PDA

View Full Version : Ticket Question Regarding an Accident



cubsfan07
12-16-2007, 10:21 PM
Hey all, a friend of mine just called me and he told me that he was involved in a single car 10-50. He hit a patch of ice, lost control and hit a cement barrier in DT Chicago. A CPD officer came on the scene, asked him what happened, filled out a report and cited him for "Failure to Reduce Speed To Avoid an Accident." There was no damage to anything but his vehicle. There were no witnesses to the accident but my friend. I told him to fight the ticket because there are no witnesses, there was no accident reconstruction, and not to mention the ticket is BS because it's basically rubbing salt in an open wound. The weather was bad and it really doesn't matter how slow you are driving sometimes...if you hydroplane you hydroplane. Would any of you guys right a ticket for this? I know I wouldn't.

L-1
12-17-2007, 12:34 AM
The weather was bad and it really doesn't matter how slow you are driving sometimes...if you hydroplane you hydroplane. Would any of you guys right a ticket for this?

Out here it's called driving at an unsafe speed for conditions and it gets written all the time. The simple fact is that that you need to be cognizant of the currrent road conditiond and adjust your speed accordingly in order to be able to drive without crashing.

If, as you suggest, conditions were so bad that you friend was going to hydrplane and crash no matter how slow he was driving, then a citation was certainly warranted, if only for being silly enough to be on the road under those circumstances.

ChiTownDude
12-17-2007, 04:07 AM
In this cituation, I think the copper was just covering his butt. Odds are if you buddy goes to court and contest it. The ticket will most likely be tossed. I believe that since the police officer didn't witness the crash, then a citation should not have been issued.

L-1
12-17-2007, 06:12 AM
In this cituation, I think the copper was just covering his butt. Odds are if you buddy goes to court and contest it. The ticket will most likely be tossed. I believe that since the police officer didn't witness the crash, then a citation should not have been issued.

Your comment has made me curious. Out here an officer who investigates an accident may cite for violations that he discovers occurred as part of the crash, even though they were not committed in his presence. Is that not permitted in Illinois?

blueline1032
12-17-2007, 06:20 AM
Your comment has made me curious. Out here an officer who investigates an accident may cite for violations that he discovers occurred as part of the crash, even though they were not committed in his presence. Is that not permitted in Illinois?

Such citations are routinely issued. For traffic crashes, an officer does not have to witness the crash to issue a citation... that would be asinine. We issue citations as the evidence dictates. I have yet to actually issue a citation for a crash that I actually observed.

Corp
12-17-2007, 11:32 AM
Hey all, a friend of mine just called me and he told me that he was involved in a single car 10-50. He hit a patch of ice, lost control and hit a cement barrier in DT Chicago. A CPD officer came on the scene, asked him what happened, filled out a report and cited him for "Failure to Reduce Speed To Avoid an Accident." There was no damage to anything but his vehicle. There were no witnesses to the accident but my friend. I told him to fight the ticket because there are no witnesses, there was no accident reconstruction, and not to mention the ticket is BS because it's basically rubbing salt in an open wound. The weather was bad and it really doesn't matter how slow you are driving sometimes...if you hydroplane you hydroplane. Would any of you guys right a ticket for this? I know I wouldn't.

How fast was your friend going? What was the posted limit?

cityblusuit
12-17-2007, 11:54 AM
The IVC does not require an officer to witness a crash....the driver can be cited for failure to control speed or essentially driving too fast for conditions. The prevailing logic is that you cant be driving faster than anything in front of you...otherwise you will hit it. It is the same logic that applies in a rear ender. The cop is not covering his butt. If the officer's investigation reveals a contributory violation he will (or at least should) cite accordingly. You dont have to cover your butt if you are doing the right thing. As the driver, you accept responsibility for the function of your vehicle......sort of an implied consent. More directly, if I am driving my vehicle and I hydroplane and strike your vehicle I will get the citation for 625 ILCS 5/11-601a regardless of the posted speed limit and most parties in an accident would protest if I didnt get the cite. Posted speed limits are irrelevant and factors such as speed too high or too low are always contributory factors in single or multi vehicle wrecks. Just because the posted speed is 45 doesnt mean I should be driving 45 mph in an ice storm.....that is too fast for conditions.

But then again this is Illinois, in most cases the driver is already DWLS but he will probably drive to Court anyway.

flydream777
12-17-2007, 08:10 PM
I told him to fight the ticket because there are no witnesses, there was no accident reconstruction, and not to mention the ticket is BS because it's basically rubbing salt in an open wound. ... Would any of you guys right a ticket for this?

No, I probably wouldn't (but I wasn't there, so I know only what you're telling me). Salt in an open wound... yeah, probably... However, none of the reasons you stated are grounds for the ticket to be dropped in court. The ofc had every lawful reason to issue it if he chose to do so.

P.S.- "Accident reconstruction" on a single vehicle, property damage only accident?????? :eek: you're kidding me, right?

Himso
12-17-2007, 11:05 PM
If your friend said he struck a barrier in downtown Chicago and there were no witnesses, it must have happened pretty early in the morning.

You only know what your friend is telling you, the Police Officer was there and may have been cutting him a break.

And lastly, please don't use ten codes.

lcpdwannabe
12-17-2007, 11:09 PM
And lastly, please don't use ten codes.


why??

SeVere
12-17-2007, 11:34 PM
why??


Because it sounds like a police buff trying to use police jargan and different departments have different 10 codes. We don't use 10-50 in Chicago we call it a traffic crash.

10-4

cityblusuit
12-17-2007, 11:35 PM
why??

Because not everyone can 10-62 with the appropriate 10-43 and just because we are all 10-32 does not mean all we are in a position to 10-78. We cant all discuss this 10-50 and 10-19 to the point of whether or not there is a need to 10-95. Or are we all 10-96 because the belief that we all speak the same lingo is a big 10-74. The truth is we are all a bit 10-42 if we dont think that we are speaking some foreign language....himso is right we need to 10-3 because we are so busy being 10-6 it is just causing a lot of us to do a lot of 10-10 and since we are all family that makes it a 10-16 and when there is a real 10-33 our signals will be 10-1. If we all used plain english everything would be 10-2...10-4?? Or do I need to 10-9????

Ok 10-12...let me start over because I too think that using tencodes is just a big 10-80 of ghosts because we could just as easily 10-5 the info in english....is anyone else 10-60 to my line of thought???

ts622
12-18-2007, 03:34 AM
10-99 BlueSuit!

ISPCAPT
12-18-2007, 09:20 AM
10-99 BlueSuit!
There's a warrant out on BlueSuit????

dogcop
12-18-2007, 11:23 AM
This is like beating a 10-45. This whole post has gone to 10-11 crap.

ChiTownDet
12-18-2007, 11:23 AM
Bet these guys don't know why you call the dispatcher "squad."

Himso
12-18-2007, 11:53 AM
Can we please just 10-3 the 10-30?

cityblusuit
12-18-2007, 12:38 PM
Can we please just 10-3 the 10-30?

Oh I can feel the love now, sometimes you just gotta have fun.....I've just gotten started....10-12 for more 10-43

ts622
12-18-2007, 12:39 PM
There's a warrant out on BlueSuit????


In Chicago 10-99 means your riding solo, 10-4 is a two man car.

cityblusuit
12-18-2007, 12:42 PM
Bet these guys don't know why you call the dispatcher "squad."

Here in AZ, I write a report a few years back I had a brain lapse and made a reference to COS...true story...my SGT thought it was a reference to Bill Cosby. He chuckled and I had to correct the report.

ChiTownDet
12-18-2007, 01:21 PM
COS is now OEC (Office Emerg. Comm.) If you wrote COS here, now, nobody would know what it is..

Come on CityBlue, why were they called "squad?" Do I have to drag it out of you with a combo from Buona?

ISPCAPT
12-18-2007, 02:09 PM
In Chicago 10-99 means your riding solo, 10-4 is a two man car.
Just showing why using the 10 code isn't good. One agency's 10 code doesn't mean the same as another agency's, even in the same state. For us at the ISP it means Wanted on Warrant.

cityblusuit
12-18-2007, 02:28 PM
COS is now OEC (Office Emerg. Comm.) If you wrote COS here, now, nobody would know what it is..

Come on CityBlue, why were they called "squad?" Do I have to drag it out of you with a combo from Buona?

OK its my RDO, the kids are at school and I have a full pot of coffee. ANd for the record I prefer Al's or VIttori on Taylor Street......If I must I'll go to Mr Beef on Orleans

Historically dispatch was officially known as the Communiction Operations Section (COS). In the old days you could go to 1121 S State and you could see the dispatchers at work ...back then they were all P/O's. Dispatchers were considered the "squad operator". Officers then shortened the title to "Squad" when referring to Dispatch. Chicago has a very crowded radio system divided into 13 zones and six citywide frequencies (at least when I was there). The zones are shared by two districts with the exception of 003 which has its own zone(Theyre special!!!). Other units typically use the citywide freqs but usually have the capacity to copy the affected zone. In the 11th district for example if there was a shooting...the traffic would go something like this.....

COS: 1125....

COS: 1125....

1125: 1125

COS: 1125 , units in 11, units on the citywide, we got shots in the Rockwell..2450 W Monroe reports advising shots are coming from 117 N Rockwell

1125: 1125, copy squad

4571A: 4571Adam

COS: 4571Adam

4571A: 4571Adam , squad myself and 4571Boy be enroute to the loud reports in CD

COS: 1125, Units in 11, units on the citywide use caution we have Civilian Dress personnel in the area ..please use caution.

4571A: 4571Adam EMERGENCY!!

COS : UNITS Standby 4571Adam go with your Emrrgency

4571A: 71Adam my partners in foot pursuit......m/1 all black clothing heading towards 2517

COS : M/1 all black clothing running towards 2517 W Adams.....4571Adam describe your partner

4571A: Squad he's the white guy with the gun!!!

COS: (pregnant pause) 4571Adam copy

4571B: 4571Boy

COS: 4571Boy

4571B: 71Boy, Squad, 71Adam has one in custody, we recovered the weapon can u have 1125 meet us in back of 340 S Western for transport to the area.

COS: 4571Boy 10-4.....1125

1125: Copy squad, around the corner.

4571A: 4571Adam

COS: 4571Adam

4571A: Squad can you have our SGT meet us at the area

COS: 4571

4571: 4571 10-99


GOD I MISS THOSE DAYS and I dont think any of those building are still there.

cityblusuit
12-18-2007, 02:35 PM
Just showing why using the 10 code isn't good. One agency's 10 code doesn't mean the same as another agency's, even in the same state. For us at the ISP it means Wanted on Warrant.

Amen, they are a bad idea. One of the great things about Chicago is that we only had three ten codes 10-4, 10-99 and 10-1.....10-1 means I need all the help I can get. everything else is plain English. One of the compliance requirements with NIMS now is a push toward using plain English in Public Safety.....ten codes are stupid.... everybody's is different, in scanner world they are no secret, and in the event of multi-agency mutual aid situations they handicap everybody. BUt what do I know I'm just a blusuit in the city.

lcpdwannabe
12-18-2007, 03:12 PM
sorry I asked :D:D

flydream777
12-18-2007, 07:32 PM
What kind of units are 4571A and 4571B?

cityblusuit
12-18-2007, 08:59 PM
What kind of units are 4571A and 4571B?

it was a tac team out of public housing north....worked ogden courts, horner, rockwell, other fun places like that.

cubsfan07
12-18-2007, 09:24 PM
[QUOTE=Himso;1035693]If your friend said he struck a barrier in downtown Chicago and there were no witnesses, it must have happened pretty early in the morning.

You only know what your friend is telling you, the Police Officer was there and may have been cutting him a break.

I read the accident report. There were no witnesses. So basically in court the officer has to come to testify against something he didn't see. My friend may or may not win. I just told him that he might have a chance considering the officer will basically be testifying on deductive reasoning instead of direct evidence. Either way it's worth a shot.

Himso
12-18-2007, 09:47 PM
Figure it out. Downtown Chicago? No witnesses listed on the report? No property damage listed on the report? I say again, He was probably cutting him a break. Sometimes things are written a certain way for a reason.

ISPCAPT
12-18-2007, 11:10 PM
I read the accident report. There were no witnesses. So basically in court the officer has to come to testify against something he didn't see.
How many traffic crashes, burglaries, murders, etc do you think a LEO actually witnesses? It doesn't matter whether the LEO witnessed the crash or not. It's called collecting evidence and putting together the facts.
Tell your friend to go to court. Judges love to hear sob stories and lines of woe about the LEO not being able to write a ticket because he wasn't there to witness it. It will be good for your friend. He'll get an education in the law and learn it's not like he sees on TV or hears from his friend who read the crash reports and asks questions about it on the internet.
And when all is said your friend will also learn that after judges get tired of hearing all the whining and excuses that judges do a thing called adding on court costs. Judges just love to spend their day listening to these kinds of cases. :rolleyes:

cubsfan07
12-18-2007, 11:38 PM
Tell your friend to go to court. Judges love to hear sob stories and lines of woe about the LEO not being able to write a ticket because he wasn't there to witness it. It will be good for your friend. He'll get an education in the law and learn it's not like he sees on TV or hears from his friend who read the crash reports and asks questions about it on the internet.
And when all is said your friend will also learn that after judges get tired of hearing all the whining and excuses that judges do a thing called adding on court costs. Judges just love to spend their day listening to these kinds of cases. :rolleyes:


All I know is when I waiting for a bench trial a few years back for a speeding ticket I got, I remember a bunch of cases being dismissed by the judge for lack of witnesses showing up. A few times it was because the cop didn't show up for a speeding ticket he wrote, and a few others it was because the WITNESSES involved in a multi-person, multi-vehicle accident didn't show up. Actually now that I think of it, the judge dismissed when the cop didn't show up, but the prosecutor would "nolle prosequi" the cases when the other parties in an accident didn't show up. He would sit there and try to negotiate some BS plea-bargain where the fine was like 4x the amount of the original ticket. They defendants (there were at least 3 different cases) all said no. And guess what happened when the case got called before the judge? "Your honor, the state would like to nolle pros this case." So, court fines added if he's convicted, then so be it. But as I've said before, it's worth the gamble, especially in Chicago. Oddly enough the cop wrote the ticket as a state ticket instead of a city ordinance.

Himso
12-19-2007, 12:47 AM
You know alot of stuff. And good stuff too.

ChiTownDet
12-19-2007, 02:13 AM
I remember you boys in PHU/N being a rather "creative" (scattered site -wise) crew "back in the day." LOL

ISPCAPT
12-19-2007, 09:54 AM
Oddly enough the cop wrote the ticket as a state ticket instead of a city ordinance..

And why is that "odd"? State cites go on a person's driving record. This is often a surprise to some Chicago folks but Chicago is still in IL. I worked quite a few cases in Chicago area and was fun when someone said I couldn't arrest them because they were in Chicago and I was from IL.

cityblusuit
12-19-2007, 11:20 AM
And why is that "odd"? State cites go on a person's driving record. This is often a surprise to some Chicago folks but Chicago is still in IL. I worked quite a few cases in Chicago area and was fun when someone said I couldn't arrest them because they were in Chicago and I was from IL.

Thats funny and so believable...I remember that ISP cars had all red lights and when they took over on the expressways in Chicago they had to switch to red/blue lights, the genius drivers wouldn't pull over for ISP because they thought they were from the Fire Department.

cityblusuit
12-19-2007, 11:48 AM
I remember you boys in PHU/N being a rather "creative" (scattered site -wise) crew "back in the day." LOL

"Creative" has such a dirty connotation ....I prefer "liberal utilization of resources and environment". BTW .....was my explanation of "squad" sufficient?? I prefer hot peppers on my combos.

cubsfan07
12-19-2007, 01:57 PM
And why is that "odd"? State cites go on a person's driving record. This is often a surprise to some Chicago folks but Chicago is still in IL. I worked quite a few cases in Chicago area and was fun when someone said I couldn't arrest them because they were in Chicago and I was from IL.

It's odd because most municipalities will write petty offenses as city ordiances tickets so they can reap all the fine money. If they write it as a state citation they don't get all the money. But then again you being a trooper and all, you already knew that :). By the way, I'm well aware that Chicago is in Illinois and also that troopers have full jurisdiction anywhere in the state.

Himso
12-19-2007, 03:02 PM
I am really pulling for you to get into an academy. The Instructors are gonna love you.

cubsfan07
12-19-2007, 03:16 PM
I am really pulling for you to get into an academy. The Instructors are gonna love you.

Already taken care of my friend. I start in a few weeks :).

ChiTownDet
12-19-2007, 03:16 PM
"Creative" has such a dirty connotation ....I prefer "liberal utilization of resources and environment". BTW .....was my explanation of "squad" sufficient?? I prefer hot peppers on my combos.

Right on the $$$.. Bang me when you get in town, I owe you one..

pnwcopper
12-19-2007, 03:23 PM
Already taken care of my friend. I start in a few weeks :).

What academy?

Himso
12-19-2007, 03:29 PM
You could probably skip the academy.

camr08
12-19-2007, 08:55 PM
COS : M/1 all black clothing running towards 2517 W Adams.....4571Adam describe your partner

4571A: Squad he's the white guy with the gun!!!

reminds me of once a guy on my old department had a mini vehicle chase caught the guy as he was bailing. Decided to leave the prisoner on the ground and turn off his siren. Guy ran away handcuffed behind his back.

Me being the rookie asked for a description.

HE stated the guy that running with handcuffs behind his back.

ISPCAPT
12-19-2007, 10:19 PM
I am really pulling for you to get into an academy. The Instructors are gonna love you.
The instructors might but how would you like to be a classmate? Every class has one. All of us who have been thru the academy can name the person by name regardless of how long ago it's been since we went thru. My class had the guy name Vern and it was right at 30 yrs ago. Can still remember some of the questions and stunts he pulled.

Himso
12-19-2007, 10:56 PM
Cap, I hope you caught the sarcasm. That was exactly what I meant!

ISPCAPT
12-19-2007, 11:30 PM
Cap, I hope you caught the sarcasm. That was exactly what I meant!
Yup, I knew what you were saying. That's why I added the part about the classmates too and how every class has the one.;)

ChiTownDet
12-20-2007, 01:19 AM
The instructors might but how would you like to be a classmate? Every class has one. All of us who have been thru the academy can name the person by name regardless of how long ago it's been since we went thru. My class had the guy name Vern and it was right at 30 yrs ago. Can still remember some of the questions and stunts he pulled.

And all those questions always get asked right before you're about to break for lunch or be dismissed for the day...

cubsfan07
12-20-2007, 03:59 AM
Haha, yeah guys I'm the "guy" that everyone in class hates...yeah. No actually I'm discussing opinions on a forum that allows me to do so. I know better to argue with instructors and/or ask them dumb questions. Just because it's in a book doesn't mean it's how things are done. But of course you guys know it all, more than the judges, lawyers, and everyone else. You can always pull the "I've been a cop for blah, blah, blah, years" card and think that's your right of passage. And anyone that doesn't take your word as gold is "that guy." Keep thinking what you want.

ISPCAPT
12-20-2007, 09:54 AM
And all those questions always get asked right before you're about to break for lunch or be dismissed for the day...
Ain't that the truth! Our "Vern" would save up the questions for 3 PM on Friday.
Himso has him figured 100% correctly.

10-41
12-20-2007, 11:33 AM
To add my .02 cub fan, I usually don't write tickets for single vehicle crashes, unless there is private property damage. However, I recently wall papered a kid who left the scene of a single vehicle crash, who claimed that he "was going to notify the police, but was scared."....more like drunk.

Himso
12-20-2007, 12:12 PM
Haha, yeah guys I'm the "guy" that everyone in class hates...yeah. No actually I'm discussing opinions on a forum that allows me to do so. I know better to argue with instructors and/or ask them dumb questions. Just because it's in a book doesn't mean it's how things are done. But of course you guys know it all, more than the judges, lawyers, and everyone else. You can always pull the "I've been a cop for blah, blah, blah, years" card and think that's your right of passage. And anyone that doesn't take your word as gold is "that guy." Keep thinking what you want.



It is better to be thought of as a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

You have proven your point on more than one thread.

Trooper2005
12-20-2007, 04:17 PM
Back to the original question.........personally, I'd write him 11-709 (Improper lane usage). No matter what he can't fight that. He obviously wasnt driving in his lane of traffic if he struck the cement barrier. Sure beats someone trying to fight too fast for conditions.........that a grey area. I'm sure to get a conviction for 11-709. My philosophy is, If I have to risk my safety coming out in a snow/ice storm to save your butt........you're gonna pay for it.

cubsfan07
12-20-2007, 07:47 PM
Haha, why does that not suprise me. You state boys love writing tickets for anything ;). By the way, he was driving before this blizzard started and was on his way home. And secondly, "risk your safety" but it happens in the line of work. He didn't call the police. The officer showed up after the fact and the car was perfectly driveable. He could've gotten out and seen if there was any damage to anything besides my friend's own car or if anyone had been hurt. He made it his own choice to "risk his safety." The damage was less than $500 so the officer didn't have to do a report. Don't get me wrong, I'm very pro-police (I have to be since I'm going to be sworn in next month), but there is a little thing called discretion. I know my friend wouldn't get an attitude with the officer either because he's also pro-police and not a jerk like that.

MountainTreker
12-21-2007, 09:28 AM
Some jurisdictions around here go as far as to require the ofcs to cite if they can determine that a violation has occured, and failure to reduce to avoid isn't overly hard to prove.

If your friend was technically in violation of the law (blizzard or not) he is subject to the applicable cites, no witness necessary. Its up to the prosecutor to decide to bring it before the judge, and up to the judge to decide. Maybe the pros. will drop it then and there, but if it goes before the judge and the judge rules against your friend, he might end up paying more for it than originally expected...

As for why he wrote state, it could be his preference, what his super. wanted, or simply the location of the incident, not enough information to know.

MountainTreker
12-21-2007, 09:31 AM
Because not everyone can 10-62 with the appropriate 10-43 and just because we are all 10-32 does not mean all we are in a position to 10-78. We cant all discuss this 10-50 and 10-19 to the point of whether or not there is a need to 10-95. Or are we all 10-96 because the belief that we all speak the same lingo is a big 10-74. The truth is we are all a bit 10-42 if we dont think that we are speaking some foreign language....himso is right we need to 10-3 because we are so busy being 10-6 it is just causing a lot of us to do a lot of 10-10 and since we are all family that makes it a 10-16 and when there is a real 10-33 our signals will be 10-1. If we all used plain english everything would be 10-2...10-4?? Or do I need to 10-9????

Ok 10-12...let me start over because I too think that using tencodes is just a big 10-80 of ghosts because we could just as easily 10-5 the info in english....is anyone else 10-60 to my line of thought???

Hardest I have laughed in a long time, in between taking quick glances at my 10-code card :p :rolleyes:

pujolsfan146
12-24-2007, 09:27 PM
Such citations are routinely issued. For traffic crashes, an officer does not have to witness the crash to issue a citation... that would be asinine. We issue citations as the evidence dictates. I have yet to actually issue a citation for a crash that I actually observed.

Well said. The ticket is not bogus and we do not have to have witnesses to issue the citation.

I have done it many times for failure to reduce speed and haven't lost one yet.

GORTIZ
12-29-2007, 06:57 PM
Good discusion. subscribing