Sweptline Showcase
...and Jim, I might add, lose the "probable cause" line of reasoning, it doesn't apply in this case. What does apply is that you were wearing your seat belt and there is NO WAY for a peace officer to see a lap belt from his vision perspective, which was below your door.Quote
PwrWgnDrvr
"probable cause" is the wrong approach. He DID have "probable cause". He didnt see a shoulder belt - that's the "probable cause", and that's all he needed to pull u over. PC is only a defense tactic when u are otherwise guilty, but u want to get off. If u use that here, the judge will just say "sorry, he has valid pc", then u better have a REAL defense for the alleged violation.
So, forget PC, your defense needs to be on the facts.
1. U WERE wearing the lap belt, (which was the only available restraint in the vehicle)
2. The lap belt is an upgrade to the vehicle by u, as it did not have belts when "first sold" (that's the text of the code section that exempts seat belts use)
3. It was impossible for the cop to observe your lap while traveling down the road in the opposite direction.
4. The cop erred when he cited u, based on the facts above. After he pulled u over, and determined that were in fact wearing a lap belt, he was obligated to terminate the contact and not cite.
Conclusion: U are NOT GUILTY of the alleged violation. PERIOD.
Keep it simple. Dont go off on a "cop is an incompetent idiot" tangent. Judges want it quick, simple, polite and respectful as hell. U denigrate the cop, and u will get spanked. He was doing his job, he mighta screwed up, but u make him look bad and u will just cut your own throat. Remember - the judge sees the cop ALL THE TIME. You, he dont.
To get an understanding of the problem u need to overcome, go look at your countless posts here that go on and on and on. In court, wordy is bad. KISS!