Can a cop retaliate to an objection to a fine he's issued by adding a more serious offence?

April 16, 2009 5:26 AM

I was recently issued a minor traffic infringement by a Melbourne police officer. I told him that I believed the charge was unfair and that I intended to contest it in court. He told me that if I did, he'd then present me with an additional, more serious charge. Was this just bluster to dissuade me from contesting the charge, or could he in fact do that?

The charge at present is riding a (fixed wheel) bicycle without an effective brake. I know that the safety of this is debatable. However, less effective braking mechanisms are satisfactory as far as the law is concerned. The law is vague on what exactly constitutes an effective braking mechanism, so I at least have an argument to present.

If a magistrate were to reject my defense out of hand, fine, that's the final word on the interpretation of the law. What bugs me about this is that aside from the charge at hand, I did nothing wrong aside from making known my disagreement with the officer and my intention to contest the charge. I wasn't riding dangerously or breaking road rules. The bike even has a bell.

My concern is that he might fabricate something more serious but ambiguous, for instance that I "became verbally abusive" or some such. Even if I'm completely out of line as far as the brake issue is concerned, it's my right to contest the charge and I don't want to be bullied out of it.

posted by chmmr to law & government (12 comments total)

Sounds like bluster to me. Is he standing right by you right now, waiting to see if you protest in court? How's he going to know, unless he's called in for evidence? I can hardly see him leaping across the witness stand to book you for having the temerity to contest a traffic ticket. If it were me, I'd report him for threatening and inappropriate behaviour, as well as contesting his first ticket. I'd also look up the Melbourne laws on bicycling so I knew what exactly I'd been ticketed for.
posted by Happy Dave at 5:38 AM on April 16

No, or at least, not without a good reason. If he did, I would presume that would necessitate a second trial of sorts. Now I have no idea about your laws, and IANYL.

In any case, there's usually a period of time between getting the ticket and your day in court. Unless this cop has score to settle, I can't see how he'd even remember (much about) you 2-3 months later... If a judge is at all friendly, he'll regard any further charge as questionable at first - 'why didn't you mention this charge originally? Why now?' and so on.

Fight it - bring in pictures and how you do your best to comply with the law. Good luck :)
posted by chrisinseoul at 6:01 AM on April 16

Don't ever argue with a police officer over a simple misdemeanor. By the time he has decided to cite you, he has already made his judgment and he isn't a court; that's what the courts are for.

This stance may not suit your sense of justice, but police are not in the business of dispensing justice, their job is to enforce law and may find interference with that purpose upsetting. This doesn't mean that I think his threat of retaliation was good form, just that it shouldn't be surprising.
posted by fydfyd at 6:51 AM on April 16

Is your effective braking mechanism a skid stop?
posted by Pants! at 7:16 AM on April 16 [1 favorite has favorites]

Sounds like bluster - he was trying to save face after you said you would take it to traffic court. It's never wise to argue with police. I learned this the good way after being pulled over. The cop asked me if I knew I had driven through a yellow light and changed lanes without signaling (on top of it all I had forgotten my license in a different pair of pants). I agreed with the cop, and even told him the names of the streets where both infractions had happened. He let me off with a warning.
posted by KokuRyu at 7:17 AM on April 16

He doesn't care what you think is fair and you don't need to explain it to him. In the future take your ticket and go on with your life.
posted by JJ86 at 7:21 AM on April 16

In this case arguing with the cop made it much more likely that he'll remember you if you bring this to court, which will be bad for you.

Cops can always pull out the interfering with policely duties/resisting arrest/harassing a cop/disturbing the peace/ etc. card. They're the ace in the hole for dealing with people who are being a pain. It's your word against his, and he's been in court in front of a judge a lot more than you have.

I'd choose which thing you want to fight: the ticket or the blustery cop. If you want to fight the ticket, go ahead. A cop isn't going to charge you with anything else in court without endangering his job. If you want to fight the cop, write up the experience clearly and in detail, then send copies to the head of your precinct with CC: to the local news outlets.

I'd just let it go. Riding bikes is fun! Courts and harassing people with media attention is not.
posted by Ookseer at 11:56 AM on April 16

I'm not sure what the justice system is like in Melbourne, but I can't picture a cop showing up for the trial and writing a new ticket on the spot. They can be dicks, but I don't think that would go over very well.

I know you didn't ask this, but.. I do know what the courts are like in the United States though, and if they are anything alike, I don't recommend contesting the ticket unless you are absolutely sure you are going to win. At least here, traffic judges have to see hundreds of cases a day and get irritated when someone contests a charge. Most people that fight tickets end up losing and getting stricter penalties for wasting the court's time. Of course if your goal is to make a point instead of winning, then by all means go for it. The stakes are surely just a fine with a maximum penalty you may end up paying regardless.

(Boilerplate IANAL and don't live in AU disclaimer).
posted by cj_ at 1:33 PM on April 16

He told me that if I did, he'd then present me with an additional, more serious charge.

This is illegal. Lawyer up. Do you have the cop's ID in some way?

If you have broken the law, cops in australia are able to ticket you - to threaten you with further legal action if you contest is, essentially, blackmail. And actionable.
posted by Sparx at 3:39 PM on April 16

Melbourne criminal lawyer here. The infringement notice should have an option to elect to take the matter to court. It might give you a date that you need to do it by. Wait until the period is almost up, then elect to contest the ticket. Odds are the cop will have forgotten the incident and forgotten to bear a grudge.

If another charge is issued, it will have been issued after the date on which you elected to contest the matter. Which will look inherently dodgy, particularly when any statement that the officer writes will be written and sworn months after the incident. All of which is useful if you're attempting to impugne the accuracy or truthfulness of the officer's statement.

In future, I would suggest to anyone in a similar situation to keep your face-hole shut and say nothing about your intentions with respect to fighting the ticket. Why put the police on notice that you may contest it? Why give them the reminder to go and make accurate (or innacurate!) contemporaneous notes of the incident.

Memail me if you want more info, or want some recommendations for a solicitor.
posted by tim_in_oz at 4:01 PM on April 16 [2 favorites has favorites]

Thank you all for your replies.

Ookseer:
I'd choose which thing you want to fight: the ticket or the blustery cop.

The cost of paying the ticket itself I could care less about, it's only $57. While I would like to have my position vindicated by a magistrate, frankly my main interest at this point is not to take the bullying behaviour of this cop lying down.

cj_:
Honestly if it goes to court I expect to lose. At best I'd have representation only from a free legal aid service. You're right that magistrates hear a swathe of cases per day, and I doubt one would be particularly interested in listening to a treatise on the comparitive merits of rear-wheel braking systems. My intention comes more out of principle than likelihood of success. That said my slightly-uncertain understanding is that I wouldn't end up paying any more than the original penalty.

tim_in_oz:
I'll take your advice about waiting until the ticket is near due before raising the objection. (You're right, the due date for this is six weeks after the date of issue.) I was aware at the time that it wouldn't increase my chances in court any by telling the cop that I intended to contest it (in fact, saying so prompted him to bring a camera out of his car and photograph my bike), but this officer's known around the Melbourne community for targeting cyclists and I felt that he needed to be stood up to.

Again, thank you all for your thoughtful responses.
posted by chmmr at 6:14 PM on April 16

I was in a rush earlier, a couple more replies:

Pants!:
Is your effective braking mechanism a skid stop?
I'd say that a skid stop is a braking technique, but the mechanism is the gear. Where possible I favour braking techniques that cause less tyre wear.

Sparx:
The name of the officer issuing the infringement is stamped on the notice. I suspect that you're right and he was treading on thin ice, legally and ethically speaking, by making the statement that he did, but if it came to the crunch he'd deny it, his partner would obviously support him and it'd be his word against mine, and you don't need to be a genius to know how that would work out.
posted by chmmr at 7:28 PM on April 16