TRAFFIC COURT, AN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL APPROACH

Traffic court. The name alone conjures up memories, none good.

Until now, I’ve done the same thing I’ve always done with a traffic ticket: pay it right away, or go to court.

My court game, never good, just got better with new legal strategies based on the latest impeachment trial.

“Don’t blame me.”

Along with, “It’s a fraud, a hoax, a set up.”

What could go wrong?

I fought a speeding ticket from riding a Honda 100, and lost.

My defense then was, “It’s a Honda 100. It barely moves.”

I saw the judge later on in the Pony Village Motor Lodge, drunk and trying to drink a bottle of catsup while his date fought him for it.

Seemed fair and equal.

Traffic court heard my argument over a yellow light ticket. I had limped across Hwy99 in grandma gear of an old truck, into the intersection on green, out on red, early in the morning, but not ‘the bar just closed’ early.

Grandma gear was not an effective defense, but not any worse than the Honda 100 defense.

The only win I’ve had was a Portland parking ticket. I moved my car when I was at an event downtown and didn’t change the the parking tab to my other window when I parked on the other side of the street.

The check I sent in with the ticket was in an envelope with an explanation. I got a refund back, minus administrative costs.

Traffic Court Game Changer

This time it’ll be different. When I’m called to speak I’ll open with the history of traffic speed limits.

Connecticut was the first state to pass a speed limit law back in 1901.This law limited the legal speed of motor vehicles to 12 mph in cities and 15 mph on country roads. However, there were laws even before this that limited the speed of non-motorized vehicles.

According to The History Channel, the colony of New Amsterdam (now New York) issued a law in 1652 stating that wagons, carts and sleighs cannot be run, rode or driven at a gallop. Violators faced a penalty that started at two pounds Flemish , which is about $150 by today’s standards. And in 1903, New York City introduced America’s first comprehensive traffic code.

From there, I’ll whip out my Pocket Constitution and argue my case based on infringed freedoms.

The Fourth Amendment bars the government from unreasonable search and seizure of an individual or their private property.

A traffic camera took my picture as I motored through an intersection. Without my permission; inside my own car.

I felt under attack by illegal suburban automatic paparazzi. And the camera flash could have caused a crash if I had ducked under the visor.

The Fifth Amendment provides several protections for people accused of crimes. It states that serious criminal charges must be started by a grand jury.  A person cannot be tried twice for the same offense (double jeopardy) or have property taken away without just compensation. People have the right against self-incrimination and cannot be imprisoned without due process of law (fair procedures and trials.)

Appearance In Court

Here’s the plan. It could be your plan, too:

Before I stand up and give the history of traffic lights and speed limits, I’ll loosen up. Since I’ll be squeezing my hands back and forth like I’m playing an accordion, and sniff and twitch like a meth-er coming down from a long jag, I don’t want to risk injury.

Then I’ll move to the Bill of Rights. Besides more accordion, sniffing, and twitching, I’ll amp up for the audience and tell them we’ve got to fight for our traffic rights, fight like hell, or we won’t have a road to speed on.

The wrap up will include a call to action: “Let’s march over to City Hall and make our demands heard. And I’ll be right there with you.”

In a new legal environment inspired by the impeachment trial, I’ll have precedent to back me up.

On one, two, three, let’s go.

Hey, where is everybody?

The other plan is to obey the law and pay the fines. But that’s only what losers and suckers do, based on evidence from the nation’s last president.

I’m so torn. How about you?