0
68

[–] Titus-of-Voat 0 points 68 points (+68|-0) ago  (edited ago)

You are correct you should not have to prove your son's innocence. That is absurd. I'd see how you can get a transcript of the hearing and present it to a lawyer if you can get a reasonable or free consultation. It may cost you more then the 185, but it might be worth a few extra hundred bucks to stick it to this judge.

I don't use syrup either, it is basically corn syrup. It's like your son is in trouble because the ex didn't have syrup. Fucking laughable.

0
27

[–] crazy_eyes [S] 0 points 27 points (+27|-0) ago 

I will see if I can get a transcript, that's a good idea. I just don't know if it's worth it to throw money at it, though I do know in the future if my son were to get into some trouble they would bring this up as evidence of a pattern or character or something

1
37

[–] lexsird 1 points 37 points (+38|-1) ago 

You should have taken the contempt of court charge so that you could sue the everloving fuck out of the judge, the cop and the county. Definately get the transcripts. In fact, tell this story to an OUT OF TOWN LAWYER or one that has a reputation of not being one of the 'good old boys'.

Lawyers in smaller towns can be just as big of a problem as the crooked law enforcement or judges. They all work together, they collude big fucking time, don't let anyone bullshit you. If there is a rival town near you, go to it and explain what the hell is going on. Tell them you not only want this to go away, but you want damages and punitive damages.

By standing up to these cunts, you are already on their radar. I'm betting you're in a small town because this is typical small town horse shit. They abuse you because they expect to gin up business for one of their cunt lawyer friends. They hate it when someone tries to do what you did. You're pissing on their crooked assed economy.

When you nuke them with an out of town lawyer, they'd be pissy still. You'll need to put some recording devices in your vehicles and in your home because I'd bet that they try even more bullshit. This is where you nail them yet again and score enough to move the fuck away.

It's that or eat a cock and pay the fuckers of their extortion money and move on. Don't make their radar and tell your kid for fuck's sake don't get in any trouble again or they'll rape his ass in court and yours too. It sucks, but welcome to the realities of court in America.

0
20

[–] Titus-of-Voat 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

His priors would be a factor in future sentencing if he did get into additional trouble as a minor.

0
1

[–] Hey_Sunshine 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

the court transcripts will be a small filing fee, you should have recorded the courtroom proceedings because you have grounds for a civil law suit.

0
1

[–] retractableclaws 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

If you don't contest these misdemeanor charges, be sure to get his record purged. I think this process varies by state, but you can pay a couple hundred bucks and get it purged from his record and the internet (the latter being the real problem).

0
4

[–] Alopix 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

You can still get legit maple syrup. It's quite a bit more expensive than the "brown HFCS" though

0
1

[–] E-werd 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

If you dont like "brown HFCS" then make your own. IIRC, about a half cup brown sugar, half cup white sugar, and a cup of water. Stir and boil. Add like a 1/4 tsp of extract if you want a different flavor, I liked almond extract, but vanilla would be good as well--maple would probably be the best.

0
27

[–] Travisty 0 points 27 points (+27|-0) ago 

And this is why you don't talk to the police. If they come to your door and ask to come in, say NO!

0
17

[–] Eideard 0 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago 

I have had twice police come to my door. Once some short in phone work on the poll made 911 think they got a call, the other they had the wrong house and I had to correct them from the warrant (one of the Place/ St/ Ave mix-ups).

Both times they asked to come in, both times I said "I am so sorry officer, while I respect your position and job, I am going to exercise my 4th amendment rights and ask you to show me a warrent".

The 911 said, no everything seems calm here. And left.

The second had a warrant, I read it carefully and showed them they had the wrong house. The cops joked around about it a bit and left.

0
8

[–] retractableclaws 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

And this is exactly how it should go. Everyone makes mistakes, no reason for someone to get shot. I'm glad the police management is reasonable in your neighborhood.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 26 points (+26|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
12

[–] SomewhatNeutral 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

The cop's testimony of the other witness is hearsay unless if your state is shit and has a cop exception.

Fun fact: the Federal Rules of Evidence 801(d)(2)(a) (applies in Federal courts) allow a cop's testimony to be admitted as evidence/testimony but does not allow those statements to be used in your own favor... example:

  • Interview: cop asks about whether suspect knew a murder victim; suspect says that he knows the murder victim and really hated him but he was miles away that night, with no evidence to prove that he wasn't near the scene.

  • Cop, in court, is asked whether there was anything suspicious about the suspect's relationship with the victim, and mentions the hatred for the victim.

  • The defense is not allowed to bring up the fact that the suspect had made a statement about being "miles away that night". Exculpatory statements are inadmissible if brought up by the defense.

Part of the reason that police don't record interviews is that nothing requires them to record any exculpatory statements, hence they are perfectly allowed to write only inculpatory information.

0
2

[–] 6383049 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

There are no interviews. It's called interrogation.

0
12

[–] crazy_eyes [S] 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

Thank you. I did bring that up. Probably not in the correct procedure, but I pointed out that the officer can not legally use that statement in the trial because it was simply hearsay. They did not seem to have any respect for me or for the truth or the law itself really. It was all a self serving exercize

0
23

[–] uberbrew 0 points 23 points (+23|-0) ago 

Sounds like the cop had been watching too many CSI shows. He also sounds like one of the cops that gives all the others bad names. It comes to the point where, if you have the money, you may want to continue with the case just based on principle.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 25 points (+25|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

1
1

[–] hunter3 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

this

0
11

[–] crazy_eyes [S] 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

I think I want to appeal because of the record, if something were to come up in the future they would bring up he's been convicted of these in the past

0
9

[–] Le_Squish 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

You should. Police like to bully the young because they don't how to defend themselves and "fine" will definetly be used against him later.

0
4

[–] uberbrew 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Ah good point. Yes looking out for him I would do the same. See what a lawyer believes the outcome would be and what a trial would cost.

0
22

[–] 51rH0n3y84d93r 0 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago 

I am not an attorney; I am a badger. This is not legal advice. If this happened to me, I'd do the following:

  • Get the transcript

The transcript should have the damning quote you referenced earlier.

  • File a FOIA request for the signed affidavit the cop cited.

It may be a grayed out piece of paper, but if they can't produce it without reason, you may be able to have proof the cop perjured himself, again aided by #1.

  • File a FOIA request for the oath of office of the judge and the cop

In all jurisdictions I'm aware of, state employees must sign and properly file an oath of office. Look at the requirements for each. You may find that they didn't properly file and that they may not legally be a cop and or judge. This opens up another avenue for legal action.

  • Take findings to appeal. You may want to look up the requirements of if you wanted a federal judge to review this as the state may only view you as a resource to be milked. If you file an appeal, ensure all of your proof is added to the record. There are two filing stamps: one is the legit whereas the other means it goes into the crap pile. Research which one is which in your district.

Also, look and see if there's a legal workshop in your county where they will help you with filing, but not with the facts of your case. There are other resources online providing some research if you want to do the legwork yourself. This is fairly low risk, but potentially high reward.

Best of luck!

0
10

[–] crazy_eyes [S] 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Thank you kind badger

0
5

[–] nogods_nokings 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

you won't need any FOIA demand if this goes to court, you'll need a simple discovery demand, and then an order from the judge for them to produce it if they don't (as long as the probative value is good and not a fishing expedition). long story short, don't listen to any of us assholes, get a lawyer for the appeal. doing it yourself isn't going to work.

if it's anything other than a simple traffic violation ALWAYS GET AN ATTORNEY. the courts are not friendly places to people who don't practice law.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
7

[–] crazy_eyes [S] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

That is a great idea. I am going to keep that one in mind. Thank you

1
10

[–] BobArctor 1 points 10 points (+11|-1) ago 

Get the transcript before you contact the media.

0
18

[–] MaunaLoona 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago 

This is part of the scam they call "decriminalization". They made citations such as traffic tickets and the ones that the cop wrote a "civil infraction". This allows the court to lower the burden of proof from "beyond reasonable doubt" to "preponderance of evidence". The reasoning then goes that someone who has been accused of a crime has a motive to lie, while a police officer is an impartial truth teller. Since it's your word against the cop's, and the cop's word always wins, you're automatically guilty unless you have physical evidence to prove your innocence.

0
7

[–] crazy_eyes [S] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

That makes a lot of sense and explains a lot of their actions. Are ordinance violations a civil matter? I don't believe that this was made clear at any point during the proceedings

0
3

[–] TerryB 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Admiralty court -- it is actually an administrative hearing. The mere accusation of the crime by the officer means you are guilty. Ever see that movie 'A Few Good Men'? Ever wonder why Jack went so crazy? The mere fact an officer made the claim means you are guilty in that system. Very shitty that they have brought this law of the sea over land to destroy our common law.

0
14

[–] Proppa 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Let's just ignore this sham of a trial for a moment and let's appreciate the way these fucking pigs are slapping a criminal record on a CHILD over a fucking syrup bottle. They really just have no shame at all. Even if your son was 100% guilty it still does not warrant this. It's like charging a 6 year old with assault for running up and hitting someone. What the fuck is wrong with these people

0
6

[–] crazy_eyes [S] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

That really is a great point, one that seems to be lost on everyone involved in the system except the defendants. All over a few dollars

0
8

[–] GIF-lLL-S0NG 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Its bullshit. the $185 would be enough to get his car, your car, the ex'es car, the judges, the clerk, and the prosecutors car washed.

load more comments ▼ (37 remaining)