Harassed by the cops

[protege]

Well, see, I get that if you are the lone car on the road at 3am, and a cop is bored or whatever, the odds are good that you will get pulled.

In that case though, unless you're doing something *really* stupid, they'll probably let you off with a warning.

Case in point, many years ago, I was driving back to school...and got pulled over for speeding. Granted, it was late, and yes, I *was* speeding. Nothing serious, maybe about 35-40mph in the 25mph zone through South Park on Route 88, somewhere around 10pm or so. Nothing really unusual, since Route 88 is usually busy most summer nights as people attempt to show off their rides and/or cruise for ladies

But, I got pulled over simply because I was the only car on the road. During the day, being slightly over the limit isn't as obvious--as long as you're going with traffic, you're fine.

Anyway, I got a warning, simply because I could have easily fought that ticket. The cop wanted me to slow down, but didn't want to waste time in front of the magistrate with it.

[Jester]

I think cops should at least limit pulling people over who appear to be drunk.

I can't believe this, but I am going to take the cops' side to this, and disagree with you. Why? Well, because not everyone who appears drunk is drunk, and not everyone who does not appear drunk is not drunk. There are many habitual, "professional" drunks who have mastered the art of, at least from a distance, appearing not to be drunk. If the cops only pulled over the really "obvious" ones, they would be getting many a hue and a cry from the public when a not-so-obvious one killed some innocent people because they were driving drunk.

Look, it is not a perfect science, and I dare say the majority of cops mean well and ARE out to protect and serve. But it is a crapshoot, this drunk driving thing, and the cops are human too.

Keep in mind, the above has been said by someone who HAS driven drunk, and HAS gotten away with it (and, on at least one occasion, did not). So I know from personal experience that someone can appear to be perfectly alright, can appear to be driving perfectly alright, and is not, in fact, in any way alright. I feel that the cops should be allowed to err on the side of caution with this, as long as it does not cross into the are of harrassment, as it apparently did with Fashion Lad, and clearly did with Recovering Kinkoid.

There was no reason to pull me over either time

Amusing story: a 17-year old Jester is riding his bicycle home from work at about 2 am. I was wearing ripped jeans and a rock band concert shirt. And a cop cruiser pulled me over. And the (rather young) cop starts asking me a lot of questions. I told him truthfully that I was coming home from work, where I worked, where I live (I was going the most logical straightforward route from one to the other), and that my parents were fully aware of this. (While my town had a curfew law, it did not apply to minors who were commuting to or from work, as long as their parents were aware of the job and the commute.) I answered all his questions calmly, logically, rationally, and lucidly, and finally asked him why he had pulled me over to begin with. He said that they had had some problems in that area, and he saw the way I was dressed, and--

"Wait....so you pulled me over because I'm a slob?!?"

The cop did a double take, realized I had pretty much nailed it, admitted as much, laughed, and left me to be on my way. But not before he commented on how kickass the band on my t-shirt actually was!

All in all, rather amusing to me at the time, and even now.

[Shangri-laschild]

Well, see, I get that if you are the lone car on the road at 3am, and a cop is bored or whatever, the odds are good that you will get pulled.

Eh...even then, unless you've done something, all I can understand is just following. I've been followed around by a cop before, I'm guessing because it was a small town and it was really early in the morning (like 3am). It was weird but nothing big or anything since all they did was follow me for the short bit it took me to get on the interstate. I would have been ticked off if I had gotten pulled over and hadn't done anything just because of the time and being bored.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Well, see, I get that if you are the lone car on the road at 3am, and a cop is bored or whatever, the odds are good that you will get pulled.

However, I was getting pulled by the same asshole multiple times A WEEK. This guy was familiar with my vehicle. He knew I was a late night switcher at the nearby TV station because I told him this the first time he pulled me (this was before I knew better than to talk to them). He knew what my situation was, he knew I was a night person on my way back home from my job. He knew I was not some random drunk or some creep casing the neighborhood.

Yeah, you know what? A bored weirdo with a gun and licence to pull me over whenever he wanted, and him knowing my schedule and where I worked, and me being a lone female in a deserted neighborhood did not make me feel safe.

I told the dispatcher that with my schedule, the site of a cruiser should make me feel safer. It should not make me wonder if that was the night I was going to get raped. She put a stop to it, but sheesh.

Stalked by a fucking cop. How nice is that.

[blas]

Same here medic, except that I was designated driver.

This was late last winter. I had been ill for the better part of that week and had no intention of drinking, and personally offered to take a few friends home so they didn't need to worry about paying $10 for a cab or risking driving drunk or *shudder* walking home.

I purposely take the back way home, even when I haven't drank a sip, just because of the cops.....there was a cop sitting at Papa Murphy's (which had been closed for hours). As soon as I drove past, he immediately pulled out and followed me...followed me all the way to my damn apartment (granted, it was only a couple of miles and I only made 2 turns, the rule is 4 turns all in the same direction). I mean, he followed me until I turned from the street into the parking lot, and he gave up. I wasn't speeding, I didn't blow or roll through any of the several stop signs, my tags are good, no lights out..the only problem being the car isn't registered to be but maybe the cop figured I had a man's name....and he just kept following me anyway.

Meanwhile, people like my former friend Big Sis and my stupid stalker ex drive sports cars and constantly drive drunk. More than drunk....completely shitfaced....and drive AGGRESSIVELY....no attempt to even try to pretend to be sober or try to obey the law......and neither of them have ever gotten stopped once, and they damn well should have by now.

[trailerparkmedic]

As a night owl, I hate that idea too. But the problem is, at those hours, a lot of drivers ARE drunk. And that combined with the fact that there are a lot less vehicles on the road at that hour increases dramatically the likelihood that one of them is, in fact, a drunk. Once again we face a contradiction: we want cops to get the drunks off the road, but we don't want to be inconvenienced by them pulling us over to see if we are, in fact, drunk.

I think cops should at least limit pulling people over who appear to be drunk. Twice in the past 6 months I've left work very late at night (2 am and 3 am) and was pulled over. There was no reason to pull me over either time--no speeding, no expired tickets, no lights out. The cops just wanted to see if I was drunk. This probably wouldn't have made me so angry if I lived in a rural area, but I live in a BIG Texas city. It's not like I was the only one driving at that time of night.

[Shangri-laschild]

This. Quoted for truth. Just say "yes, sir", "no sir," and if it comes to it, "may I go now, sir?"

Anything else you are just asking for trouble.

But the problem with answering the cops questions without a lawyer present, and without knowing what the cop is looking for, the "suspect" could inadvertantly incriminate himself in the crime. He could accidently give the cop reason to lock him up.

The cop has the right to ask questions, of course, but the citizen has the right to refuse to answer without council. He really does have the right to remain silent.

These are both very true. Hell, my best friend who's an officer himself has said that if I ever shoot someone in my home in self defence, I'm to not answer any questions. I'm simply to ask for a lawyer the whole time. There are reasons for it other than not being guilty

I think that's a myth. Most officers are going to show up because OT. In some departments, they can be reprimanded if they don't show up.

I think those departments are doing that to fix the fact that usually the officer doesn't show. But it's true that for the most part except for in those departments, they don't show for the court date. Even if the officer does show, I don't think there will be any problem getting it dropped.

[Mr. Rager!]

The officer doesn't know that ahead of time. As slow as bureaucracy is, you could pay the ticket the next day, and he'd probably never hear about it beforehand.

I don't think you understand how this goes.

I have a court date on December 30th. The cop does not have to show up to that. If I plead "not guilty" which I will, they will set a date and that's when the cop has to show up. Traffic courts are pretty much all set up on the same days.

Here, if you want to go to court and make a plea, You go in on either Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday at 1:00pm. Then if it goes in front of a judge where you can make statements and question the officer that pulled you over, they pretty much schedule those together too. You might be in a room with 5 or 6 other people that got pulled over by that same cop.

Like I said before, in some areas the cop can be reprimanded if he does not appear in court to defend his ticket. In almost all areas, the cop gets paid OT. And for the most part, they all get paid just to sit in court which is easy for them.

[Jester]

Just tooling along on a public road is not probable cause.

You do not have to prove your innocence if you are just driving along minding your own business.

Depends on the situation. Depends on the road, the time, and what the driver is doing. Once, during my travels, I was in Minnesota, and pulled into a closed gas station to stop and check my map, using the lights of the gas station to do so. What the cop SAW was a vehicle with dark tinted windows pull into a closed business after hours in an area where they had had a rash of robberies. I was doing nothing wrong. He, however, did not know that when he first pulled up.

As for your second statement, until the cop can determine that you are just minding your own business, and are not engaged in the suspicious activity he may have initially suspected, he is doing his job. How often do we as a society bitch and moan about lazy cops not doing their job and letting criminals slip by? It's a contradiction that we perpetutate: we want cops patrolling and questioning suspicious people, but we ourselves don't want to be inconvenienced by cops stopping is if we look suspicious to them. You cannot have one without the other, and too many people refuse to accept that basic fact.

He never asked why I was taking those roads or out so early. I think he thought I was drunk or drinking and had taken the back road to get away from him.

But to a cop seeing someone take a drink, look at you then turn down a back road? I could see where I looked suspicious.

Late hours. Back roads. Sipping on an unknown beverage. Even if it can clearly be seen to be coffee, how many drunks try to sober up with coffee? Pulling him over is well within the cop's rights. It's AFTER the cop pulled him over that the cop became a douchebag.

I hate that idea that everyone on the road late at night is drunk.

As a night owl, I hate that idea too. But the problem is, at those hours, a lot of drivers ARE drunk. And that combined with the fact that there are a lot less vehicles on the road at that hour increases dramatically the likelihood that one of them is, in fact, a drunk. Once again we face a contradiction: we want cops to get the drunks off the road, but we don't want to be inconvenienced by them pulling us over to see if we are, in fact, drunk.

But your math doesn't take into effect that some people are just going to pay the fine.

And that is what many cops bank on. It is a calculated gamble. Let's say they write 50 tickets in a month. Of those 50, there is a good chance that (for the sake of argument and round number), 40 will pay the fine and avoid court. That leaves ten. Let's say the cop is not a lazy douchebag, but is actually rather diligent in his work, but due to his schedule, he can only make it to 5 of those court dates. That is still a lot of time out of his schedule, remember. If he shows up at those 5 dates and proves his due diligence and shows the judge that he was right, that means that out of his 50 tickets, 45 ended with some kind of fine or punishment for the ticketee, with only 5 getting off scott free. That means our cop has a success rate of 90%. Not too shabby.

Even if the cop is a douchebag, combine the number of people who won't go to court with just a handful of court dates he shows up at, and he still has a good "success" rate.

Cops are just like anyone else. They play the numbers. In the cops' case, the numbers are in their favor.

[Broomjockey]

But your math doesn't take into effect that some people are just going to pay the fine.

The officer doesn't know that ahead of time. As slow as bureaucracy is, you could pay the ticket the next day, and he'd probably never hear about it beforehand.

[Mr. Rager!]

I dunno, the math bears it out. Assume an officer writes about 50 tickets a month, I assume court is only on weekdays, during business hours. Just that alone means he's likely working or sleeping during many ticket hearings. But then spread them out over the month, two tickets a day, on average, I doubt they'd be able to turn up for all of them. They probably pick and choose.

But your math doesn't take into effect that some people are just going to pay the fine. Some will avoid the fine and not show up at court. Some people will show up to their initial hearing and plead "guilty with an explanation." And that would require no further follow-up. The only time a cop would have to show up to court is if the defendant goes in and pleads "not guilty."

Most people are not going to show up in court; therefore, the officer won't have to show up either.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Used to work second and third shift at WOLO TV. I got hassled by this one ASSHOLE COP so much I ended up calling dispatch at something like three or four in the morning to tell her (thank God it was a woman) what was going on.

She said she had a pretty good idea who that guy was and that it would stop. It did.

I was wondering what night he'd decide to drag me out the car and assault me. No kidding. It was THAT BAD.

[blas]

I hate that idea that everyone on the road late at night is drunk. Unfortunately, around here, many are, but at lot of people also work really crazy hours....and the overtime where I work doesn't help. There's second shift people staying until 1 or 3 am, weekend people staying until 4 or 5 am......and I'd hate to see my coworkers or even myself getting pulled over just because it's late at night and that means we're drunk.

[Broomjockey]

I think that's a myth.

I dunno, the math bears it out. Assume an officer writes about 50 tickets a month, I assume court is only on weekdays, during business hours. Just that alone means he's likely working or sleeping during many ticket hearings. But then spread them out over the month, two tickets a day, on average, I doubt they'd be able to turn up for all of them. They probably pick and choose.

[Mr. Rager!]

Back to the OP: There is no such thing as too much documentation in court. FWIW, a lot of cops never show up for traffic court, so you have an edge right there.

I think that's a myth. Most officers are going to show up because OT. In some departments, they can be reprimanded if they don't show up.