Posts: 52,147
Threads: 2,793
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
however, police and courts have a devilishly hard time trying to care about these things.
BS.
Police have a devilishly hard time trying to prove the driver was distracted, without some kind of measurable standard. If there is a major infraction, or a collision (with or without injury, it's pretty much prima facia.
It's similar with DUI. But with DUI (in CA) there must first be probable cause for a stop. If the driver is eventually found to to have a BAC of .08% or greater, they are presumed DUI. No further proof is needed. But everything up and to that point can (and often is) challenged.
Less than .08%, the People have to prove that the actions and condition of the driver warrant (npi) a conviction. Not that easy.
With texting being illegal, you don't have to prove that the driver was distracted, you just have to hope the jury believes your testimony that he was texting, and not the jerk:
"I wasn't texting. Maybe it was somebody who looked like me, in a car that looked like mine. But it wasn't me. I don't know what he's talkin."
turning a station, or upping the AC takes far less time than texting.
Agreed.
And it's my contention that it takes less higher (?!) brain activity to do those as opposed to texting.
Posts: 37,098
Threads: 2,599
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
however, police and courts have a devilishly hard time trying to care about these things.
BS.
what proof is needed for a red light ticket? just the officer's word. i don't see why that wouldn't be sufficient for reckless driving.
Posts: 13,563
Threads: 175
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
jdc wrote: Ouch...
A driver who caused a fatal traffic collision when she was text messaging behind the wheel on the freeway last year was sentenced today to five years in state prison.
She got off easy.
Posts: 2,775
Threads: 90
Joined: Oct 2020
Reputation:
0
Article Accelerator wrote:
[quote=jdc] Ouch...
A driver who caused a fatal traffic collision when she was text messaging behind the wheel on the freeway last year was sentenced today to five years in state prison.
She got off easy.
Agreed.
I was pissed about my wife's ticket. As Mattkime said, she was an easy target, plus the end of the month quota's were needing to be filled...
But she was not causing any danger to anyone. A simple, short toot of the horn from the car behind would have been all that was needed to get her on her way again. Ho hum.
Posts: 2,775
Threads: 90
Joined: Oct 2020
Reputation:
0
RAMd®d wrote:
...
turning a station, or upping the AC takes far less time than texting.
Agreed.
And it's my contention that it takes less higher (?!) brain activity to do those as opposed to texting.
Kids (and other people) can pocket text, i.e. by touch. They barely need to engage neurons to reply to a text. It's automatic. It's old people we need to worry about, whose fat jittery fingers fumble to find the keys!
I keed, just a little.
Posts: 4,915
Threads: 267
Joined: Dec 2024
Reputation:
0
Black wrote:
[quote=RAMd®d]
In the city, I split lanes at stop lights and occasionally as I roll up along side a car, I'll see the driver hide his/her cellphone.
And I'm also hopelessly aware of what's going on inside people's cars. Most of the time I wish I wasn't able to see.
I walk my son to school & back every day, and we have to cross at a very busy intersection. So I'm teaching him how, even when you have the Walk signal, you have to make sure the approaching driver sees you and acknowledges you before you step off the curb. We watch drivers approaching the light as it's about to turn green, and it's downright frightening what we see a couple times a week. Maybe twice a week we miss the signal because somebody speeds right through, barely slowing to make the turn, often while chatting on the phone, or texting, or putting on makeup, or shaving, reading a newspaper. Or just not looking for pedestrians standing patiently at the corner trying to cross legally and safely.
Posts: 6,024
Threads: 68
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
jdc wrote:
A driver who caused a fatal traffic collision when she was text messaging behind the wheel on the freeway last year was sentenced today to five years in state prison.
I wish it was more.
Posts: 2,775
Threads: 90
Joined: Oct 2020
Reputation:
0
Mike Johnson wrote:
[quote=Black]
[quote=RAMd®d]
In the city, I split lanes at stop lights and occasionally as I roll up along side a car, I'll see the driver hide his/her cellphone.
And I'm also hopelessly aware of what's going on inside people's cars. Most of the time I wish I wasn't able to see.
I walk my son to school & back every day, and we have to cross at a very busy intersection. So I'm teaching him how, even when you have the Walk signal, you have to make sure the approaching driver sees you and acknowledges you before you step off the curb. We watch drivers approaching the light as it's about to turn green, and it's downright frightening what we see a couple times a week. Maybe twice a week we miss the signal because somebody speeds right through, barely slowing to make the turn, often while chatting on the phone, or texting, or putting on makeup, or shaving, reading a newspaper. Or just not looking for pedestrians standing patiently at the corner trying to cross legally and safely.
Basic rule of the road- make eye contact with people, don't assume anything. Good for you dad. People really are stupid.
Posts: 52,147
Threads: 2,793
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
what proof is needed for a red light ticket? just the officer's word. i don't see why that wouldn't be sufficient for reckless driving.
Well, you've hit the nail on the head. It's the officer's word. That is not proof. A judge or a jury makes a decision based on that testimony, not on material evidence. Judgement usually goes for who has the most reasonable testimony and accurate testimony, unlike a red light camera case which is pretty much cut and dry.
Again, this is just about CA, but reckless driving almost always requires that three moving traffic violations are committed, and they all have to point to wanton disregard for the public's safety. Unless the suspect waves their right to a jury trial, you must convince the jury that what you saw merits the arrest and conviction. And not all jurors will agree with you. That's another reason good witness statements are important. But good witnesses aren't always around.
You can't force anybody to accept your word except perhaps when you testify as an expert witness. Then the defense may try to bring in one of their own. Again, it's a matter of who the jury believes.
So we have laws specifically about cellphones and texting, to eliminate uncertainty and hopefully prevent injury or worse.
Posts: 42,600
Threads: 545
Joined: Nov 2023
Reputation:
0
Reckless Driving in WA state is automatic for 20+ over the speed limit. My GF's niece just got nailed for 45 in a 20 school zone, and was hit with reckless. As soon as the judge heard school zone, she was screwed. He said she "might" be able to argue the 25 over down to 19, thus no reckless, but school zone screwed her. Lost her license until she hits 18.
I got an 86 in a 60, but the state trooper cut me some slack as the road was deserted, and wrote it for 19 over. He said the judge/magistrate knows this is code for already has been given a break and don't even try talking it down any lower.
|
