Wasn't wearing seatbelt, was delivering a pizza...

User avatar
Decatur
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 702
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:31 am

Posting Awards

Moderator

Re: Wasn't wearing seatbelt, was delivering a pizza...

by: Decatur on
Tue Jan 12, 2016 5:01 pm

Well.... All of those pertain to statements and their admissibility.
Identifying yourself with a drivers licence is not a statement..
If you chose to not identify yourself with one, thats your choice. You'll pay the price for that. And if you then decide to not incriminate yourself by speaking to the polices do identifying yourself, I could see you in a fancy pair of bracelets.

Wow.... Nuff said.....


jsherk
High Authority
High Authority
Posts: 1722
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 1:18 pm

by: jsherk on
Tue Jan 12, 2016 5:38 pm

You misunderstand... I am compelled to give my license, which I do, but only after asking "Am I required to give that to you?" followed by "Here is my license but I am giving it to you because I have to and I am not giving it to you voluntarily". Any compelled information obtained (whether a statement or a drivers license) can not be used against you. Nuff said!
+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


bend
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1184
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 1:44 am

Posting Awards

Moderator

by: bend on
Tue Jan 12, 2016 5:54 pm

jsherk wrote:You misunderstand... I am compelled to give my license, which I do, but only after asking "Am I required to give that to you?" followed by "Here is my license but I am giving it to you because I have to and I am not giving it to you voluntarily". Any compelled information obtained (whether a statement or a drivers license) can not be used against you. Nuff said!
lol


screeech
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 324
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 10:20 am

by: screeech on
Tue Jan 12, 2016 6:31 pm

Yup, that should work...but if it doesn't, just tell the Justice of the Peace that a leprechaun jumped into your car a moment before and told you that you didn't need to wear the seat belt, then jumped out just before the officer saw you...+++ This is not legal advice, only my opinion +++


User avatar
Nanuk
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 12:47 pm

by: Nanuk on
Tue Jan 12, 2016 7:31 pm

Jsherk, I've been lurking on this forum for about a year now without joining or posting. Your posts continually become more and more borderline freeman of the land or sovereign citizen like. Just sayin.. :roll:


tryingtoimprove
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 2:48 pm

by: tryingtoimprove on
Tue Jan 12, 2016 10:18 pm

jsherk wrote:You misunderstand... I am compelled to give my license, which I do, but only after asking "Am I required to give that to you?" followed by "Here is my license but I am giving it to you because I have to and I am not giving it to you voluntarily". Any compelled information obtained (whether a statement or a drivers license) can not be used against you. Nuff said!

Thats a great statement. Are you a paralegal?




UnluckyDuck
Member
Member
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 11:03 am

by: UnluckyDuck on
Tue Jan 12, 2016 11:13 pm

tryingtoimprove wrote:So had the trial what do you want me to do or say? ( I already had the early resolution meeting )

I will plead guilty, and then ?...
The clerk will hand you a piece of paper, you walk to the cashier, and pay your fine. The conviction will stay on your record for 3 years (may or may not affect insurance), and demerit points (if any) for 2 years (shouldn't affect insurance).

Pretty Straight Forward.


argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:30 am

Posting Awards

by: argyll on
Wed Jan 13, 2016 3:14 am

jsherk wrote:You misunderstand... I am compelled to give my license, which I do, but only after asking "Am I required to give that to you?" followed by "Here is my license but I am giving it to you because I have to and I am not giving it to you voluntarily". Any compelled information obtained (whether a statement or a drivers license) can not be used against you. Nuff said!
Complete nonsense. Compelled statements - yes. Providing a driver's licence - no.

If that were the case no-one would ever get charged for a driving offense because the drivers licence is the means of identification.

People come here for simple advice on how best to deal with traffic tickets. Your advice is becoming more and more confusing and therefore less and less helpful. If I was a mod, I'd ban you.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !


rank
Member
Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 8:54 pm

by: rank on
Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:56 am

Ban Him? LOL. If he was banned then the only regular contributors here would be police and retired police. Both of which appear (from my limited experience) to be biased. I have read alot of threads here and I can remember very few instances where someone has offered a defence......only criticism and mocking of potential defences. To wit, when I asked "Is radar infallible....i.e. is there ANY way a radar can be wrong", I got a grand total of ZERO replies from the people who operate(d) them. Nobody said it was infallible, which tells me it isn't perfect.....but nobody is willing to tell you HOW it's imperfect. This speaks volumes to me.


rank
Member
Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 8:54 pm

by: rank on
Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:05 am

Decatur wrote:What do you mean by a secondary offence?
Are you an officer/retired officer? I thought it was a common term. I even googled it before I posted to make sure.

Schreech, you are correct that I meant a secondary offence is one that you cannot be pulled over for. You get pulled over for the primary offence....i.e. speeding, then the officer sees that you don't have your seat belt attached so he lays the seat belt charge also.

I was certain (OK 80% certain) that the seat belt used to be secondary. Perhaps some of you aren't old enough to remember when they brought that charge into law. Perhaps Ontario back doored that change. Pretty sure they back doored it in New Jersey.....i.e. get it on the books as secondary and then sneak the change in when nobody is looking.


argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:30 am

Posting Awards

by: argyll on
Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:10 am

You got no replies so you assumed that meant it was fallible. Why not make the other assumption ?

When operated correctly I never saw anything to question the reading. The reading and the observation go hand in hand.

I'm all for fighting tickets at the right time but jsherk goes the extra mile by trying to recommend ridiculous defences which are just going to confuse people coming here for simple advice. To recommend a charter argument that is at the core of traffic enforcement is not particularly helpful to a chap who's come here with a simple question about a seatbelt ticket. If he was so certain this was a valid defence why hasn't he used it himself or recommended it to any other poster for a more serious charge for example.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !


argyll
VIP
VIP
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 3:30 am

Posting Awards

by: argyll on
Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:12 am

rank wrote:
Decatur wrote:What do you mean by a secondary offence?
Are you an officer/retired officer? I thought it was a common term. I even googled it before I posted to make sure.

Schreech, you are correct that I meant a secondary offence is one that you cannot be pulled over for. You get pulled over for the primary offence....i.e. speeding, then the officer sees that you don't have your seat belt attached so he lays the seat belt charge also.

I was certain (OK 80% certain) that the seat belt used to be secondary. Perhaps some of you aren't old enough to remember when they brought that charge into law. Perhaps Ontario back doored that change. Pretty sure they back doored it in New Jersey.....i.e. get it on the books as secondary and then sneak the change in when nobody is looking.
I've never heard the term secondary offence - maybe it's a US term. If the charge is in the book then it can be enforced.
Former Ontario Police Officer. Advice will become less relevant as the time goes by !




rank
Member
Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 8:54 pm

by: rank on
Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:43 am

argyll wrote:
rank wrote:
Decatur wrote:What do you mean by a secondary offence?
Are you an officer/retired officer? I thought it was a common term. I even googled it before I posted to make sure.

Schreech, you are correct that I meant a secondary offence is one that you cannot be pulled over for. You get pulled over for the primary offence....i.e. speeding, then the officer sees that you don't have your seat belt attached so he lays the seat belt charge also.

I was certain (OK 80% certain) that the seat belt used to be secondary. Perhaps some of you aren't old enough to remember when they brought that charge into law. Perhaps Ontario back doored that change. Pretty sure they back doored it in New Jersey.....i.e. get it on the books as secondary and then sneak the change in when nobody is looking.
I've never heard the term secondary offence - maybe it's a US term. If the charge is in the book then it can be enforced.
Yes maybe it is a US term. If it was a term here, you guys I'm sure would be familiar. Thanks


Locked

Return to “Driver failing to wear a seat belt”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests