Question about Traffic Violation

[xtremecaligirl]

What is the name of your state? - CALIFORNIA

I have a question ...

If the CHP pursues someone on a motorcycle and then stops chase but gets a plate and later goes to the registered owner's house, can they prove that the person riding the bike was in fact the registered owner? Also what is a normal course of action on something like this? (vehicle code 2800.1?)

Also with respects to this, if the person has never been informed of a suspended license (even by an officer who gave a warning for a violation) can it be used against them in respects to the above if mentioned after the incident?

Basically my friend had the cops come to his house looking for him for this same thing. He wasn't home but they left a message that he needed to get a hold of them before noon the next day or else they would issue a bench warrant. He called, left a message, got a message in return and is waiting to hear back since the officer was going to be out of the office. Now, they say they have his plate from a bike they were pursuing and got away from them because they dropped chase (it was in traffic apparently). Now, he had loaned his bike to his buddy because he was thinking of selling or trading it, and he spent the day with me. Now, they also said his license was suspended, which he didn't know, so he is not driving now because of that. Basically I am trying to find out if they can actually hold him responsible if (1) they don't have a positive ID, back of a guy in a helmet isn't exactly a positive ID (2) He was with me (3) He doesn't name his buddy (4) they don't scare him into admitting guilt.

Oh yeah, he is also on probabtion for a previous misdemeanor which he only had to pay the rest of the fine to get off which he did after this incident happened.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[dequeendistress]

It appears there are some underlying issues.

But without positive ID your friend has nothing to worry about.

 

[CdwJava]

Basically I am trying to find out if they can actually hold him responsible if (1) they don't have a positive ID, back of a guy in a helmet isn't exactly a positive ID (2) He was with me (3) He doesn't name his buddy (4) they don't scare him into admitting guilt.

1 - You're right. They don't. But, the cops know he was either riding the motorcycle or knows who was.

2 - And who can verify where the two of you were? The oldest alibi (and least effective) is the ol' "I was with my girlfriend" alibi.

3 - He's full of horse hooey. Nobody will believe that he simply loaned his motorcycle to a guy he does not know or does not know how to contact. If he told me that, I'd probably arrest him right there for obstructing a peace officer.

4 - Fine. Then they can impound his motorcycle until he either cooperates or gets charged. I hope he doesn't care too much to ever see the bike again.

Given the #3 claim - that he doesn't know the person he loaned the motorcycle to, I'd have to say that he was the driver. Could they prove it? No. Could they seize and hold the motorcyce as evidence? You betcha!

And the fact he had a suspended license sure gives him motive to flee, doesn't it?

So, he can keep playing games with the cops and wait for the hammer to fall ... it's a felony - it will hang around for a long time. Or, he can 'fess up and take it like a man. And if you cover him with a lie, you can expect to be charged as well.

Carl

 

[dequeendistress]

Yeah and he was not at the address either...nor will he be in the future, until they get a warrant, what do you want to bet?

Then it will be "Oh, I was just leaving, out the back door"...

I think they need a forum called "101 ways to beat the police"

Besides this statement looked like an admission of guilt or knowledge thereof:

Quote: Also with respects to this, if the person has never been informed of a suspended license (even by an officer who gave a warning for a violation) can it be used against them in respects to the above if mentioned after the incident? [end quote]

So, since this is a legal advice forum, the real question should have been: (any of the below and many more I did not type)

Does my boyfriend need a lawyer? A: Yes, but you could wait till he is formally charged to retain one.

Could my boyfriend go to jail? A. Yes.

Could I go to jail if I lie and say he was with me? A. Possibly

How happy was the PO when s/he was notified?

 

[xtremecaligirl]

1 - You're right. They don't. But, the cops know he was either riding the motorcycle or knows who was.

Out of curiousity, how would they know who was riding the bike? They may have a description of a male in certain clothes and helmet, and the bike, cause of the plate, but honestly how can they without a shadow of a doubt hold someone on that alone? I mean isn't that like the photo radar thing .... they can't issue the ticket unless they have (1)A clear picture of the license plate & (2)A clear picture of the driver.

2 - And who can verify where the two of you were? The oldest alibi (and least effective) is the ol' "I was with my girlfriend" alibi.

Well honestly I couldn't say there was anyone who could verify where we were since we went shopping after I picked him up after work. I have receipts from the places we went shopping and people at my work can verify the time I left work but other than that nothing.

3 - He's full of horse hooey. Nobody will believe that he simply loaned his motorcycle to a guy he does not know or does not know how to contact. If he told me that, I'd probably arrest him right there for obstructing a peace officer.

I never said he didn't know the guy. He knows the guy by first name only and nickname. Why wouldn't someone lend a bike to someone they trusted? Most people are pretty trusting of the people they hang out with. Besides the guy lent him his bike before.

4 - Fine. Then they can impound his motorcycle until he either cooperates or gets charged. I hope he doesn't care too much to ever see the bike again.

According to the California vehicle code it states that they can basically only hold the vehicle for 30 days.

Given the #3 claim - that he doesn't know the person he loaned the motorcycle to, I'd have to say that he was the driver. Could they prove it? No. Could they seize and hold the motorcyce as evidence? You betcha!

And the fact he had a suspended license sure gives him motive to flee, doesn't it?

He did not know of the suspended license until they came to the house. He even had a cop let him off with a warning the week before and never made mention to any suspended license. The California vehicle code 13106(a) also states that written notice has to be sent notifying of the suspension, otherwise the driver is not held resposible for that cause of not knowing.

So, he can keep playing games with the cops and wait for the hammer to fall ... it's a felony - it will hang around for a long time. Or, he can 'fess up and take it like a man. And if you cover him with a lie, you can expect to be charged as well.

How is it a felony? According to California vehicle code 2800.1 fleeing from a peace officer is a misdemeanor. Only a felony if it results in death or injury.


Anyway you sound like a cop and I respect that. I don't respect cops though that try to scare people into confessing to something they didn't do. As a matter of fact I am not even saying that I condone fleeing from the police under any circumstances. I am just trying to find out what we should expect of this and his rights. I guess you don't believe in innocent until proven guilty. It's cops like you who give the police a bad name. I mean geez, u automatically assume he is lying and I.

I do want to thank you though, obviously there are cops who are jerks out there and now I know what to expect form them. If anyone has another opinion on this matter I would greatly appreciate it. Also after hearing this do you think it is a good idea for him to have a lawyer present when they talk to him?

 

[xtremecaligirl]

He wasn't at the address because he was with me. We have been there the past few nights so he is not hiding or anything, has no reason to. He also called the officer. As far as the admitting guilt on the previous violation, well the cop already had called it in that night so they have a record of that so why deny it? The cop let him go with a warning. So whatever, if he was the type to run and knew of the suspension he would have that night, but he didn't.

When the cop left the message after my friend called him, I think he said something like "It's an understatement that I want to talk to you, but I won't be around until Saturday (that was 4 days later)"

 

[CdwJava]

Out of curiousity, how would they know who was riding the bike? They may have a description of a male in certain clothes and helmet, and the bike, cause of the plate, but honestly how can they without a shadow of a doubt hold someone on that alone? I mean isn't that like the photo radar thing .... they can't issue the ticket unless they have (1)A clear picture of the license plate & (2)A clear picture of the driver.

They wouldn't - that's why they are talking to the owner of the motorcycle. he either was riding it, or knows who was. Either way he's either concealing a criminal or hiding his own involvement. And while he does not have to 'confess', he can also lose the M/C as evidence.

And they do not need proof beyond a "shadow of a doubt" ... only beyond "reasonable doubt". Still a considerable hurdle, but not impossible. And if he gets on the stand to say that he loaned the M/C to an unknown friend ... well, THAT will get a huge chuckle.

I never said he didn't know the guy. He knows the guy by first name only and nickname. Why wouldn't someone lend a bike to someone they trusted? Most people are pretty trusting of the people they hang out with. Besides the guy lent him his bike before.

Most people don't do that. And most of us know a little more about our friends then just their first name and nothing else. Or is he regularly in the habit of handing over equipment worth thousands of dollars to strangers?

That's why it's not all that believable. And I will wager that your boyfriend just happens to have no idea how to get a hold of him either.

According to the California vehicle code it states that they can basically only hold the vehicle for 30 days.

Try the Evidence Code. While the case is under investigation, they can hold it for a lot longer unless a judge releases it. The question is IF they are going to pursue it.

He did not know of the suspended license until they came to the house. He even had a cop let him off with a warning the week before and never made mention to any suspended license. The California vehicle code 13106(a) also states that written notice has to be sent notifying of the suspension, otherwise the driver is not held resposible for that cause of not knowing.

But he can be held liable for CVC 12500(a) - unlicensed driver. And because he LEGALLY had not been notified, does not mean that he did not know he was suspended. There's a big difference.

Besides, it doesn't appear he's being charged with that - just with evading. so it's a moot point.

How is it a felony? According to California vehicle code 2800.1 fleeing from a peace officer is a misdemeanor. Only a felony if it results in death or injury.

Try reading CVC 2800.2 ... if he fled with reckless disregard (likely the reason they did not pursue) this can be raised to a felony. They may be citing the misdemeanor section for the moment to be nice and cut him a break. But if he ... er, the mystery rider ... goosed the throttle, you will see 2800.2 pop in there pretty quick.

Anyway you sound like a cop and I respect that. I don't respect cops though that try to scare people into confessing to something they didn't do.

Nobody's asking him to confess ... well, if he did it, that would certainly be the manly thing to do. But he certainly needs to come up with some sort of realistic explanation aside from a mystery friend borrowed the bike. That won't hold water even if it somehow WERE true. If he can produce said mystery friend, then maybe ... otherwise, the presumption will be that HE was driving.

I am just trying to find out what we should expect of this and his rights.

He has the right to remain silent and not admit his own guilt. He does not have the right to shield others - we call that obstruction. And he sure as HELL doesn't have the right to zip off on a crotch rocket putting the rest of us in danger.

I guess you don't believe in innocent until proven guilty. It's cops like you who give the police a bad name. I mean geez, u automatically assume he is lying and I.

A court must presume innocence - I don't. And the story he is laying out is one that has been heard countless times over and over ... it just doesn't fly. And it's been used so often that when (if) it were true at some point, it wouldn't be believed.

It's like the car we find near a bar that is wrecked and come morning the owner of the car reports it stolen after he came home from the bar ... go figure.

Carl

 

[xtremecaligirl]

Vehicle Impound

Ok, so here is an update. My bf called the officer back on Saturday and we ended up meeting with him at a gas station nearby. Basically they just asked him about his friend and everything. We have also been trying to locate his friend as well. No charges or violations have been issued to my bf and no warrants are out there either. He found out the suspended license was for a ticket he forgot about, so he is taking care of that and not driving until it is taken care of.

Now I have another question. They mentioned either getting the bike or a person and I was wondering about how long they can seize and hold a vehicle for in this type of situation. We don't have the bike but aren't going to hide it either if we ever get it back. I understand that the bike will more than likely be seized but I wanted to find out if this would be something permanent or if the registered owner can retrieve the bike after a certain length of time.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

[dequeendistress]

Was the bike stolen?

 

[xtremecaligirl]

Was the bike stolen?

No, he actually loaned the bike to his friend. If we don't get the bike back or can't get ahold of his friend, then we may report it as stolen. But as of right now and during the incident the bike was not reported stolen.

 

[dequeendistress]

Then why don't you skip all the B.S., tell the police how to get ahold of the friend, who evidently, as you say was the operator when the violation came up, the police get the perp and you get your bike.

case closed.


Until the friend says he took the bike because your boyfriend asked him to after the police took chase

 

[xtremecaligirl]

He gave the cops all of the information he had on his friend, but unfortunately that was pretty limited. As CdwJava stated, they also said it wasn't very believable. I assume they just don't have enough evidence to cite or arrest my bf on it. They are pretty intent on getting the bike though. The officer stated that he transfers in 2 weeks but he's not doing so unless he gets the bike or a body. Problem is we don't have either. My bf is supposed to meet his friend this week (that was the plan at the start) but since we can't get ahold of him I'm starting to wonder if he will show. If he does give the bike back then we plan to call the officer, but I want to know if we will ever see the bike again once they impound it. (which I am sure they will)