Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MassLive)   Fewer people are contesting traffic tickets since Massachusetts started charging a fee to plead not guilty   (masslive.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, Massachusetts, Registry of Motor Vehicles, Supreme Judicial Court, small claims court, fees, Insurance Board of Appeals, trial courts  
•       •       •

8281 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jun 2012 at 10:03 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



123 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-06-24 04:30:16 PM  

TheZorker: GAT_00: This is what happens when people start saying all taxes are bad - you get ridiculous fees everywhere. The anti-tax tards don't biatch about those, especially when attached to the court system. Everything has to be paid for somehow.

So, I'm curious. Is paying for court costs on a ticket, even if the officer doesn't show up and the charge is dismissed, normal everywhere?

Just asking, but isn't it called Taxachusetes for a reason?

Doesn't it have one of the Highest tax systems in the nation?


Nope, nope, and you spelled the state wrong.

Twenty seconds on Google would stop you from looking quite so ignorant.
 
2012-06-24 05:30:16 PM  
This is as unconstitutional as a poll tax.
 
2012-06-24 05:37:51 PM  
AMonkey'sUncle : A friend here in NYC got his traffic ticket thrown out because he proved to the judge he fixed the problem in the time allotted by him. He still had to pay and $80 service fee.

That's a fix it ticket, he was in violation of whatever they cited him for, he fixed it, he pays for the paperwork.

That's a bit different than say, getting a ticket for speeding, and then proving that you actually weren't speeding (IE, the original citation was BS) you shouldn't have to pay anything.
 
2012-06-24 05:51:21 PM  
Should do like most cities in NJ do:

You have to appear in court, even to plead guilty. And yes, there is a court fee (think it's pretty routine $25 from what I hear).
 
2012-06-24 06:05:56 PM  
I always love how the court's time is valuable, but your time is worthless. Of course, I suppose that nobody would ever be found "not-guilty" if the court had to pay for your time with that verdict. Ah, the best fairness that you can buy. Our legal system is so wonderful.
 
2012-06-24 06:15:14 PM  

DIGITALgimpus: Should do like most cities in NJ do:

You have to appear in court, even to plead guilty. And yes, there is a court fee (think it's pretty routine $25 from what I hear).


Why should you be on the hook for even one cent if you aren't guilty? That essentially means that you are guilty unless you pay the court for the privilege of proving your innocence. That's even worse than guilty until proven innocent.
 
2012-06-24 06:28:25 PM  
California does something similar, and equally repugnant.

Say the fine is $200.00. Well it's automatically reduced to $100.00 if you just pay it. But if you want to contest it, you have to post a $200.00 bond to cover the fine. If you win the contest, you get your $200.00 back, in 6-9 months. If you lose the contest, you lose the $200.00 bond, plus court fees of another $200.00.

So it's $100.00 if you just pay, or $400.00 if you contest and lose.
 
2012-06-24 06:37:53 PM  

GDubDub: California does something similar, and equally repugnant.

Say the fine is $200.00. Well it's automatically reduced to $100.00 if you just pay it. But if you want to contest it, you have to post a $200.00 bond to cover the fine. If you win the contest, you get your $200.00 back, in 6-9 months. If you lose the contest, you lose the $200.00 bond, plus court fees of another $200.00.

So it's $100.00 if you just pay, or $400.00 if you contest and lose.


Well, if there's some completely head-up-ass way to make money they'll do it here. Then they'll come up with some equally head-up-ass way to spend it. I love this place, but FFS it drives me nuts sometimes.
 
2012-06-24 06:37:53 PM  
The first thing you learn at extortion justice school is to make paying up the easiest way out for the victim citizen.
 
2012-06-24 06:50:27 PM  

Hermione_Granger: GAT_00 [TotalFark]
2012-06-24 09:30:04 AM

This is what happens when people start saying all taxes are bad - you get ridiculous fees everywhere. The anti-tax tards don't biatch about those, especially when attached to the court system. Everything has to be paid for somehow.

So, I'm curious. Is paying for court costs on a ticket, even if the officer doesn't show up and the charge is dismissed, normal everywhere?

yep.


Speak for yourself sparky, that's not the way it works in my state. If the cop doesn't show after having been subpoenaed, you're free to go, no fees no fines no court costs.
 
2012-06-24 07:40:41 PM  

greyw1980: Hermione_Granger: GAT_00 [TotalFark]
2012-06-24 09:30:04 AM

This is what happens when people start saying all taxes are bad - you get ridiculous fees everywhere. The anti-tax tards don't biatch about those, especially when attached to the court system. Everything has to be paid for somehow.

So, I'm curious. Is paying for court costs on a ticket, even if the officer doesn't show up and the charge is dismissed, normal everywhere?

yep.

No and it is completely unconstitutional.

What do they do if you refuse to enter a plea? The right to remain silent was in response to church courts, where if you pled not guilty to be a catholic you were renouncing your (catholic) God and you surely did not want to plead guilty to a thought crime (believing the Catholic church was correct) and be burned or tortured.


While I completely, wholeheartedly understand why people told the truth here...why the hell didn't anyone just, y'know, lie?

/Totally off-topic
//I have a feeling any Divine is perfectly fine with you lying to save your life.
 
2012-06-24 07:53:35 PM  

GoldSpider: RembrandtQEinstein: This will prevent the corruption that is inevitable if law enforcement is preformed for profit.

Yeah and who in law enforcement is going to get behind this?


Law enforcement will hate it, but the one group of people who get to push around law enforcement is the legislature. So it will require the citizens who recognize what is happening to both gain control over the legislature AND not become so corrupted in the process that they start to support the current system out of self interest.

So far the only place there is a bit of hope this might happen is New Hampsire
 
2012-06-24 08:04:52 PM  
I have to ask why this kind of thing hasn't been shot down by the supreme court a long time ago. It is not okay to penalize someone for contesting charges against them, even if they're civil, be they misdemeanor or felony. This creates a situation where there's a shotgun approach to citing someone. You were going 60 in a 55. My radar gun only said you were going 55, but there's a percentage of error there and we'll at least break even on administrative costs if you're found not guilty. Your wife died in a car accident, obviously you murdered her and our evidence amounts to 'we think you did it but aren't sure' but come on down to the jail and post $100,000 bail or stay in jail for a month lose your job lose your kids let your pets die etc.
 
2012-06-24 10:02:35 PM  
What I've learned from this thread is that Honest Bender is a farking idiot.
 
2012-06-24 10:07:42 PM  

JuggleGeek: What I've learned from this thread is that Honest Bender is a farking idiot.


www.horror-movies.ca
Your mother!
 
2012-06-24 10:23:49 PM  
A courthouse is the only place I never flush a toilet.
 
2012-06-24 10:58:06 PM  

Xanlexian: A courthouse is the only place I never flush a toilet.


The next person to use that toilet is probably someone just like you. Think about it.
 
2012-06-24 11:23:26 PM  
I'm amazed that nobody has talked about the reason for this yet.

The problem is that traffic tickets are undercosted. They don't make money for the State. Otherwise, it would be more profitable for the state to hire more judges and take more ticket cases. The real answer here is to just increase ticket costs.
 
2012-06-25 12:50:05 AM  

starsrift: I'm amazed that nobody has talked about the reason for this yet.

The problem is that traffic tickets are undercosted. They don't make money for the State. Otherwise, it would be more profitable for the state to hire more judges and take more ticket cases. The real answer here is to just increase ticket costs.


Undercosted?! WTF?! Traffic tickets are pure profit. It's absurd how much has been made off of traffic tickets. There was one town that pretty much made its entire budget off of traffic tickets.
 
2012-06-25 01:51:19 AM  
There was a thread recently about red light camera's someplace, and the tickets were $480.

So I'm not buying the 'undercosted" argument.
 
2012-06-25 04:01:55 AM  
Then again, I point to the second point of my argument. Why not hire more judges, clerks, etc, to deal with the additional cases?

On a cost/benefits analysis, they must cost the state more than they bring in - if they are contested. Otherwise, the state is purely incompetent by not accommodating additional workload.
 
2012-06-25 10:52:16 PM  

PsiChick: greyw1980: Hermione_Granger: GAT_00 [TotalFark]
2012-06-24 09:30:04 AM

This is what happens when people start saying all taxes are bad - you get ridiculous fees everywhere. The anti-tax tards don't biatch about those, especially when attached to the court system. Everything has to be paid for somehow.

So, I'm curious. Is paying for court costs on a ticket, even if the officer doesn't show up and the charge is dismissed, normal everywhere?

yep.

No and it is completely unconstitutional.

What do they do if you refuse to enter a plea? The right to remain silent was in response to church courts, where if you pled not guilty to be a catholic you were renouncing your (catholic) God and you surely did not want to plead guilty to a thought crime (believing the Catholic church was correct) and be burned or tortured.

While I completely, wholeheartedly understand why people told the truth here...why the hell didn't anyone just, y'know, lie?

/Totally off-topic
//I have a feeling any Divine is perfectly fine with you lying to save your life.


If you ever come back to this old thread, denying your catholicism was a sin (bearing false witness). It sounds crazy, but the church was just as strict about your loyalty as the (protestant) state was. So the post-reformation church came up with the idea of equivocation, a semantics trick by which you would use double-speak or incomplete or garbled sentences to sound like one thing but secretly mean another; for example:

Q: "Are you a catholic?"
A: "Why no [I have never buggered a boy], not at all!"

So you see, it sounded like the answer they wanted, but you pretended to misunderstand, thus "unintentionally" answering a different question. Religion is all about plausible deniability.


/love these dead threads...
 
2012-06-25 11:20:17 PM  

macadamnut: PsiChick: greyw1980: Hermione_Granger: GAT_00 [TotalFark]


If you ever come back to this old thread, denying your catholicism was a sin (bearing false witness). It sounds crazy, but the church was just as strict about your loyalty as the (protestant) state was. So the post-reformation church came up with the idea of equivocation, a semantics trick by which you would use double-speak or incomplete or garbled sentences to sound like one thing but secretly mean another; for example:

Q: "Are you a catholic?"
A: "Why no [I have never buggered a boy], not at all!"

So you see, it sounded like the answer they wanted, but you pretended to misunderstand, thus "unintentionally" answering a different question. Religion is all about plausible deniability.


/love these dead threads...


...Wow. That's spectacularly retarded. Yeah, your people could all save their butts and live if they lie, or you can force them to tell the truth and be horribly murdered. Let's go with option B!

*facepalm*
 
Displayed 23 of 123 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report