That's what I like about the Prayer For Judgement, it really keeps traffic laws in the forefront when you are driving. Then, you just get in the habit of it.
That may be true, but losing someone to a speeder puts a new light on somethings. And it's bad enough that there are people who speed, then there are the idiots who want to justify it. Hey, it's only a few miles over the speed limit, what the heck, no one's getting hurt. And my all time fave, lighten up! Yeah, right. You justify it. You enable to speeder. You're just as guilty when someone dies because of their stupidity.
You will not get points if you have the DA reduce the speed and plead guilty either.... (if they reduce it which normally they will unless they have many tickets)
Why would the District Attorney reduce the ticket? If the police officer has issued a ticket proving that someone has exceeded the speed limit then why would this District Attorney make the decision to reduce it? I am just curious. Seems like the DA would uphold the law and backup the police officer. It must get frustrating for the police. Grace
Grace! A ticket does not "prove" anything! And it has been routine for as long as I can remember to reduce traffic tickets. I think the police are used to it. If this driver speaks to the assistant DA before court, he may well get the ticket reduced to a speed within 10 miles of the speed limit, saving him points on his insurance. The rules are complicated, and it's usually best to get an attorney that practices in traffic court on a regular basis.
Well, being hard headed, why is the ticket not the deciding factor for the DA? I would think that a person has the right to challenge the ticket in court but not by going through the DA or Asst. DA. Seems to me that those two people should be defending the cop's position, if they have proof (like radar) that the person was breaking the law. We need new people in office to change these things. For goodness sakes...why would a cop even stop someone if they know that it can be negotiated. I know why...because they have a quota...right? These are the things that drive me insane. Grace
I used mine when I "california rolled" through a stop sign 2 years ago. I got the ticket in February, court in March and used PJC. I've been good so far (knocking on wood). I'm 2/3 of the way there..... :jester:
No, I don't believe they have a quota. And the cop knows that in the majority of cases the person will be convicted of something, if not the offense originally charged. The "deciding factor" for the DA in any case, however minor or major, is not the report of one police officer. In major cases, the DA will weigh all the evidence and decide what charge to bring. Many times, if the evidence is not totally conclusive, it is in the best interest of both the State and the defendant for the DA to offer, and the defendant to accept, a plea bargain. For the hundreds of traffic tickets that are handed out each week, it is much more efficient to get the defendants to agree to plead guilty to a lesser charge, instead of having to try each case.
Okay, I now understand and take back what I stated earlier. You know me, I have to have it pounded in so that I really understand and what you wrote makes since to me. Efficiency is the word that struck the nerve! Grace
Note to self - Cliff never, EVER, EVER goes over the speed limit. Never get behind him, might have to run him over. 8)
Continuing the grammar lesson from the other thread, that should be sense. M-W online: Glad you finally see it my way! :lol::hurray:
My understanding was it was only one year...if I remember right.. If you got points then they are on your insurance for 3 yrs.