Originally Posted by
smasha
by submitting video and a complaint, and stating that you "may have" violated the law, you have not confessed. similarly, a complaint can be written in a way that makes it not a confession, as such.
And without a confession, the odds are the police will not act upon your report that you possibly committed a moving violation. After all, they did not personally witness it.
Also, they're going to wonder what your angle is, and are unlikely to want to play your game, whatever it is. They'll think you're wasting their time (and they'll be right) -- and even if they can't really figure out why, they won't want to humor you on it.
not sure about the states, but here in NZ police can send a letter to a vehicle's owner "requesting" information about who was driving the vehicle at a given time/place. if the owner doesn't respond within 14 days, they face a $10k fine.
Not in the states. In the states you have the right to remain silent in any criminal proceeding except under some very specific circumstances (such as having been given immunity.)
Now, many criminals do not properly avail themselves of this right to shut the hell up, but the wealthy and/or connected ones tend to either know not to say a word until they talk to their lawyer, or know to call their lawyer immediately. And because of this, it seems like after many serious hit and runs, especially when the police have clues to find the car that was involved and are on the track to finding it, they receive a phone call from the lawyer of the car's owner, saying where the car is, but never with any more detail about things like who was driving it the previous night. And in general, unless a witness saw the collision and can identify the driver (surveillance video may work here too) -- a conviction of the owner for a hit and run is difficult to get.
Using this right to remain quiet when the police start asking questions often makes the difference between time in prison and a plea bargain with no jail time, being acquitted in a trial or no prosecution at all.
And in practice, do the police in NZ really send such letters for minor traffic violations with no damage? For a fatal hit and run, sure, but do they do that when given video by a citizen of a car running a red light?
but that's precisely what can be changed, if a case like this was even filed.
How? You don't need to change courtroom procedures -- you're trying to change police procedures -- but not really their procedures, but more their priorities. Police generally enjoy a large amount of latitude in what minor crimes (such as minor traffic violations with no injuries or damage) they decide to pursue, and in general they decide not to pursue such things when they did not personally witness them, even when shown video. For a serious crime, sure ... but a minor traffic violation? They probably won't do anything.
And even if you convince one cop to do so, how does that affect other cops? And if it goes to a court, and you get convicted (?) ... how does that affect other cops? If you want to change the cop's priorities, you probably should start with the police chief, or the mayor, somebody like that. The courts aren't going to exert the sort of pressure on the cops you'll need to change this.