1. Free Legal Help, Legal Forms and Lawyers. TheLaw.com has been providing free legal assistance online since 1995. Our most popular destinations for legal help are below. It only takes a minute to join our legal community!

    Dismiss Notice

Bumper Pacing Illegal?

Discussion in 'Speeding Tickets, Traffic & Moving Violations' started by coworker23, Feb 2, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My question involves a speeding ticket from the State of: CA

    What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Californ I. A.

    Here is a good question nobody in law seems to be able to answer clearly.

    If Officers of the Law (Emergency Vehicles) are subject to the same laws governing the roads as stated under the following Vehicle Codes:

    Section 21350
    Section 21650
    Section 21800
    Section 21950
    Section 22100
    Section 22348
    Section 22450
    Section 22500
    Section 22650
    Section 38305
    Section 38312

    and if an officer does not "display a lighted red lamp visible from the front as a warning to other drivers and pedestrians" as stated under V C Section 21055 Exemption of Authorized Emergency Vehicles, when bumper pacing, then the Police Officer is not Exempt from the laws above and he is then breaking the law to issue a citation under the act of "bumper pacing".
     
  2. CdwJava

    CdwJava Moderator

    Messages:
    4,388
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    21055. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle is exempt from
    Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 21350), Chapter 3 (commencing
    with Section 21650), Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 21800),
    Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 21950), Chapter 6 (commencing with
    22100), Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 22348), Chapter 8
    (commencing with Section 22450), Chapter 9 (commencing with Section
    22500), and Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 22650) of this
    division, and Article 3 (commencing with Section 38305) and Article 4
    (commencing with Section 38312) of Chapter 5 of Division 16.5, under
    all of the following conditions:
    (a) If the vehicle is being driven in response to an emergency
    call or while engaged in rescue operations or is being used in the
    immediate pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law
    or is
    responding to, but not returning from, a fire alarm, except that
    fire department vehicles are exempt whether directly responding to an
    emergency call or operated from one place to another as rendered
    desirable or necessary by reason of an emergency call and operated to
    the scene of the emergency or operated from one fire station to
    another or to some other location by reason of the emergency call.
    (b) If the driver of the vehicle sounds a siren as may be
    reasonably necessary
    and the vehicle displays a lighted red lamp
    visible from the front as a warning to other drivers and pedestrians.
    A siren shall not be sounded by an authorized emergency vehicle
    except when required under this section.


    Yes, we can pace you. No, you have not discovered a magic bullet that has been ignored by every attorney in the state for generations.
     
  3. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Selecting hearing apparently.

    (b) If the driver of the vehicle sounds a siren as may be
    reasonably necessary and the vehicle displays a lighted red lamp
    visible from the front as a warning to other drivers and pedestrians.

    A siren shall not be sounded by an authorized emergency vehicle
    except when required under this section.
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2011
  4. CdwJava

    CdwJava Moderator

    Messages:
    4,388
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    Read PC 4 if you want to know how the courts are encouraged to interpret the laws.

    And if you truly think that you have discovered some golden goose to get off of a traffic infraction, you have another think coming. So, good luck with that defense.
     
  5. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Assumptions

    Again, assumptions.

    You assume this is my defense... This isn't my defense. This is an argument which will be escalated to law makers as it's apparent it's written in black and white, but it's not being followed black and white.

    Where you aware of the VC code or did you just assume that you could break the rules of the road (while in pursuit?)

    The fact of putting my and another vehicles life in danger as the officer had no regard for my or others safety is just bonus points I will be bringing to the attention to the courts and his superiors. The fact he broke the law while providing me the ticket will just make my day.

    Do you really think I would be this motivated if I in fact did break the law? There are Dirty Officers, I have uncovered one. I will be doing everything I can legally to prevent this type of thing to happen to anyone else.

    Aside from video taping Officers breaking the law and posting it on Youtube, how would you suggest "policing" this type of thing, Supervisor?
     
  6. CdwJava

    CdwJava Moderator

    Messages:
    4,388
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    Good luck with that. If officers are unable to ignore some of those rules, then it would be impossible to enforce many provisions of the Vehicle Code.

    Of course I am aware of the CVC. And, of course, since no court of competent jurisdiction has ever tossed an infraction because the officer had to accelerate to pace a vehicle, I think it is pretty clear that the courts view this as an acceptable practice whether you like it or not.

    Again, good luck with that.

    How does his speeding endanger others but yours does not?

    If an officer lies, commits some egregious violation of the law or policy, you need to report him or her or hire legal counsel to pursue the matter ... provided there is some action to be taken. No officer wants to work with a bad cop, and no agency wants to support or keep employed an officer that is a liability.

    If no one reports him or her, then the agency may never be aware of any problems. Administrators are not psychics.
     
  7. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow, really?

    This isn't encouraging coming from a Supervisor of Law Enforcement.

    Who suggested I was traveling at a unsafe rate of speed? You must be assuming my defense is some technicality to exonerate me from "questionable" charges.

    It's apparent your bias outlook on the law (and lack of regard for them) prevents you from acknowledging the possibility I WASN'T SPEEDING.

    Aside from the fact of my comment "Do you really think I would be this motivated if I in fact did break the law?" I guess it wasn't black and white enough for you... My cruise control was set to the speed limit, which I now realize, was traveling 2mph under the speed limit after the calibration of my speedometer. The amount of distance this officer had to travel to catch me in the X amount of seconds I was traveling on said road could not have been traveled if I had in fact been traveling at the accused speed. Unless Ford started putting Super Chargers and Super Brakes in Crown Vics, the accused speed is NOT SCIENTIFICALLY POSSIBLE, nowhere near it. If you think I am "assuming" how fast Crown Vic's are, take a look at the Scientific data readily available for said vehicle from the Michigan State Police Vehicle Evaluation Program. I imagine the Data within that assumes the Vehicle is new, not 5+ years old.

    Either this Officer was under heavy braking when he glanced at his speedometer or he is being flat out dishonest. The fact the Bumper Pacing is allowed with no Scientific evidence of an infraction gives the opportunity for Officers of this nature to provide infractions under false pretenses to fill their increased quotas as a result of lawoffs and budget issues.

    Not only will the issue be escalated, depending on the response of said escalation will determine whether YouTube and the students of the City's Universities of Law (witnesses) will be involved. Perhaps a content server specifically pointing to a domain name of "saynotodirtycops.com" will be entertained as well.

    :)
     
  8. mightymoose

    mightymoose Moderator

    Messages:
    11,370
    Likes Received:
    1,970
    Trophy Points:
    113

    It is the same thing you will hear from a judge, if a judge even entertains your argument enough to respond to it.
    You are arguing against a well established and accepted practice utilized by law enforcement. Perhaps your best bet is to contact your state representatives in the legislature and seek more specific restrictions against law enforcement within the Vehicle Code.

    The argument you are making isn't going to get you anywhere. If you have not consulted with a local attorney about all this then you should let one explain it to you.

    You are going to find that the law is not as black and white as you think. There are gray areas, and there are a lot of things that are left to the discretion of officers on the street. In this case, pacing is something that is reasonably necessary for enforcement purposes. Not every agency has radar, and pacing is the most practical way to determine speed.
     
  9. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wordddddddddddd
     
  10. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Actually I was completing that at or about the time you posted. I don't want it restricted, it's black and white. I want it followed or even changed to exempt (allow) bumper pacing.

    I feel if the laws are holding us responsible for the cashcow traffic violations provide then it should be a consistent subjectmatter. The tighter money gets for people the less likely they will just "pay the ticket". In my case, it's !@#$. Utter !@#.

    The great thing about the law, Continuances, Peremptory Challenges, Motions to Suppress Evidence after the lack of follow through from the D.A. for a Discovery Request and anything else any normal person can do to soak up that extra $200+ dollars they are working to suck out of your pocket, makes me sleep at night.

    You begin to question, how much is it worth to continue to be a witness to a case when you are asked to appear in court 3 times. hahahaha.
     
  11. CdwJava

    CdwJava Moderator

    Messages:
    4,388
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    At time and a half with a minimum of two to four hours depending on the contract? In this economy? Actually, that would be lucrative.

    But, since most continuances are requested prior to the court date officers tend to be called off before they have to appear. And if the officer does have to appear then turn around and go home, oh well, the officer still gets paid.

    If you want to try and change the law to remove the discretion of the courts and officers, go right ahead. I doubt I will see such a thing in my lifetime. If we do, then we might as well take the cops out of the cars and put them behind a desk with a phone waiting for people to come in and confess because that will be the only way that most traffic enforcement will be able to be conducted. Good luck with that.
     
  12. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Very interesting point you make... That's exactly the SAME thing this officer said when I said I would see him in court. 4 hours of overtime. Considering this officer mentioned the hours of furlough the union just negotiated in lieu of layoffs wouldn't officers then benefit from giving !@$# tickets in hopes to have to goto trial to gain back those hours?

    Like you apparently? lol

    Walked in to that one now didn't ya. hahahaha
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2011
  13. mightymoose

    mightymoose Moderator

    Messages:
    11,370
    Likes Received:
    1,970
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I love getting subpoenas... easy money!
     
  14. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Would you normally show up in your outfit if you were off duty?
     
  15. CdwJava

    CdwJava Moderator

    Messages:
    4,388
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    Not necessarily. Since it is impossible to predict how many will go to court, it is an ineffective way to try and spike one's income.

    Who said I work behind a desk?

    I'm in administration, but I also work the field. I've been at this for a couple of decades and have worked most every assignment possible. I've earned a right to work in more or less comfortable surroundings once in a while. When we improve skills, knowledge and education, we tend to move up ... moving up often means better positions with greater responsibility (and corresponding liability), and better positions often mean less physical exertion and not more.

    So, yes, I do work behind a desk a good deal of the time. But, it is not because I cannot chase violators, it is because most of my duties require me to work Administration and Investigations, and not engage in routine patrol.

    Walked in to what? The point was that if you take away the ability of officers to chase violators they will not be able to enforce traffic offenses at all. If you missed that point, then I feel sorry for you.
     
  16. mightymoose

    mightymoose Moderator

    Messages:
    11,370
    Likes Received:
    1,970
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I sometimes do... I am required to appear in court either in uniform or in suit/tie.
    I usually have the uniform ready to go so I wear it in most cases. It also gets me around the line at the entrance ;)
     
  17. CdwJava

    CdwJava Moderator

    Messages:
    4,388
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    What "outfit?"

    If you are referring to court, yes, I would tend to show up in court in uniform unless it is my day off and I intend to do something else AFTER court. In such a case I would take my personal vehicle to court, dress in a suit and tie, and then go on my merry way afterward. If I intend to go there and back, I'll burn the city's gas in my unit, dress in uniform, and head home afterward. Since I have a take home car, it's a minimum of fuss.
     
  18. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Lighten up man. Hey Soos!
     
  19. coworker23

    coworker23 Law Topic Starter New Member

    Messages:
    22
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Concerning the Overtime, the 2 times shown was in Company Vehicle + Outfit, probably no ot is what I am thinking.
     
  20. CdwJava

    CdwJava Moderator

    Messages:
    4,388
    Likes Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    83

    Your the one getting all vitriolic here, not me.

    With my schedule? Traffic court occurs on my usual days off and three hours before my shift starts if I do happen to be working that day. So, if I go in uniform and in the city vehicle it's probably overtime anyway.

    Frankly, I do very little traffic these days aside from DUI enforcement. But, if one leaps out in front of me I deal with it. Most of mine do not go to traffic court so I get court for more serious matters.

    Overtime or not, if I get a subpoena I attend. If it's overtime, my wife loves it. If not, my Chief loves it. Either way, someone is happy.
     

Share This Page

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.