Tweet
A guy comes in with his traffic ticket. He has his phone out and aims it at everyone he meets while stating the name on their ID badges. He comes up to me at the desk with his phone aimed at me. He reads out my name.
I say hello to him, take his ticket and pull his case on the computer. I ask him what he wanted to do today with the charges.
He notices I have not mentioned his phone being pointed at me. He tells me in a smug, superior manner that he is recording this.
I cock my head to the side and ask him why.
He replies with a higher degree of smugness that I am a public servant, so I have no expectation of privacy.
I say that I am not concerned about being recorded, I just do not understand why he would want to record this.
He smirks and states that EVERYTHING he does with “government thieves” is done on the record.
I look at his tickets. He easily could get a plea bargain to dismiss his moving violation (speeding) for a fine on the non-moving, expired license plate charge. I, however, am under no obligation to be nice - and have no inclination to be that way to such a snot like this guy.
I smile benevolently, and tell him that if he wants a record, he shall have it. I then ask him if he wants the trial before a jury or just before a judge.
He looks at me with a momentary expression of confusion and asks what am I going to offer him so the city can make its money off him.
I smile again, knowing full well that any offer I might make only would be used as an excuse for him to rant opinions and make a big show of rejecting everything, and state to him that there is no offer as negotiations never are the subject of recordings, so the matter now will be set for trial where an official record will be made as he wanted. I repeat my question regarding judge or jury.
He begins another line of arguments that I will not repeat as someone here may agree with his thinking, and this is not where I am going to engage in a debate. They do, however, confirm my suspicion as to what group gave him his strategy for how he is acting.
I finally state that, as he will not tell me he wishes to waive his right to a jury trial, the case will be set for a jury as the law requires an assumption of a not guilty plea when a defendant refuses or declines to plead, and a jury trial is his absolute right. I hand his paperwork to the clerk for a setting.
I can tell this was not the YouTube worthy response he had been hoping to generate.
He tries to ask me several more questions to which I calmly answer identically that his issues should be raised at a hearing before a judge, so he needs to file his motions in order to get the settings for them.
The clerk returns with the trial date. The guy is escorted out still yelling his accusations/opinions about the whole situation.
Can’t wait for the opening arguments!
I say hello to him, take his ticket and pull his case on the computer. I ask him what he wanted to do today with the charges.
He notices I have not mentioned his phone being pointed at me. He tells me in a smug, superior manner that he is recording this.
I cock my head to the side and ask him why.
He replies with a higher degree of smugness that I am a public servant, so I have no expectation of privacy.
I say that I am not concerned about being recorded, I just do not understand why he would want to record this.
He smirks and states that EVERYTHING he does with “government thieves” is done on the record.
I look at his tickets. He easily could get a plea bargain to dismiss his moving violation (speeding) for a fine on the non-moving, expired license plate charge. I, however, am under no obligation to be nice - and have no inclination to be that way to such a snot like this guy.
I smile benevolently, and tell him that if he wants a record, he shall have it. I then ask him if he wants the trial before a jury or just before a judge.
He looks at me with a momentary expression of confusion and asks what am I going to offer him so the city can make its money off him.
I smile again, knowing full well that any offer I might make only would be used as an excuse for him to rant opinions and make a big show of rejecting everything, and state to him that there is no offer as negotiations never are the subject of recordings, so the matter now will be set for trial where an official record will be made as he wanted. I repeat my question regarding judge or jury.
He begins another line of arguments that I will not repeat as someone here may agree with his thinking, and this is not where I am going to engage in a debate. They do, however, confirm my suspicion as to what group gave him his strategy for how he is acting.
I finally state that, as he will not tell me he wishes to waive his right to a jury trial, the case will be set for a jury as the law requires an assumption of a not guilty plea when a defendant refuses or declines to plead, and a jury trial is his absolute right. I hand his paperwork to the clerk for a setting.
I can tell this was not the YouTube worthy response he had been hoping to generate.
He tries to ask me several more questions to which I calmly answer identically that his issues should be raised at a hearing before a judge, so he needs to file his motions in order to get the settings for them.
The clerk returns with the trial date. The guy is escorted out still yelling his accusations/opinions about the whole situation.
Can’t wait for the opening arguments!
I'm sure he was pissed off that he had nothing but a boring legal explanation for all his efforts.
And, I'm sorry, it is NOT legal to photograph or "film" someone without their consent, especially inside a business that repeatedly asks you to put the phone down and stop recording.
Comment