[erkme73]

Thanks MB... I already have some legal advocate in my corner - more of a government watchdog type than a traffic lawyer. He was cited for the same infraction in Maryland - and because of his case, the County he lives in will now no longer issue citations for motorists who warn each other.

[Momma_bear]

Originally Posted by erkme73

Thanks MB... I already have some legal advocate in my corner - more of a government watchdog type than a traffic lawyer. He was cited for the same infraction in Maryland - and because of his case, the County he lives in will now no longer issue citations for motorists who warn each other.

Is he a lawyer and does he know the law in FL?

[erkme73]

Yes, and yes.

[chaotix]

You anticipated being pulled over as you were videotaping your trip. Also, it seems likely that you will beat the ticket as you are obviously well versed in the the law/statutes. Begs the question, why put yourself through the aggravation?

[erkme73]

It's funny you say that. I've posted this incident on many different forums and this "looking for trouble" comment always comes up.

15 years ago I had an elderly (senile) lady stop on busy two-lane road. She puts it in reverse, and before I could react, she slammed into me. Both my wife and I couldn't believe it. She said she'd missed her turn, and wanted to back up - and didn't see me behind her. While we waited for the police to show up, she suddenly changed her mind... "I don't remember what happened... I just stopped and felt a thump". We signed a handwritten roadside disclaimer holding each other harmless, and we parted ways before the police arrived. I knew I would be found guilty.

Since that day, I wanted an unbiased witness to be my co-pilot. About 5 years ago, the technology became small (and affordable) enough to put in both of my vehicles. It's cheap, always-on insurance. It requires NO driver input, and is priceless in he-said she-said events. So, because I have a camera doesn't mean I go out looking for confrontation.

My last stop was over 3 years ago - for speeding. My camera system proved the officer's laser gun was off by 4MPH. The difference was a 13MPH over vs. a 17MPH over (major) speeding ticket.Prior to that, it was 8 years since my last traffic stop.

Maybe I'm paranoid. Maybe I'm practical. Everyone at my office (with a few exceptions) has this system in their cars now. Recently a co-worker's wife was t-boned by a county deputy who claimed his lights and sirens were on and he came to a complete stop before entering the intersection on a red light. He didn't. She didn't have the recorder (then) and she will likely face charges - even though witnesses said she had a green light.

The aggravation, for me, is worth it due to principal. I have issues with government limiting my constitutional freedoms. When an officer can bend the law to intimidate the public so they fear communicating, we've lost a lot more than a $101 ticket.

[chaotix]

Originally Posted by erkme73

It's funny you say that. I've posted this incident on many different forums and this "looking for trouble" comment always comes up.

15 years ago I had an elderly (senile) lady stop on busy two-lane road. She puts it in reverse, and before I could react, she slammed into me. Both my wife and I couldn't believe it. She said she'd missed her turn, and wanted to back up - and didn't see me behind her. While we waited for the police to show up, she suddenly changed her mind... "I don't remember what happened... I just stopped and felt a thump". We signed a handwritten roadside disclaimer holding each other harmless, and we parted ways before the police arrived. I knew I would be found guilty.

Since that day, I wanted an unbiased witness to be my co-pilot. About 5 years ago, the technology became small (and affordable) enough to put in both of my vehicles. It's cheap, always-on insurance. It requires NO driver input, and is priceless in he-said she-said events. So, because I have a camera doesn't mean I go out looking for confrontation.

My last stop was over 3 years ago - for speeding. My camera system proved the officer's laser gun was off by 4MPH. The difference was a 13MPH over vs. a 17MPH over (major) speeding ticket.Prior to that, it was 8 years since my last traffic stop.

Maybe I'm paranoid. Maybe I'm practical. Everyone at my office (with a few exceptions) has this system in their cars now. Recently a co-worker's wife was t-boned by a county deputy who claimed his lights and sirens were on and he came to a complete stop before entering the intersection on a red light. He didn't. She didn't have the recorder (then) and she will likely face charges - even though witnesses said she had a green light.

The aggravation, for me, is worth it due to principal. I have issues with government limiting my constitutional freedoms. When an officer can bend the law to intimidate the public so they fear communicating, we've lost a lot more than a $101 ticket.

I didn’t think you were looking for trouble, I merely wondered why would anyone go through the trouble, but you’ve answered my question.

Well, there is certainly no better alibi than a video recording. I can only applaud your efforts, who knows situations/issues such as this may reduce/deter frivolous traffic stops by Police Officers and can only aid in accidents/situations encountered as you have described herein.

[Mike1306]

What about when the officer mentions first that you said your light was wobbly but then you changed your story?

This calls into question your credibility.

[hortysir]

I vaguely remember a similar case being tried, in GA, back in the 80's.
The judge ruled that the flashing driver was actually helping the troopers, in that when one sees blinking headlights, they tend to slow down.

[erkme73]

Originally Posted by Mike Peterson

What about when the officer mentions first that you said your light was wobbly but then you changed your story?

This calls into question your credibility.

I didn't change my story. Neither here, nor on the video. It seemed fishy to me that warning motorists would be illegal - so I simply asked "What is illegal about warning others". That was a legitimate question (one which he never answered) - and does not equal a confession or admission that that's what I was doing.

Trooper: "Do you normally just blink your lights, or were you warning others that we were there - which is illegal..."

He's asking me to confess to (what he claims is) an illegal activity. Wouldn't be the brightest thing to do - especially when you have the right against self incrimination. I should have smiled and simply not answered. But that would have caused other issues. Had I known that it wasn't illegal, I probably would have been a bit more confident and less intimidated.

That being said, my driver's side light did have a wobble. The light field was moving up/down when I hit the reflectors on the center line. I was turning my lights on and off to trouble shoot - to verify whether the light pattern was mine. Of course, I didn't have a chance to finish that explanation as the officer interrupted and already 'knew' my intent. Not that it mattered. The statute he cited doesn't consider intent.

In fact, the last thing I did in the video was try to show him the difference in light intensity between on/off and on/brights - By that point, he was convinced he knew my motives, and simply said "Ok, sign right here."

[erkme73]

Originally Posted by chaotix

I didn’t think you were looking for trouble, I merely wondered why would anyone go through the trouble, but you’ve answered my question.

Sorry - I misread your intent...

You're right about trying to deter rogue or overly aggressive LEO's with technology. I wish every car came standard with it (like seat belts). It would keep the law straight and honest. I'm not trying to lump all cops into the same category. I'm sure many are good and honest. Unfortunately, there are also a lot of bad ones, and the system is set up to protect them (at the entire group's expense).

Just this year a woman who was rear-ended by an on-duty patrol officer was charged and arrested for DUI. The dash cam was later acquired by her attorney. On it, the officer and the THREE investigating officers could be overheard conspiring how to frame the woman. "I'll put words in her mouth if I have to, to protect a fellow officer" one said. The story can be found here: Charges Dropped Against Woman Framed by Cops | NBC Miami

Again, not trying to make all cops evil. But what are the chances that Broward County has only four bad ones? And all four showed up at the same call?

So, simple and cheap insurance by turning the technology table to OUR benefit seems like a good idea. Unless of course you post this question in a pro-LEO forum (not here). The claws come out! Wierdo... You have issues... Paranoid??? A**HAT.... Let me tell you - many cops do NOT like to be recorded. I wish all were.