Beating a NYC bike traffic ticket on a technicality

"mark" wrote:

"JoeD" wrote ...
I was waiting at the crossing for my light to turn green. When the
opposite light turned red I waited for a SUV to pass that illegally run
the red light (in front of the cop) and I then began riding. So I was 1
second ahead of my light turning green.
If it is safe and does not interfere with traffic or pedestrians, I
typically start riding after the opposite light turns red and 1 or 2
seconds before my light turns green so I can get a head start on the
traffic.

No offense, but it sounds like you ran a red light to me.

Yep, 'fraid so. That's clearly illegal, and there's no practical way
to fight it - you broke a vehicular code, pay the ticket. I also
agree with the other poster who suggested the cop cut you a break by
issuing you a ticket on a "semi-nonsensical charge".

The thing I'm struggling with is that in order to be IN the
intersection "1 or 2 seconds before your light turns green", you have
to leave your stopping point even sooner.

Besides, I don't recall seeing many lights in NYC that leave a 2
second gap where all directions have a red light (I could be wrong,
it's been a long time since I drove there). I can't imagine NYC
drivers having THAT much patience... ;-)

FWIW, I will often stand on the pedals and be READY to enter the
intersection as the cross traffic's light turns red, but will wait
until my light is green to enter the intersection (that way it's a
fair race between me and the cars to the other side of the
intersection). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:05:34 GMT, JoeD
wrote:
violation I am being accused of does not describe the infraction at all.
If the police officer shows up, can I assume that since he selected the
wrong violation that I would win on a technicality?

Yes. The officer may not even remember why he wrote the ticket. I
was once cited (in a car) for an offense which was just as
impossible. I don't remember what it was called, but when I
researched it, I found that it meant that you crossed the double
yellow line to pass somebody when there wasn't enough room before
hitting the oncoming car. I was on a separated interstate highway
where that was a physical impossibility.

Any constructive comments to fight this ticket are welcomed.

What caused him to stop you and ticket you? Just curious.

Regards

Joe
--
Rick Onanian

"JoeD" wrote in message
link.net...
I was waiting at the crossing for my light to turn green. When the
opposite light turned red I waited for a SUV to pass that illegally run
the red light (in front of the cop) and I then began riding. So I was 1
second ahead of my light turning green.
If it is safe and does not interfere with traffic or pedestrians, I
typically start riding after the opposite light turns red and 1 or 2
seconds before my light turns green so I can get a head start on the
traffic.


Joe,

It is impossible for us to assess your chances. This is one of those
situations where it will depend upon the judge you actually get. You did run
a red light (technically, and also, IMO, at the most dangerous part of the
light cycle) and the judge may let the fine stand for this.

My question isn't about this, however. It is, why do you feel it is
important to get that extra few bits of time to cross the intersection?
Unless the intersection is pretty wide and the light cycle short, there is
no benefit to doing this - none. Any time you do "gain" will be quickly
lost, due to other factors, such as the all-too-common, driver who doesn't
look for cyclists. Most of the time, I am the first to cross the average
intersection and I generally just go hard as soon as the light turns green.
If the road is 4-6 lanes wide, cars may catch me before I reach the
crosswalk on the other side. When I get there, what have I gained? A little
ego boost because at 47 YO, I can still cross the street faster than the
cars. At the end of the ride, lights, wind, asthma, bad drivers, or a
thousand other factors beyond my control will have claimed those few gained
milliseconds.

Rick

PS: Who sees most stop signs as some shade of yellow, depending upon
visibility.

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 05:19:04 GMT, (Hi, I'm TV's Oscar
The Grouch) wrote:

I'd throw that ticket right in the trash.

Why didn't they ticket the SUV?

1. Perhaps the officer had his eye on the bike rider who was in close
proximity, and therefore missed the SUV driver's violation?

or

2. He did see both violations and grabbed the one that was easiest to
grab. After all, if he had gotten the SUV driver, wouldn't that driver
be able to say, "Why didn't you ticket the bike rider?"

As to the specific violation you were ticketed for:
Section 1232. Riding on bicycles.
(a) A person propelling a bicycle shall not ride other than upon or
astride a permanent and regular seat attached thereto, nor shall he
ride with his feet removed from the pedals.

I too use clipless pedals and sometimes have a difficult time
getting my shoes snapped into the pedals for a few feet. Is that maybe
what the officer saw?

Some more NYS bike violations info:

COMMON QUESTIONS ABOUT BICYCLE
AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC LAWS

Which traffic laws apply to bicyclists?

* The same laws that apply to other drivers, with some obvious
exceptions and special rules, apply to cyclists. Most importantly,
bicyclists must obey, and are also protected by, the rules of the road
(Sec. 1231).
* Bicyclists must obey all traffic lights and signs, and must
signal for turns whether driving on a roadway, a bike lane or bike
path. Likewise, motorists must obey the rules of the road with respect
to bicyclists, including yielding the right-of-way when the law
requires it, just as they would to another vehicle.
* Bicyclists who violate the law are subject to traffic tickets.
Parents can be held responsible for violations by their minor children
(Sec. 1230).
http://www.dot.state.ny.us/pubtrans/share.html#1231

Cordially,
Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department
___________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

"I regret to say that we of the FBI are
powerless to act in cases of oral-genital
intimacy, unless it has in some way
obstructed interstate commerce."
-- J. Edgar Hoover

Q: What the hardest thing about rollerblading?
A: Telling your parents you’re gay.

Hi Again,

For those of you that say just pay the fine. I would have paid it if it
in line with my offense. But they want $100, which I was surprised to
learn was more the fines for a driver who speed upto 35 miles above the
limit.

But whether I am innocent or guilty of a minor or major infracture is
not the issue that I am addressing here.

What I am asking is, if the ticket has a vague violation description as
described below conflicts with what the officer will accuse me of doing,
will a "NYC" traffic judge dismiss the charge?
I was always under the impression that if a traffic ticket (auto or
bicycle) did not proper identify the violation or was improperly written
that it would be dismissed.

Again thanks for any constructive opinions.



JoeD wrote:

Hi,

I have been riding around NYC off and on for 30 years. After 9/11, I
decided to minimize the use of my car and gas consumption, I began
commuting to work by bike again averaging over 4000 miles a year. I
consider myself a reasonble and safe rider. I wear a a helmet and have
blinking lights in the front and back.
I got my first ticket recently. Although I have never fought a ticket
before and I want to fight this one.

The ticket describes the infraction as " improper riding of bicycle"
in violation of section 1232 sub A.

Section 1232. Riding on bicycles.
(a) A person propelling a bicycle shall not ride other than upon or
astride a permanent and regular seat attached thereto, nor shall he
ride with his feet removed from the pedals.

I ride an older well maintained road bike with toe clips so the above
violation I am being accused of does not describe the infraction at all.
If the police officer shows up, can I assume that since he selected
the wrong violation that I would win on a technicality?

The ironic thing was that a SUV ran a red light right in front of me
and this police officer in his squad car while we were both waiting
for my light to turn green, and he gives me a ticket.

Any constructive comments to fight this ticket are welcomed.

Regards

Joe

From somewhere in cyberspace, JoeD said:
For those of you that say just pay the fine. I would have paid it if it
in line with my offense. But they want $100, which I was surprised to
learn was more the fines for a driver who speed upto 35 miles above the
limit.

I find it curious that you don't want to say what you were ticketed for,
much less whether you actually did it or not.

But whether I am innocent or guilty of a minor or major infracture is
not the issue that I am addressing here.

What I am asking is, if the ticket has a vague violation description as
described below conflicts with what the officer will accuse me of doing,
will a "NYC" traffic judge dismiss the charge?

The judge, after hearing everyone's testimony, can find you guilty of some
other charge that the judge feels is more appropriate. For example, you
might tell the judge that you did something wrong, but you think you
violated section XXXX of the Vehicle and Traffic Law rather than section
YYYY that you were cited on. And if XXXX has a lower fine associated with
it all the better - but if not, you at least you get convicted of what you
actually did rather than what the cop wrote up.

The one time I went before a traffic judge along with a cop who was lying
through his teeth, the judge did just that - threw out the four or five
offenses that I had been ticketed for, and found me guilty of one count of
"improper operation".

I was always under the impression that if a traffic ticket (auto or
bicycle) did not proper identify the violation or was improperly written
that it would be dismissed.

That might be more or less true for parking violations, but not for moving
violations.
--
eravin@ | Grief can take care of itself; but to get the full
panix.com | value of a joy you must have somebody to divide it with.
| -- Mark Twain

snip
But whether I am innocent or guilty of a minor or major infracture is
not the issue that I am addressing here.

What I am asking is, if the ticket has a vague violation description as
described below conflicts with what the officer will accuse me of doing,
will a "NYC" traffic judge dismiss the charge?
I was always under the impression that if a traffic ticket (auto or
bicycle) did not proper identify the violation or was improperly written
that it would be dismissed.
snip

Well, that's not always the case. It really depends on the judge. I once
saw a police officer simply alter the original ticket and he got away with
it ... he even admitted under oath that he "corrected" the ticket after the
fact (after it was sent in for appeal).

You have to understand, there is no law saying you have to break the law to
be found guilty. Sounds silly but it's true ... you could get arrested for
wearing a blue shirt, and found guilty and put in jail because of it. That
is a blatant example, but more often than not it happens in more subtle
ways, and a whole lot of lawyers make their money defending people that has
happened to.

OKay, here's how I see it ... the cop is just busting your balls ... but in
all fairness, by jumping the light in front of him, you were busting his
balls and that's probably why you got the ticket. Cops hate it when you
don't kiss their asses ... it's a small penis thing, the same reason many of
these guys became cops in the first place. You "disrespected" him by not
being scared by him and being extra cautious. You should have waited a
couple of seconds to go through the green light, and just let the bully get
on with looking for people to **** him off.

screw it, fight it anyway.

C.Q.C.

JoeD wrote:

I was always under the impression that if a traffic ticket (auto or
bicycle) did not proper identify the violation or was improperly written
that it would be dismissed.

At which point he could probably write a ticket which would not be dismissed.
Look into the potential penalty for running a red light before deciding.
Mitch.

a technique I have used in Chicago for car tickets is to go to the court
a day before the hearing (or whatever you call it) and claim I have a
job interview the next day and need to reschedule.

I figure they notify the officer somehow that one of their appearances
is rescheduled. They probably never even get the message. And since they
have planned all their appearances to be on a specific day, the likely
hood you them appearing the following day just for you is essentially
zero.

So when you show up and determine that the officer is not present, and
after they scare everyone into taking "supervision" so they get a
reduced fine and noone tells the insurance company, they start calling
the people who want to plead "not guilty".

When it is your turn (don't dress like a slob) speak clearly and calmly.
When asked how do you plead, say "Not guilty." The judge then says, "The
officer is not here to refute your claim, you a free to go."

End of story.



In k.net JoeD wrote:
Hi,

I have been riding around NYC off and on for 30 years. After 9/11, I
decided to minimize the use of my car and gas consumption, I began
commuting to work by bike again averaging over 4000 miles a year. I
consider myself a reasonble and safe rider. I wear a a helmet and have
blinking lights in the front and back.
I got my first ticket recently. Although I have never fought a ticket
before and I want to fight this one.

The ticket describes the infraction as " improper riding of bicycle"
in violation of section 1232 sub A.

Section 1232. Riding on bicycles.
(a) A person propelling a bicycle shall not ride other than upon or
astride a permanent and regular seat attached thereto, nor shall he
ride with his feet removed from the pedals.

I ride an older well maintained road bike with toe clips so the above
violation I am being accused of does not describe the infraction at
all. If the police officer shows up, can I assume that since he
selected the wrong violation that I would win on a technicality?

The ironic thing was that a SUV ran a red light right in front of me
and this police officer in his squad car while we were both waiting
for my light to turn green, and he gives me a ticket.

Any constructive comments to fight this ticket are welcomed.

Regards

Joe

First I want to thank everyone for your comments.

I have one more question.

If I show up and the officer is not there, can I assume that the charges
will be dismissed.
If the officer does show up and I get cold feet, can I change my plea to
"Guilty" to the charge and just pay the fine?

For those of you who have asked about the violation, I have described it
twice in this thread.

Thanks again for you comments.

Joe


JoeD wrote:

Hi,

I have been riding around NYC off and on for 30 years. After 9/11, I
decided to minimize the use of my car and gas consumption, I began
commuting to work by bike again averaging over 4000 miles a year. I
consider myself a reasonble and safe rider. I wear a a helmet and have
blinking lights in the front and back.
I got my first ticket recently. Although I have never fought a ticket
before and I want to fight this one.

The ticket describes the infraction as " improper riding of bicycle"
in violation of section 1232 sub A.

Section 1232. Riding on bicycles.
(a) A person propelling a bicycle shall not ride other than upon or
astride a permanent and regular seat attached thereto, nor shall he
ride with his feet removed from the pedals.

I ride an older well maintained road bike with toe clips so the above
violation I am being accused of does not describe the infraction at all.
If the police officer shows up, can I assume that since he selected
the wrong violation that I would win on a technicality?

The ironic thing was that a SUV ran a red light right in front of me
and this police officer in his squad car while we were both waiting
for my light to turn green, and he gives me a ticket.

Any constructive comments to fight this ticket are welcomed.

Regards

Joe