "their" road—regardless of the speed they were riding at. I was simply a victim of that. I had been required to post 10% of the $150 fine in order to get a court date, and the judge reduced my punishment to the $15 already paid......but I still got another point on my driving record.....which was worse. I told the judge that I would rather pay the whole fine and not get the point on my record, and his answer was "NEXT CASE PLEASE!!!"

Later, I asked a friend of mine who was a CHP officer why that cop would have lied on the stand like that. His answer was that the cop in question knew that I had no real evidence to offer in my defense, and that, as a LEO, he is what is called a "Friend of the Court." In any conflict between the word of the accused or the word of a witness, and the word of the officer who wrote the ticket, where there is no evidence to refute the officer's word, the court is going to naturally assume that he is telling the truth and that the accused or the witness are lying.

My friend said that is is quite common for officers to lie on the stand in traffic cases precisely because there is rarely any evidence to the contrary, the accused is presumed to be guilty, and "cops never lie."

In your case, you're telling the truth, but the cop is going to get away with his lie because that is how the system works, and it works to encourage him to lie.

[C-dub]

I'm sorry, but this LEO didn't care about the truth. He only saw what he wanted to see and left no room for any other possibility. I have also been a victim of this type of abuse and luckily it only cost me several hundred dollars nearly 30 years ago. And we are usually at their mercy with no way to prove what the truth of the matter was. Fortunately, I have not come into contact with another officer like that since then.

[Jaguar]

I understand the the system TAM and C-dub, and I really don't like it but it is what it is.

On the other hand, my brother-in-law was ticketed late one night for an illegal u-turn and was guilty, but since he didn't want the ticket on his record decided to try and fight it. When he went to court he saw the officer there, remembered him clearly and figured he was done for. When the judge asked the officer about the event, the officer stated he could not remember any details, so the judge dismissed it.

Win some and lose some I guess.

[tbrown]

I'm sorry, but this LEO didn't care about the truth. He only saw what he wanted to see and left no room for any other possibility. I have also been a victim of this type of abuse and luckily it only cost me several hundred dollars nearly 30 years ago. And we are usually at their mercy with no way to prove what the truth of the matter was. Fortunately, I have not come into contact with another officer like that since then.

I started running video in my car because of bad drivers but bad cops are another good reason to have video. If the OP story happened to me, I would give a copy of the video clip of the full stop through the traffic stop to my lawyer and I'm confident he would get the DA to drop the charges without a trial.

If I got a sincere apology from the cop within 30 days, I would consider the matter closed. Otherwise, that video would be all over the internet with the cop's name and agency, showing their disregard for the truth to the world.

[Jumping Frog]

When the judge asked the officer about the event, the officer stated he could not remember any details, so the judge dismissed it.

Have you ever noticed how a cop will give a traffic ticket, and then after the driver pulls away the cop continues to site there for a few minutes?

I had a cop friend of mine explain he did that because he took a few minutes to jot down his notes about the stop on the back of ticket. Since the notes were made at the time of the stop, he was allowed to refer to them during his testimony.

[Jaguar]

When the judge asked the officer about the event, the officer stated he could not remember any details, so the judge dismissed it.

Have you ever noticed how a cop will give a traffic ticket, and then after the driver pulls away the cop continues to site there for a few minutes?

I had a cop friend of mine explain he did that because he took a few minutes to jot down his notes about the stop on the back of ticket. Since the notes were made at the time of the stop, he was allowed to refer to them during his testimony.

Maybe the cop was feeling extra generous. That would be my BIL's luck.

[puma guy]

I have installed a video and GPS recorder in my truck - just in case

[gigag04]

Our videos record +/- 30s prior to activation so as to catch observed violations.

I think making a stop on a perceived violation is pretty thin. I won't stop for a moving violation stop sign/light unless I observed the entire approach and violation.