"John was confronted by a City of Lansing police officer who was professional and polite, but told him, "The roadways are made for motor vehicles, and you can ride your bike on it, but you're impeding traffic." Unfortunately, the magistrate disagreed with John and found that he violated the statute."

'This is all - this is all f***** up. He's riding his f*** bike in the right-hand lane down Michigan Avenue at 11 miles an hour. He's got f****** traffic backed up for three . . . three blocks. So, I pull him over. People are beeping at him. He's not pulling over . . . He's like, 'F*** it. I've got a right to be on the roadway . . .' He goes, 'Act so and so and this and this here . . . you can't stop me. It's against my rights.' I said, 'Look here. You're impeding traffic. You can't . . . You can't drive down the street at a couple of miles an hour and hold-up traffic. What if there are two bikes? You can stop both lanes going eastbound on Michigan?'

Read the whole article:
https://www.lmb.org/index.php?option=...=162&Itemid=94

Nice to see a happy ending, but disappointing that it took a lawyer and two court appearances to get the ticket withdrawn.

In reading the whole article, we find that the original judge and the arresting cop were found to wrong by a hearing judge:

Again and again we have seen similar cases with similar results... if a cop can't figure it out, and at least one judge is confused, why is it that we expect motorists to understand the laws that pertain to cyclists?

Most motorists barely know the laws that cover driving... much less the laws that apply to other road users.

If he really was doing 11 MPH and not moving over where safe, I'm kind of inclined to agree that he was unnecessarily impeding traffic. While local statutes vary, I know that this behavior would run afoul of my local laws. Delaying 3 blocks of traffic (assuming the officer's account is correct) really is an act of spectacular narcissism if nothing else.

There was more than one lane going in the same direction... so there was ample room to pass without even having to cross a double yellow line.

Would 11.01 mph make you happy?

I think we need to be careful when we use the term judge...I'm not sure how Michigan works, but in my area, traffic courts, most levels of family court and municipal courts don't have what I'd call a real judge...they have elected bozos and/or cronies that typically aren't attorneys. Many don't have college degrees at all and they all want to impersonate Judge Judy. Their courts are not courts of record and there is an automatic right of appeal. I wouldn't expect one of them to be a subject matter expert on any kind of law and would consider them a mere formality along the way of talking to a real judge.

The police are not usually legal experts or subject matter experts on code - they are often blue collar, less educated labor that we entrust to arbitrate difficult situations when they happen. Courts are there to work out the aftermath. I would not expect a police officer to be an expert on traffic code, nor would I appeal to the law when speaking with them. When speaking with them you say, respectfully, "yes sir" or "no sir." If you are saying words other than yes or no, you are probably making a mistake. You then take the legal issues to an actual judge. Police aren't usually attorneys and many aren't college grads. Why would you expect them to be legal experts when most legal issues contain strains of gray that require resolution by an expert?

Ah, my mistake then. That's what I get for not RTFA.

I think when people are riding in the street, they should do their honest best to not impede the flow of traffic. If there's not a significant hill, neither 11 MPH or 11.01 MPH is likely to be consistent with an honest effort to partake in the normal flow of traffic.

I wonder if that's a common thing on the East cost. These articles about the court system in New York seem to match what you've described and are quite scary.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/ny.../25courts.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/26/ny.../26courts.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/27/ny.../27courts.html

... though like you, I don't know if this applies to Michigan. Probably not.

My experience in New York was consistent with KonAaron Snake's description - the judges in the small towns were an absolute joke. They frequently have a poor grasp of the law and almost uniformly are more interested in remaining buddies with the officers and lawyers they see regularly than with actually administering justice. As an example, I argued a minor traffic ticket by printing out the specific law in question and showing that the officers supporting deposition didn't match the requirements for the violation; the judge's response was to give me the maximum fine possible for the violation and to tell me that I would have gotten a lower fine if I hadn't argued it. That's pretty astonishingly corrupt, but there's no real recourse for it.

What about farm or construction vehicles?

You must be a pretty important dude if your trips can't wait a few seconds to pass a slow moving vehicle.

There is real recourse for it...appeal to a real judge. In our system that means appealing to the commonwealth level of courts. This stuff varies by area...we get a lot of agency law and agency bureaucrats which are the worst of both worlds (public and private). In agency law, you usually have to appeal through the agency (timely and expensive) before a real judge will listen to you. The intent is to make it a pain in the arse so that no one will fight anything, and it works. Agencies like this often get the benefit of being government affiliates/vendors while having no accountability to the public. There is an automatic right of appeal on motions courts and municipal court decisions (like traffic courts), so you do get to see a real judge, but you'll have to pay to do it (and likely need an attorney at that point).

I've never met a stupid actual judge...I have met a lot of stupid "judges" in motions court and the like.

When I am on my way home with groceries, and pulling my kid in the trailer, and maintaining a safe handling speed (no cyclocomputer, so I have no idea actual mph).... you are saying that a random number you picked now qualifies me for "impeding" traffic? I have a right to travel the public roadway, and no, I am not impeding anyone. (Unless I see more than 5 vehicles bunched up behind me, in which case I will comply with slow-moving vehicle code.)

I think as cyclists, some of us are prone to go about our use of the road in some bizarre guilt-ridden frame of mind. Strange, me thinks!

As far as I know, farm and construction vehicles are doing their honest best to not impede the flow of traffic. I don't think cyclists moving down the center of a lane at 11 MPH are doing so; personally, I've observed almost no one behaving that way, so it's basically a non issue. It'd be a pretty narcissistic approach to not pedal a bit harder though.

I should have been more clear - there's no practical recourse available. I suppose I could have gone through an expensive and time consuming effort, but there's not really anything in it for me. In my fantasy world, local judges would just behave like decent people, but I'm not counting on that happening.

But that may be as fast as some cyclists ride... So now are you banning those slower cyclists from the road? This is the catch 22 of vehicular cycling... apparently you have to be able to ride 16MPH before it is legal, eh? (BS)

This is not a "random number I picked", it's the number mentioned in the story.

Exactly - the portion of the story that I read in the OP stated that there were 3 blocks of traffic backed up. Someone isn't spectacularly narcissistic would observe that and think, "boy, maybe I should accommodate these people, even if I have the legal right not to".

Nope, not a shred of guilt from me, just the same basic decency that I try to exercise whether I'm walking, cycling, or driving. If there's other people around, I process whether my actions are hindering other people or not. If they are, and I can easily alter them, I try to do so.

That statement I won't disagree with!

Usually what happens is that you have to wait for a lawyer to get pissed off and go on a principals crusade involving actual judges, who then (hopefully) render a decision reigning in the out of control party.

Just remember, for every "stupid judge" there are hundreds of stupid motorists...

And a dozen stupid cyclists, and 400 stupid pedestrians. There are a lot of stupid people period.

Again, regardless of local laws regarding traffic flow, it seems like basic decency to me to not ride in a fashion that impedes others to any significant degree. If (big if)the officer's description of the circumstance, wherein three blocks of traffic were backed up, was correct, then I would surely think that the individual in question would notice this and make an honest effort to mitigate it. Personally, it bothers me to impede others; I think being completely unbothered by delaying others is a form of narcissism.

The problem with that line in the story is that is what the arresting cop said... the video apparently did not show that... AND there was another lane... did those three blocks of motorists not understand how to change lanes?

There are conflicts in the account the cop gave verses the video... apparently the dash cam shows something different when viewed completely... it also shows that the cop was really upset about the cyclist (audio).

You think that because you're not an idiot

FYI - I think the same thing.

Since we can't see the video, that's why my statements was caveated with the acknowledgement that there's only a legitimate complaint if the officer's account was true. At this point in the thread, I'm speaking generally as opposed to about the specific incident, which can't really reach well evidenced conclusions about. I'm suspicious of the motivations of both the officer and the ticketed individual in this specific case.

I tend to agree... IF... But the video apparently does not confirm the statements of the cop.

And frankly when I was touring, and riding about 13MPH, I noticed that drivers seemed to be able to pass me just fine in adjacent lanes... Of course I didn't try "taking the lane" on high speed arterial roads... as most of my touring was done when the national speed limit was 55MPH. Now we have arterial roads with speeds that high (in my area). The national speed limit was repealed in 1988.

apparently it was not...