Ticket or Not to Ticket?

[ONEEYEDMIC 68]

With the nice day we had yesterday and hopefully soon to come till Oct, I started thinking about all the traffic accidents that happen with Donor Cycles and Motor Vehicles. It seems that when the nice weather is here people drive extra idiotic. Here is the dilemma.

When responding to an accident with any injuries from minor to serious do you pardon the pun, add insult to injury by writing the injured party a NYS SUMMONS? Although most violations need be witnessed by the PO, through some investigation you can come to a conclusion. I don't really mind if their is a minor accident and I have to write a summons but I guess I do feel bad sometimes when somebody is in real bad shape and I add a summons to their property while they recover. Now, if they are totally in the wrong then I don't feel bad at all.

[OnTheWheel 43]

I think the only time i'd write a person with PI or SPI would be if they were in the wrong (outside of a dwi etc of course). Like a person being ejected because they had no seatbelt, I think the injuries and road rash will teach them the lesson needed to be learned. But an idiot who fails to stop, yield etc and causes an accident, then they will surely get one.

[ONEEYEDMIC 68]

I feel the same way. Just wanted to see what others thought.

[helicopper 1,050]

I think the only time i'd write a person with PI or SPI would be if they were in the wrong (outside of a dwi etc of course). Like a person being ejected because they had no seatbelt, I think the injuries and road rash will teach them the lesson needed to be learned. But an idiot who fails to stop, yield etc and causes an accident, then they will surely get one.

ditto

[Oswegowind 17]

Minor question, how about when someone is rear ended because the person behind was obviously following too closely due to the damage, even if there are no injuries, do you write?????

[ONEEYEDMIC 68]

Minor question, how about when someone is rear ended because the person behind was obviously following too closely due to the damage, even if there are no injuries, do you write?????

If the accident was witnessed by me then I would write for following too closely. It is very hard for you too prove how close the person was before the accident. I am not an accident investigator per se. Meaning just basic from the academy. I think you would have to start measuring skid marks and stuff like that. In wet weather you might be able to get away with some sort of speed not prudent violation. I usually just write if they don't have Ins Cards. We have too actually on our job if they don't produce and INS CARD during an ACCIDENT.

[INIT915 1,119]

Minor question, how about when someone is rear ended because the person behind was obviously following too closely due to the damage, even if there are no injuries, do you write?????

When I was on the road I wrote 'Following Too Close', VTL 1129A, all the time. If you weren't following too close, you'd have enough time to stop.

[Oswegowind 17]

When I was on the road I wrote 'Following Too Close', VTL 1129A, all the time. If you weren't following too close, you'd have enough time to stop.

That is exactly what I am thinking! Unfortunately, I have been rear ended 3 times!!!!! People like to draft off of me I guess!

[OnTheWheel 43]

A rear end job isnt a prima facia (sp?) case for following too closely. The person could have been 500 ft behind the stopped vehicle and slammed him because he wasnt paying attention. Hard ticket to prove in court if you didnt witness it. Witness statements could contribute to your evidence, but we all know how reliable they are.

[helicopper 1,050]

That is exactly what I am thinking! Unfortunately, I have been rear ended 3 times!!!!! People like to draft off of me I guess!

Then take the hint and SLOW DOWN!!!

[Oswegowind 17]

I do understand what you mean by the not paying attention thing, however I was referring to those that occur in heavy traffic conditions. If they are 500 or more feet away and don't see you, I am awfully sure it will be a lot worse than just a minor traffic collision...In other words, OUCH!

How about cell phone tickets? If one driver says that the other driver was using a hand held (not free) device. This wouldn't be hard to prove, all calls are logged by the provider no(?), isn't there a way to put the hones on the person to prove that they were not using the cell phone as has been previously described? On another note, is there any way of tracking how many accidents are caused by hand held cell phones? And does anyone think that there may be grant money out there to do a study?

[INIT915 1,119]

A rear end job isnt a prima facia (sp?) case for following too closely. The person could have been 500 ft behind the stopped vehicle and slammed him because he wasnt paying attention. Hard ticket to prove in court if you didnt witness it. Witness statements could contribute to your evidence, but we all know how reliable they are.

I never had any difficulty articulating it in Court. Maybe V-2 was initially 500 feet behind, but at some point (immediately preceding impact) they were in fact following too closely. The VTL does not state that the offending vehicle needs to be following to close for a predetermined period of time or distance.

Let the operator attempt to offer an affirmative defense of "I wasn't paying attention". Local judges I work with won't let that fly.

[INIT915 1,119]

How about cell phone tickets? If one driver says that the other driver was using a hand held (not free) device. This wouldn't be hard to prove, all calls are logged by the provider no(?), isn't there a way to put the hones on the person to prove that they were not using the cell phone as has been previously described? On another note, is there any way of tracking how many accidents are caused by hand held cell phones? And does anyone think that there may be grant money out there to do a study?

In this scenario, I would not issue a UTT for Cell Phone Use (1225-c) based solely on the second parties word. If it were a fatality or Serious PI, you could take the phone into evidence, and after securing a search warrant, check the call log. The Courts have recently held that absent the search warrant, you cannot start looking thru it, solely incident to arrest.

[OnTheWheel 43]

Contributing factors now include cell phones, so when we check it off it can be tracked in Albany for statistics.

[DaRock98 76]

My boss got into an accident on 287 this winter in the middle of a snow storm he ended up rear ending the person in front of him because he hit the brakes and slid right into someone that was a good 300-400 ft in front of him and the state trooper wrote him a ticket for following to close. He ended up pleading not guilty to the ticket when he went to court and the judge dropped the ticket. So it is hard to prove something like that I guess.

[DOC22 1]

My boss got into an accident on 287 this winter in the middle of a snow storm he ended up rear ending the person in front of him because he hit the brakes and slid right into someone that was a good 300-400 ft in front of him and the state trooper wrote him a ticket for following to close. He ended up pleading not guilty to the ticket when he went to court and the judge dropped the ticket. So it is hard to prove something like that I guess.

He beat the following too close summons, but if the PO had written "Speed not reasonable and prudent" , things might well have turned out differently.

[Oswegowind 17]

Contributing factors now include cell phones, so when we check it off it can be tracked in Albany for statistics.

HEY Wheel, Thanks for this answer. Haven't seen the newer reports...working inside for way too long now...and fortunately I have been avoiding meeting other people by "accident".

[Guest paramedico987]

How about cell phone tickets? If one driver says that the other driver was using a hand held (not free) device. This wouldn't be hard to prove, all calls are logged by the provider no(?), isn't there a way to put the hones on the person to prove that they were not using the cell phone as has been previously described? On another note, is there any way of tracking how many accidents are caused by hand held cell phones? And does anyone think that there may be grant money out there to do a study?

Our previous documentation system had a check box for that, I suppose to track occurances since there's no medical relevance. I haven't done an MVA where the cell phone thing was a problem... actually I think the DWT [as I've come to call it] really just makes for traffic jams and jerks that won't let you merge more than anything.

[27east 19]

Not to hijack the thread, but I got a ticket tonight for "speed no reasonable and prudent." I'm a little upset here becasue it's a stretch. He claimed I went too fast up a hill and almost ran a light. But I didn't run the light (and he said that too), and I wasn't doing more then 35 in a 30 while going up a hill since I had to acclerate. I was not on radar and he said he was doing me a favor.

So to the other LEOs here, do you write this or give me a warning?

[khas143 13]

Not to hijack the thread, but I got a ticket tonight for "speed no reasonable and prudent." I'm a little upset here becasue it's a stretch. He claimed I went too fast up a hill and almost ran a light. But I didn't run the light (and he said that too), and I wasn't doing more then 35 in a 30 while going up a hill since I had to acclerate. I was not on radar and he said he was doing me a favor.

So to the other LEOs here, do you write this or give me a warning?

Depends on the situation, traffic conditions, and weather. If the officer is radar certified, he can write you the actual speed based solely on his / her visual observations. When he said he was doing you a favor, he meant that you are better off getting a ticket for 1180 (a) (Speed not reasonable and prudent) than an acutal speeding ticket. Personally, writing that ticket would depend on the actual circumstances. Can you elaborate on traffic conditions, etc??

Edited April 16, 2008 by khas143

[ONEEYEDMIC 68]

Not to hijack the thread, but I got a ticket tonight for "speed no reasonable and prudent." I'm a little upset here becasue it's a stretch. He claimed I went too fast up a hill and almost ran a light. But I didn't run the light (and he said that too), and I wasn't doing more then 35 in a 30 while going up a hill since I had to acclerate. I was not on radar and he said he was doing me a favor.

So to the other LEOs here, do you write this or give me a warning?

If you say your on EMT BRAVO I give you the ticket. LOL

Seriously were you speeding going up the hill? I would like to know the town/village or city your in. How was he doing you a favor by giving you a ticket? Maybe you have been seen driving poorly before. Sounds weird to me.

[helicopper 1,050]

Not to hijack the thread, but I got a ticket tonight for "speed no reasonable and prudent." I'm a little upset here becasue it's a stretch. He claimed I went too fast up a hill and almost ran a light. But I didn't run the light (and he said that too), and I wasn't doing more then 35 in a 30 while going up a hill since I had to acclerate. I was not on radar and he said he was doing me a favor.

So to the other LEOs here, do you write this or give me a warning?

1180-a, speed not reasonable or prudent is one of the most subjective tickets out there. Obviously the officer considered your speed unreasonable given the totality of the circumstances. By your own admission you were going 35 in a 30 so the officer obviously agreed with you.

[27east 19]

Depends on the situation, traffic conditions, and weather. If the officer is radar certified, he can write you the actual speed based solely on his / her visual observations. When he said he was doing you a favor, he meant that you are better off getting a ticket for 1180 (a) (Speed not reasonable and prudent) than an acutal speeding ticket. Personally, writing that ticket would depend on the actual circumstances. Can you elaborate on traffic conditions, etc??

Traffic was light, it was just before 9PM, and perfectly clear weather.

[OnTheWheel 43]

Pedestrian traffic comes into play, the area ie residential, tight street, playground etc. Once heard a story of one of our cops got stopped by a cop somewhere down south, he was doing 31, the cop told him if they wanted you to go 31 the speed limit would be 31 not 30. 35 is fast for some areas and I would write it, not 1180d but the not reasonable. Even though a speed limit is 30 sometimes 20 isnt reasonable, like Chris said, its a very subjective ticket and open to a lot of officer discretion, in your favor or not.

[ONEEYEDMIC 68]

In a residental neighborhood 30mph is too fast. Our Town speed limit is 30mph unless posted different. You find me a driver that drives 30mph all the time. I think it is ridiculous. Cars have more horsepower than back in the day when these laws were made. I don't think 40mph would be unreasonable. Most of the time I give you 20mph over on a main road. Depending of course the time of day, weather, etc.. That is pretty generous. I think of it this way. If I write you 20mph over you probably won't plead it down to a non moving violation. Fine is higher, points on license and INS goes up. Hopefully the driver will learn from their mistakes.

[SgtGumby311 0]

What shift are you working??? Just in case I'm running late, that 20 over could help me out...lol

[DaRock98 76]

Most of the time I give you 20mph over on a main road. Depending of course the time of day, weather, etc.. That is pretty generous. I think of it this way. If I write you 20mph over you probably won't plead it down to a non moving violation. Fine is higher, points on license and INS goes up. Hopefully the driver will learn from their mistakes.

WOW that is more then fair good to know let me know where and when you are working please!

[helicopper 1,050]

In a residental neighborhood 30mph is too fast. Our Town speed limit is 30mph unless posted different. You find me a driver that drives 30mph all the time. I think it is ridiculous. Cars have more horsepower than back in the day when these laws were made. I don't think 40mph would be unreasonable. Most of the time I give you 20mph over on a main road. Depending of course the time of day, weather, etc.. That is pretty generous. I think of it this way. If I write you 20mph over you probably won't plead it down to a non moving violation. Fine is higher, points on license and INS goes up. Hopefully the driver will learn from their mistakes.

You're right cars have more horsepower but for the most part the roads are all the same. The speed limit on the Bronx River Parkway (north of the Sprain split) is 40 MPH - not because the road was built back in 1917 (completed in 1925) - but rather because of sight distances (hills/curves), intersections, etc. It's no Autobahn yet people treat it as one because they think they can. That style of driving simply continues once they're off the highways and on local roads unfortunately.

Given all the driveways, side streets, and other things that could create a problem, 20 MPH is quite generous. That's what I used to give people on the parkways. Unless I was in a triple digit hunting mood.

[NWFDMedic 58]

I hate that "speed not prudent" violation. I actually got stopped for some odd reason on a clear day in light traffic on the NYS Thruway doing 72 in a 65 on my way up to an EMS event of some sort. The trooper wrote me for "speed not prudent" and somehow it stuck. I was nice to the trooper, all "yes sir" or "no sir", never complained, etc. I have that odd feeling that it had something to do with the fact that I was captain of my EMS agency at the time and had red lights on my personal vehicle and I found a trooper with a grudge.

I guess I really shouldn't complain because I was violating the speed limit but I knew full well that the NYS Thruway was built with such sight lines, grade changes, and turns, that they somehow scientifically figured out that it should be able to be navigated by the average driver at a speed of 75 mph with the cars of those days. Oh well, those points are long gone from my record.

[trauma74 111]

NWFDMedic,

Maybe it is because of who you work for that got you the ticket!!!! LOL!HAHA!! Just busting your B*LLS! I will make sure that when a Base 5 guy writes you, he gets you for the actual speed you are going!!!!! Be Safe!!!!

Doug