The police officer didn't file accident report. What is the best way or established protocol to help or encourage them to do it?

[stealth2]

1. It's not germane to any argument that I made.
2. What I posted about hearsay is actually correct, and just tired of ridiculous nitpicking especially when I am correct.

Ooh... thin skin.

 

[cbg]

I never claimed that every jurisdiction charges $260 for a Failure to Maintain Lane traffic violation

Nor did I say you did make the claim. But the point is that not all states, or municipalities, treat violations the same way. Unless you are also in Boston, your experience means zip to the OP.

 

[Mark_A]

Nor did I say you did make the claim. But the point is that not all states, or municipalities, treat violations the same way. Unless you are also in Boston, your experience means zip to the OP.

What do you mean they don't treat violations the same way? Are you saying they don't give out tickets when they know a traffic violation has occurred that resulted in an accident? Or are you saying that the exact amount of the fines vary? Who cares if the amount of the fines vary, that is not the point. The point is that traffic fines are an important part of revenue for any police department, I find it incredulous to believe that the officer would not issue a citation if he was reasonably certain of who was at fault. However, I do admit that there was some discussion of possibly in this case that the officer got taken away to deal with a more important issue, but normally the police do issue traffic citations and there are fines associated with them.

 

[Zigner]

It doesn't matter. Sue me.

The fact that you don't care about the correctness of your statements makes it clear that you shouldn't be on a forum to help people.

 

[cbg]

The poster didn't ask about tickets. He asked about police reports.

 

[Taxing Matters]

What I said is that, unless the accident report included assignment of blame for the accident (in which case usually a traffic citation is written), getting the officer to submit a police report after the fact probably won't be of much help to OP going forward.

You missed my point. The cop doesn't have to make the determination of faut for the report to be usefull in getting the other party's insurer to pay. The insurance adjuster and the insurers makes their own call on how strong the plaintiff's is. What the insurer wants to see are the facts that the officer puts into the report, the the cop's opinion of fault is secondary, if it counts for anything. Since it is the facts that the insurer wants rather than the cop's opinion, a police stating the facts that the officer gathered is valuable to the plaintiff and insurer in evaluating the claim.

While an accident report cannot be used as direct evidence to prove fault in a car accident case because it is considered hearsay, meaning it relies on statements from others who were not under oath at the time of the accident, a police officer who filed the report may be called to testify about their observations from the scene, making certain parts of the report admissible in court.

That's not quite right. The hearsay rule prevents admission of statements made outside the court proceeding and for which there is no exception in the state's rules of evidence. Typically out of court statements made by one of the parties that are contrary to his/her interests are considered not hearsay in the first place.

The cop testifying does not make report admissible as evidence. However, if the cop testifies in the court proceeding contrary to what the cop stated in his/her report then the report may be used to impeach the cop's credibility as a reliable witness.

 

[Mark_A]

The fact that you don't care about the correctness of your statements makes it clear that you shouldn't be on a forum to help people.

First of all, I was 100% correct about what constitutes hearsay (testimony not under oath), as I explained in my post above. You can refer to the post of the definition of hearsay for NY, posted someone else.

(1) "out of court" means not under oath, and
(2) "not a witness at the proceeding" also means not under oath.

Second, when I said it doesn't matter, I clearly meant (and said) it was not germane to any argument I made.

As far as correctness of statements, you are apparently still upset that I called you out in my own thread on this forum about my accident, when upon viewing the dashcam video of my accident that I provided, you claimed "I don't believe the OP's speed estimate to be credible " that I was driving about 21 MPH, even though the video itself showed my speed (calculated by GPS) displayed right on the video itself that I was going 21 MPH. Plus, you claimed that "You were intent on racing to make your turn" when the video showed the light was red and I was clearly slowing down. Having been on various forums since the beginning of the Internet (including the legal forum on usenet more than 25 years ago), I have never seen a person consistently post such incorrect information as you do, and your personal attacks against me are not appreciated and I would respectfully request that you apologize for your comments above that I should not be on a forum to help people.

 

[Mark_A]

The poster didn't ask about tickets. He asked about police reports.

I understand. But why does he want the police to file an accident report? My suggestion is that an accident report, if filed later, would be very unlikely to include assignment of blame if no traffic citation was issued at the scene, and therefore I don't understand what good it would be if the police did file an accident report.

Obviously, I don't know that for certain, but it just seems unlikely that an accident report would be useful to the OP. Maybe the OP can expound on this and explain why he wants them to file an accident report so long after the accident.

 

[Mark_A]

That's not quite right. The hearsay rule prevents admission of statements made outside the court proceeding and for which there is no exception in the state's rules of evidence. Typically out of court statements made by one of the parties that are contrary to his/her interests are considered not hearsay in the first place.

The cop testifying does not make report admissible as evidence. However, if the cop testifies in the court proceeding contrary to what the cop stated in his/her report then the report may be used to impeach the cop's credibility as a reliable witness.

My quote came straight from some other site, and I believe it is substantially correct, even if not 100% correct in all situations. Not many legal opinions or explanations are 100% correct in all situations.

However, if a person is issued a traffic citation, and that person pays the fine without contesting it in court, it generally means that they are admitting guilt to the infraction, which may have led to the accident.

 

[Mark_A]

Nor did I say you did make the claim. But the point is that not all states, or municipalities, treat violations the same way. Unless you are also in Boston, your experience means zip to the OP.

Are you saying that some states or localities in the US don't issue traffic citations if the investigating officer determines that a traffic violation occurred that resulted in an accident? Could you please tell me what place(s) that is?

I have been to Boston at least 30 times (and driving each time after I flew in), but fortunately never got into an accident, nor was I ever cited for a traffic violation. I do understand that in places like Boston, they don't always respond to every accident, especially if it is relatively minor with no injures in a no-fault state like Massachusetts. But in this case an officer did respond.

Also, if the officer did not file a report right after the accident, I wonder how much the officer would remember that could be included in the report filed this long after the fact.

 

[Mark_A]

Apparently in Massachusetts, the operators of vehicles involved in an accident are required to file an accident report to the police, the state, and their insurance company within 5 days of the accident:

M.G.L. Chapter 90, Section 26 requires a person who was operating a motor vehicle involved to complete the Motor Vehicle Crash Operator Report form in a crash in which:

• any person was killed
• any person was injured
• there was damage in excess of $1,000 to any one vehicle or other property

https://www.mass.gov/how-to/report-a-motor-vehicle-crash

 

[cbg]

Are you saying that some states or localities in the US don't issue traffic citations if the investigating officer determines that a traffic violation occurred that resulted in an accident

No. I am not.

I am saying that since the OP did not ask about traffic citations but about the police report, which is not the same thing, any discussion about traffic citations is pointless.

 

[Mark_A]

No. I am not.

I am saying that since the OP did not ask about traffic citations but about the police report, which is not the same thing, any discussion about traffic citations is pointless.

OK, but not sure what else in the accident report would be particularly useful in determining liability. As I mentioned above, drivers are required in Massachusetts to file their own accident report in most situations.

 

[Zigner]

First of all, I was 100% correct about what constitutes hearsay (testimony not under oath),

No, you're not.

 

[Mark_A]

No, you're not.

That's it? Can you explain why?

Also, as I mentioned, I copied that from another site so I am not emotionally invested what I posted. But upon reading the definition in NY provided above by another poster, the two definitions are consistent because testimony in court or in a some other legal proceeding is under oath, and hearsay is evidence about what someone said outside of those venues.