Originally Posted by
FeParamount
Article and video of cyclist being ticketed by a Michigan State Trooper.
Keep in mid if you don't read the linked article;
* The cop is wrong about the law.
* The ticket had to be appealed because a lower court judge sided with the cop.
* The prosecutor told the other riders in the group if they testified on behalf of the ticketed cyclist they would be charged as well.
* The appellate judge opened the case by asking "who appeals a civil infraction?" which to me speaks volumes about the three previous points.
Biker Obstructing Traffic? Nope ? Roll the Videotape! | Bike Law
Sadly, as we know way too many LEO's and judges are ignorant of what the law actually says and means.
Wasn't that tantamount to blackmail? Tell
WITNESSES that if they testified that they'd be charged?
Also is just me or did the cop come off sounding rude and argumentative himself? Possibly hoping to provoke some sort of response from the cyclist.
And uh, doesn't every state define the roadway as the surface
BETWEEN not
OUTSIDE of the white lines as being the roadway?
Originally Posted by
genec
The cop doesn't know the law, the sitting judge doesn't know the law... how in the world do we expect motorists to have a clue.
Our driving training in the US is simply NOT teaching proper driver behavior around cyclists... and perhaps only barely touching on the laws... which older drivers (and LEOs and judges) have no clue about.
Exactly, which is why as I've said before I think that
EVERYONE, not just cyclists should not only be required to take a Cycling Savvy class, but before a person is issued a drivers license that they should have to spend at least a year using a bicycle as their primary mode of transportation. That also includes the cops and judges, every so many years they should have to either be assigned to bicycle patrol for the cops and they should be required to log x number of hours per year using a bicycle as their primary means of transportation to and from work.
Originally Posted by
rydabent
It was a good deal that the cyclist took it to a higher court and got justice.
+100
But it never should have gotten that far.
Originally Posted by
wphamilton
I am impressed by the cyclist's restraint, correctly deciding that it is pointless to argue when the cop is being that ignorant and aggressive. It's not easy in the heat of the moment.
Exactly, that is how a friend of mine has ended up with 100+ citations. She'll stand on the side of the road and argue with the cop. And is why I try to keep a copy of
F.S. 316.2065 with me when I'm on the bike.
Which is sad that we not only as cyclists but as legitimate road users have to do things like that. I bet if they were on scooters (
NOT motorcycles but scooters) that that cop probably
WOULDN'T have said anything to them.