[DeTomaso] Speeding ticket check returned

[boyd casey]

Double jeopardy dosen't exist in this case because he has not been tried.
Under double jeopardy you can't be tried twice for the same crime "If your
are found not guilty" in the first trial. You can be charged and have the
charges "Null process" which means the state has declined to prosecute but
can charge you later if they feel like it or if they obtain more or new
evidence. In a Mistrial they can try you again. Also A judge is not
compelled to accept your guilty plea unconditionally. If you say I'ill plead
guilty but the charges are bogus and that implies you are not really
admitting guilt they won't accept it. It leaves the door open for appeal.
 That's why sometimes they require full elocution when you plead guilty,
this is usually reserved for serious crimes , not speeding tickets but you
have to get up in court and "Elocute" the nature or your guilt. Which is to
verbally spell out your actions leading up to the commission of the stated
offence. Most tickets Have a box to check for guilty or not guilty if the
ticket were so marked and the guilty plea was checked I don't think the memo
would be a legal issue. If you were in court and pleaded guilty but said
"the whole thing is bogus and a scam " you could be held in contempt. The
thing politicians always do is plead "No Lo Contend re" Which means "No
Contest" you are not admitting guilt but your not denying it either you just
agree to accept the punishment.Boyd
AKA
 Hugh Boyd Casey Esq.

On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Robert Kirk <kirkbrit at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> I have been following this thread with interest and some very good points
> are being made. Not sure I agree with the anarchist’s point but it’s an
> interesting read and point of view. I think what happened to the thread
> starter, is extremely arrogant and perhaps technically illegal. In
> submitting payment he has admitted guilt to return the check and force a
> court confrontation appears to be double jeopardy. Another important point,
> while each state has its own laws, double jeopardy is protected by the
> constitutional.
> I laid off this when it first came up because it appeared the presumed
> offender was already in court. I haven't read the out come of his trial but
> even if he is found guilty a discussion of double jeopardy is in order
> either in the company of a lawyer or to the prosecutor of the case.
> In the Midwest its common to admit guilt by simply paying the fine. One can
> also appear in court as has been mentioned and pay or ask for a trial. A
> trial date is set and that's when the cop has to appear. If he doesn't the
> judge typically dismisses the case. In Chicago, if you are unable to simply
> bribe the judge through a local politician, the gambit is similar to parting
> the groups on the court date into guilty vs. not guilty...at least that was
> my experience on more than one occasion even getting an "incorrect lane
> change" ticket enroute to court on I55.
> Asa and others make a sound case for knowing your rights and/or asking
> before or during the court appearance.
> I hope the thread starter will indeed explore my submission that he has
> been put in double jeopardy...could be a stretch but so was the individual,
> judge or magistrate (there is a big difference), who seemed a tad over the
> top in reacting to another Constitutional right called Free Speech and Right
> to Expression....another legal tact which may be inorder to fight the
> scurrilous action by the court.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Robert Kirk
> www.kirks-auto.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>
> Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
>
> DeTomaso mailing list
> DeTomaso at list.realbig.com
> http://list.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>