<p>But I am not going find out when my kid is in court. If the judge is suppose to be fair, the officer is not crooked, and every defendent is sophisticated in knowing what to say or do in court, then every defendent should be able to appear in court by him/herself. </p>
<p>This is what happened to me 10 years ago. I was driving down to Trenton for the first time, got lost around Rutgers (bit of a seedy place). I was looking for a gas station, convenient store to ask for direction. I noticed there was a police car parked on the side of a curb. There was a lot of traffic, so I pulled over to the side inching toward the police, then I noticed the police started waving for me to go toward him. I took it as a friendly gesture, but he was flagging me down for passing on the right and from a curb. I tried to explain to him that I needed direction and wanted to talk to him. He started yelling at me, gave me a ticket and told me to show up at the court.</p>
<p>I was very upset with how I was treated by this policy, so I sent a letter to the head of police. I showed up at the court at appointed time by myself. The police was also there. He pulled me aside, told me that he didn´t appreciate me writing the letter, he knew where I lived and I should watch what I say in court. The judge asked if I pleaded guilty, I said no. We settled on a lot of fine with no points.</p>
<p>No, it´s stupid to show up at court without a lawyer. No, I do not believe police are always right or they are necessary all good people.</p>
<p>Younghoss: I have a friend from high school who now works as a Public Defender in a major eastern city. When I asked her how she could defend rapists and murderers, many of them admittedly guilty, she said “even rapists have rights.” One of those rights under our Constitution is that defendants have the right to an attorney, precisely because judges and officers may or may not be honest, but certainly have different interests than the defendant.</p>
<p>OP’s student is in the elite–a 16 yr old driving parent’s vehicle…a Lexus…</p>
<p>31 miles over is likely a serious infraction–in our state it is reckless driving, includes fines, pts and whopping insurance etc. </p>
<p>OP indicates the kid is in trouble at home with said parents–will be working a long time to pay for vehicle damages etc. </p>
<p>Yes- call a lawyer. Tack it onto the kid’s bill. Continue with tough love.
No driving privledges. Period. The choices to be speeding and not stop for police …are far too serious. This is part of that frontal lobe/brain thing and teenagers. Driving priviledges should be revoked for a period long enough to cause your teen some pain/anguish/missing out.</p>
<p>*OP’s student is in the elite–a 16 yr old driving parent’s vehicle…a Lexus…</p>
<p>31 miles over is likely a serious infraction–in our state it is reckless driving, includes fines, pts and whopping insurance etc. </p>
<p>*</p>
<p>Right…that’s why I asked earlier why this 16yo was driving a Lexus. I firmly believe that when young people are driving pricey or cool cars they are more “inspired” to speed. I’m not saying that kids won’t speed in cheapy cars, but there’s something about driving luxury or sports cars that can encourage such behavior.</p>
<p>I don’t know if the parents are going to allow this child to continue driving, but I know when my brother-in-law was in an accident as a teen, his parents were told by their insurance company that if they allowed that child to drive the parents’ pricier cars, they would have to pay a lot more money. This seemed harsh since the accident was largely due to weather (ice on road), but that was the company’s possition. To limit that increase, my BIL was limited to driving his car (a junker) for 3 years. Their insurance premiums increased, but not as much as it would have if the child had free-rein to drive all of the family cars. </p>
<p>It’s interesting to learn that some college students have been denied access to Zipcars because of their prior records. I understand that Zipcars include insurance, so risk management is important. </p>
<p>I wonder how many parents have their kids help pay for their driving insurance (such as paying a %) and let their kids know that if they have an incident that results in an increase, they’re paying for that, too.</p>
<p>younghoss - Not sure why I am doing this, but here are the answers to your questions about my friend’s child.</p>
<p>Did the bus have it’s red “Stop lights” on?
YES
Did the student’s action lead to an accident? (like Op’s example?)
NO
Could the driver reasonably have been charged with more, but was given a break?
NO
Would the charge have been reduced, had a lawyer advocated for her?
POSSIBLY
Should it have been?
YES
What was the age of the driver?
16
Was it the driver’s very first citation?
YES
Did the driver learn the lesson that a school bus/child’s safety overrules someone blowing his horn?
OF COURSE</p>
<p>The driver could not be a sweeter or more conscientious child. She was valedictorian of her class and got a full ride to a top 20 national University. She is also a bit ditzy, which is why she thought if she went really slowly by the bus it would be okay. </p>
<p>She was never given the opportunity to tell her side of the story because her parents did not consult a lawyer. They wanted to “do the right thing” and make sure that she fully realized the consequences of her actions. As a result, the entire family was inconvenienced by the long license suspension and suffered financially from the fines and the insurance increases.</p>
<p>Parents should make sure he is represented by a lawyer to make sure he has the best chance in court. Even though Junior doesn’t have the money, the parents should require that he be responsible for the lawyer, all fines, damage to the car and any insurance increases. Time for him to get a job.
Then the punishment begins. 71 in a 40 zone is very serious and could easily have had a much more tragic ending. The parents need to revoke his driving license if the courts don’t.</p>
<p>Often police throw in extra charges that while legally are valid, don’t really mean more crimes were committed. At the same time, they often don’t throw charges they could because of circumstance. My instincts tell me they won’t make it a felony, however, a lawyer should be consulted. He should be able to get a copy of report, state rules, what kind of radar gun was used, error rates, who was also driving fast in that location, razor isn’t perfect and that 2mph difference while with a gun may not seem like much, legally it may be huge. The margin of error for radar guns from what i could research quicklymis 1mph, so theoretically, his speed could have just be under the 30pmh over the limit, it that makes sense. That is something important to know. Rain, angle, all kinds of circumstances can affect the guns reading.</p>
<p>In cal, if you have a .19 vs .20 for a DUI, thhe difference in fines, punishment, etc is major. And often if it’s that close, the judge, depending on previous record, if the first time, may go for the lower reading.</p>
<p>
[quote[She was never given the opportunity to tell her side of the story because her parents did not consult a lawyer.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I respectfully disagree that she was not given the opportunity to tell her side of the story. You don’t need a lawyer to have that ability.</p>
<p>She had every right to tell her side of the story by pleading not guilty, at which point the judge would have permitted her to speak. Pleading guilty removes any doubt about the charges and is a clear acknowledgement of guilt.</p>
<p>There is no such plea as ‘guilty with an explanation’. </p>
<p>Now that doesn’t mean a lawyer wouldn’t have been helpful, but in all honesty I would not have been pleased had a judge decided to lighten a charge of unlawfully passing a school bus. I still remember from Driver’s Ed YEARS ago that passing a stopped school bus with lights flashing was one of the harshest infractions. Here in NJ it is a 5-point infraction, the equivalent of reckless driving.</p>
<p>"There is no such plea as ‘guilty with an explanation’. "</p>
<p>Funny you should say this. At least 10 years ago here in WA, when H got a speeding ticket (he was going back to the store to retrieve my wallet that I forgot there :(), there were 3 options to check on the back of the paper slip that needed to be mailed in: (i) I did not do it; (ii) yes, I did it, but I would like to explain the circumstances; (iii) yes, I did it, here is my check. Option 1 almost automatically led to a fine (with possibility of reduction), option 2 allowed dismissal of the ticket after completion of refresher traffic school. Sofor some folks, it was worth to plead “guilty with explanation”.</p>
<p>There certainly is. That is one of the choices in Maryland. You indicate that choice within 30 days of the citation. You either pay up, plead guilty with an explanation or request a trial date. In Maryland, most people do not need a lawyer. If you have a clean driving record, you throw yourself on the mercy of the court and the judge is very likely to either grant probation before judgment or reduce the infraction so there are fewer or no points. </p>
<p>In Virginia, however, you need a lawyer. The lawyer can actually handle the ticket without your having to be in court. That doesn’t happen in Maryland. </p>
<p>Be very careful giving and taking advice about traffic court on a forum like this. There are lots of variations from state to state and you must know what is customary in your area.</p>
<p>I would hire a lawyer for the teenager. The teenager would also not be driving for a good long while and would become acquainted with the bus and the bicycle. </p>
<p>But as a parent, I would want a lawyer’s advice and guidance. They have seen these things before and can navigate the waters.</p>