Sunday, April 15, 2007

Unfair ticket?

On January 30 I was stopped in Woodstock for a headlight out. Right in front of my house. I mean, right in front.

The officer, whom I've know for about four years, greeted me by my first name and asked if I knew my headlight was out. Because I didn't think I had any reason to suspect that I might be treated unfairly, I answered that I did know the headlight was out. I explained that I knew exactly where it had gone out. Ten miles back in Wonder Lake. Twenty minutes earlier. I explained also that I had driven straight to my house. There was no repair garage between Wonder Lake and my house. There was no place open at 6:00PM to get a new headlight installed. There was no public transportation at that hour from Wonder Lake to Woodstock.

The headlight had gone out two weeks before, and I showed the officer my vehicle repair record. He said that, since he had stopped me, he would have to give me a Warning. No problem. I expected to take the car back to DeCraene's the next morning and get it fixed again. The officer returned to his car, and I waited in my car.

Another Woodstock squad car arrived. Back-up, don't you know? The two officers talked, and then the second car departed. I read the Car Number as it passed me. Then the first officer walked to my car and told me he was going to give me a ticket! I asked just what had changed in the past ten minutes, and he didn't have an answer (or at least one that he would give me).

He wrote me a $75.00 ticket. He offered to call his sergeant, and the sergeant came to where we were stopped. I explained again that I knew exactly where the headlight had gone out, because I was keeping an extra close eye on my driving and vehicle.

Early in January I had received a telephone call from an employee at the sheriff's department who told me there was a $100 Bounty out on me; any deputy who could write me a ticket for anything would get $100 cash! I have the name of the person purportedly offering the Bounty! I had dictated the mileage where the headlight went out into a pocket tape recorder that I keep in the car, and I played the tape for the officer and the sergeant. Then I turned on the lights and pointed to the odometer - exactly ten miles after the mileage on the tape recording!

The sergeant let the officer's decision stand and the ticket was issued. I said, "Jim, you do what you have to do, and then I'll do what I have to do." I have told many people this story - to a man, they have used two words to describe the officer's decision. The first starts with B, and the second starts with S.

I met with Chief Lowen to learn the officer's reason. The officer decided that since I am quite vocal about traffic violations and want the laws enforced, then he would give me the ticket and not a Warning. I filed a Freedom of Information Act request and learned that the officer had made 77 traffic stops in the past 90 days. He issued 39 tickets and 38 warnings. I appreciated that Chief Lowen was willing to meet with me and be honest about the officer's decision-making process. In many cities and towns, a chief would never do that, especially before a court date.

I had thought of defending myself and taking up an hour of the judge's time. I considered having subpeonas issued to the sergeant, the second officer, and the records sergeant, and obtaining copies of the computer records, in-car camera videotape which would show the officer's telling me he would give me a Warning, police radio traffic, and cell phone records of the Department cell phone and the officer's personal cell phone. I figured that the judge would probably say, "Good try, Gus, but was the headlight out?" and then fine me not only the $75.00 (if not more) but also obligate me to $150 of court costs. Add lost work time, and it wasn't worth it - this time...

Was the ticket unfair?

Did the officer have the right to give me a ticket? Absolutely.
Did he make a bad decision, when he changed his mind? Absolutely.

When I was a cop, I was aware that we always had the right to issue a ticket, if we stopped a driver for a valid reason. If a driver was argumentative, abusive, profane, whatever, we could always write a ticket. But, if a courteous roadside contact solved the problem, especially for a vehicle equipment item, then no ticket was needed.

Was I singled out? You bet. It only took a couple of days for the person offering the Bounty at the sheriff's department to hear about my ticket. Four days later I got a call from an employee there who told that person was jumping up and down (with joy) that "Woodstock nailed Philpott".

4 comments:

pryan67 said...

you've got to love selective enforcement. I personally would fight the ticket, since standard practice is to give a warning, and with your documentation, you should be able to show the judge that you did your due dilligence, and that you immediately got it fixed again. It would be different if you have had issues with your headlight out in the past, etc..

Unknown said...

So what you are saying Gus is that back in your day, they did not issue citations based on the infraction but only on if they were nice to you or not? So if a person was a good enough actor or actress, cussing you out on the inside but smiling to you on the outside, they were not issued a citation? If they gave you static, said it had only been out for a little while and demanded a warning instead of a ticket, then you would write them a ticket?

Gus, You have said it in your own blog, and I quote "The law is the law..." but now that the law has caught up to you, you are upset!

What does the state statute say?

(625 ILCS 5/12-201) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 12-201)
Sec. 12-201. When lighted lamps are required.
(a) When operated upon any highway in this State, every
motorcycle shall at all times exhibit at least one lighted
lamp, showing a white light visible for at least 500 feet in
the direction the motorcycle is proceeding. However, in lieu
of such lighted lamp, a motorcycle may be equipped with and
use a means of modulating the upper beam of the head lamp
between high and a lower brightness. No such head lamp shall
be modulated, except to otherwise comply with this Code,
during times when lighted lamps are required for other motor
vehicles.
(b) All other motor vehicles shall exhibit at least 2
lighted head lamps, with at least one on each side of the
front of the vehicle, which satisfy United States Department
of Transportation requirements, showing white lights,
including that emitted by high intensity discharge (HID)
lamps, or lights of a yellow or amber tint, during the period
from sunset to sunrise, at times when rain, snow, fog, or
other atmospheric conditions require the use of windshield
wipers, and at any other times when, due to insufficient light
or unfavorable atmospheric conditions, persons and vehicles on
the highway are not clearly discernible at a distance of 1000
feet. Parking lamps may be used in addition to but not in lieu
of such head lamps. Every motor vehicle, trailer, or
semi-trailer shall also exhibit at least 2 lighted lamps,
commonly known as tail lamps, which shall be mounted on the
left rear and right rear of the vehicle so as to throw a red
light visible for at least 500 feet in the reverse direction,
except that a truck tractor or road tractor manufactured
before January 1, 1968 and all motorcycles need be equipped
with only one such tail lamp.


**********************


So you admit that you broke the law. You admit that in your own past you would base your decision on if you wrote a ticket to someone based on their actions. This officer stopped you and issued you a citation for a violation he witnessed. He stated that he made the decision to issue a citation after considering your actions, past and present, in regard to police enforcement. Might have even read you post on the blog "The law is the law!"

Well Gus, since the law is the law, what does it say? It says "All other motor vehicles shall exhibit at least 2
lighted head lamps, with at least one on each side of the
front of the vehicle" NOT "All other motor vehicles shall exhibit at least 2
lighted head lamps, with at least one on each side of the
front of the vehicle unless it just went out 10 miles ago and you have not had a chance to get it fixed."

Are you not the one who wants to take away officer discretion on issuing tickets after traffic crashes? How would it look if an officer pulled over someone that was running for sheriff and did not issue him a ticket? Would not want anybody to think that he was getting a free pass now, would you?

This coming from the same guy who called in a Chicago squad for "guessing" he was speeding 20 over and hoping that the driver of the squad got in trouble for it, right?

You said you thought about fighting the ticket. You admit you were breaking the law. Why would you think about wasting all that time and money KNOWING that you did actually break the law?

Gus "The law is the law but give me a pass if I break it" Philpott

Gus said...

DA, not sure how you could read so little (inaccurately) and be so wrong.

When the officer stopped me, he said he would give me a Warning.

Then Ofc. Schraw showed up. Something Schraw said caused O'Doherty to change his mind. And O'Doherty informed me, without further discussion, that he was going to issue a ticket.

So, here's what I think. I think there was an order or an "understanding" at WPD that, if I got stopped, I was to get a ticket, not a warning.

If Schraw hadn't responded unnecessarily and stuck his nose in where it wasn't needed, O'Doherty would have issued me a warning. And probably had to deal with a whole ration of xxxx when he got back to the lot.

Unknown said...

No Gus, I read it just fine. It is your opinion (that you THINK is law!) that I am wrong.

You are making a lot of ASSumptions without any proof. How typical of you, Gus!

ASSumption #1

"Then Ofc. Schraw showed up. Something Schraw said caused O'Doherty to change his mind. And O'Doherty informed me, without further discussion, that he was going to issue a ticket."

You are ASSuming it was something that Schraw said. Maybe the deputy just thought about your past actions, including your statements of "The law is the law!" and decided to take your advice! Maybe the other deputy reminded him that you were the "law is the law" guy and he based his decision on that.


"So, here's what I think. I think there was an order or an "understanding" at WPD that, if I got stopped, I was to get a ticket, not a warning."

More assumptions on your part or you would be filing a lawsuit the day after you were stopped!

"If Schraw hadn't responded unnecessarily and stuck his nose in where it wasn't needed, O'Doherty would have issued me a warning. And probably had to deal with a whole ration of xxxx when he got back to the lot."

The final assumptions by you! Never heard of a back up officer on a traffic stop? Did not do that 30 years ago?



It was the deputies DISCRETION! Just because he may have initially thought to give a warning, does that mean that before he issues it he is not allowed to change his mind? You might have said something, given him a funny look, stuck your tongue out at him! Who knows! You might not have even realized you did it! 70% of communication is not verbal. You have said you have done it yourself in the past! Written a ticket instead of a warning based on the actions of the driver you had pulled over!

You make yourself known in the area as a person that is a stickler for the letter of the law. You just hate the fact that the letter of the law just bit you in the @ss!