PhotoBlocker Traffic/ Toll Camera Spray

[thepopularjock]

Hey Guys -

I have taken a lot of flack from my friends for buying this stuff! LOL I bought this in response to 2 photo toll bills. I received a letter (1st letter) stating that I had failed to pay my toll and I now owe $35 on a $3 toll charge! LOL I argued it down to $9 but I still got hosed! I never received any other letters. It happened a second time and this ticket (1st letter) was for $63 for a $5 toll. :jaw drop: Now this one made me mad because I went to the website and attempted to search my license plate to pay the bill - This service was not available!!! I called to see if I could pay my toll but I was told I needed a reference number - of course I didn't have a ref # if I never received an initial bill! Unbelievable!!! A second phone call told me that I did not owe anything. I think this is literally Hiway Robbery (couldn't resist I argued the $63 bill down to $28 but that is outrageous!!!! So I was more than a little angry and I bought this PhotoBlocker that I had seen advertised on the internet in respnse to being charged $100 for less than $10 in tolls.
All of that to say please save the ethics speach!!! It is just as wrong for a company to threaten you with collection and deminish your credit as it is to use PhotoBlocker.
OK - Down to the review:
I cleaned my license plate and sprayed a VERY LIBERAL amount on my plate. I made my trip and about a month later I received my bill. LMAO!!! I love the irony!!! The one time I try to beat the system - I actually get a bill with NO late charges!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I have to say that I think this stuff is a wash!!! My opinion is to save your money and buy a toll tag because it is a Hell of a lot cheaper!!! BTW - I have seen some neet "Motorcycle Toll Tag Holders" on the web. Just Google to find them. Really clever idea and I think one of those is in my future! Maybe it will work better than the PhotoBlocker! LOL

 

[NJFZ1]

Well what you really need is one of these

Hide MOTORCYCLE PLATES| Yamaha R1 R6 GSX-R 1000 Radar: eBay Motors (item 170463197218 end time Jul-20-10 20:00:34 PDT)

 

[thepopularjock]

LMAO!!!
That is awesome NJ!! Thanks!
I had seen the "Flipper Style" but this is new to me!
LOL - If I get another outrageous Toll Bill I just may invest in one of these!!!:tup:

 

[Norm]

Alternatively, you could take on a passenger:

She should hide the plate nicely. Your mileage may suffer though. With her on the back I'm thinking about 3 gallons to the mile. Maybe you should stick with the $66 toll after all.

 

[thepopularjock]

LOL -
That is awesome Norm!!! I'm sure I would get a ticket for transporting an orca without the proper permits!

I saw a good story (and very well written account) about someone who tried to fight city hall and ........ you guessed it.................. he lost.

Here is a C/P:
Google Image Result for http://www.webbikeworld.com/motorcycles/traffic-court/tag91.jpg


Search Tips | Site Map | Home



Motorcycle Traffic Court


R.T.'s Court Date
by R.T. for webBikeWorld.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Summary: R.T. fought the law and the law won. He learned some interesting lessons along the way. What went wrong? What could or should have been done differently? How would you have handled the situation? Let's hear from both sides -- motorcyclists and Police Officers!

More: Comments (Below) | wBW Reviews Home


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Traffic Court
Yesterday I arrived in traffic court, where I decided to contest a fine for an "Obscured Tag". That is, my motorcycle's license plate was said to be not visible.

What surprised me was that despite the fact that I had photographic evidence in my favor, all it got me was a reduced fine.

While I am glad that my fine was reduced, I found myself leaving the court room discouraged, puzzled and insulted. And I am certain that the officer left there with an even bigger ego trip than he came in with.

Background
What is the purpose of the State Statutes? I think the reason the State Statutes exist are to provide a set of rules to bring order on the streets. I believe they are needed for that purpose and that purpose only.

But my experience yesterday showed me that the complex verbiage of some of the laws might be intentionally written to confuse the average citizen, without regard to whether or not the text applies to an individual's case.

In my case, I was fined for violating State Statute 316.605; in the remarks field, the Police Officer wrote “Obscured Tag”

So before I begin, let me explore the word "obscured" as defined by Dictionary, Encyclopedia and Thesaurus - The Free Dictionary

Deficient in light; dark.

So faintly perceptible as to lack clear delineation; indistinct.

Out of sight; hidden.

Not readily noticed or seen; inconspicuous.

That out of the way, let me give a quick recap of how the day started...

The Judge first asks that you pay close attention to the cases preceding yours. This is so that you might have a better understanding of how to behave without him saying, basically, "LEARN HOW NOT TO INCRIMINATE YOURSELF!"

That's a tip to you, readers -- it is in all caps because it is very important! I witnessed how in case after case, people did just that.

In case after case, excuses where interpreted by the Judge as “DISTRACTIONS” and he attempted to sympathize.

I will give him credit for his acting in caring. I was not fooled.

The rest of the day featured a traffic lawyer representing other fines. If you are wondering if a lawyer is worth it, I can tell you that for big fines they are. He had access to summon logs and other paper work from the Police Officers.

However, for a measly $85 fine like mine, in which I had clear proof of the legibility of my tag, I didn’t need one. Even after not getting the charges against me dropped, I discovered that it is still cheaper to pay the fine than to hire a lawyer!

But not to deviate from the point I am making, lawyers are worth it and they are viewed in court as “Trained Professionals”. More on that later…

The most disgusting part of the day was to see people with wreck less driving violations get their cases dismissed because they had a lawyer or the officer did not show up. That didn’t sit well with me, I was there to contest a BS ticket, & my officer showed up. Despite that, after a few cases I felt confident there was no way I would loose… I had pictures… no one else had such evidence.

Finally my turn comes up and it goes by the book: You are first asked to plead: "Guilty, Not Guilty or No Contest".

There is a reason for this -- it is my honest opinion that in traffic court you are GUILTY until proven innocent. I say that with confidence because unless you have a lawyer, the Police Officer is the only “Trained Professional”, in the Judge's view.

You are just a motorist trying to weasel out of the traffic violation you are guilty of. Since you are not a “Trained Professional”, your word is meaningless.

I was able to deduct that it is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to get a judgment in your favor unless you have clear evidence. And even if you do -- like I did -- you better also have a lawyer that is a “Trained Professional” at interpreting the complex verbiage of the law…in this case, the State Statutes.

Pleading "Guilty" is self explanatory, but "No Contest" means you are not admitting to the offense, but are given the chance to ask that point not be assessed. You either pay the fine, ordered to take the traffic school, and/or court costs may be imposed.

Pleading "Not Guilty" means you will be able to question the Police Officer, then address the Judge. That’s about it. Remember who the “Trained Professional” is here…and don’t get your hopes up.

Next, after your plea of Not Guilty (which I did) the Police Officer gets to speak first. They are very detailed; they name the time, the date, the road names and they specifically say they did everything as their training demands and they never admit to any mistakes on their part.

No big surprise, really -- except that this is a huge advantage for them. Being the “Trained Professional” means that if there is a conflict in testimony, the officers get the benefit of the doubt.

During the traffic stop I had asked the Police Officer a few questions regarding the stop. He refused to answer, and my persistence was deemed irate behavior.







I must point out that I was holding a semi-professional SLR digital camera in my hand at the time (that I could probably shoot better that the officer could shoot his weapon). Answers to my questions would have provided me with information during the stop that would have facilitated me taking pictures to prove him wrong.

Nevertheless, I did all I could and as it turns out, the officer could not dispute my photographs in court…and you bet your hind ends he gets a chance to dispute them first.

After the officer speaks, you are given a chance to question the officer. I kept the questions brief -- too many questions will result in the Judge interrupting you, especially since the Police Officers can lie because they are the “Trained Professional”. I know we can lie too…but guess who is allowed to and who isn’t?

After I was successful in getting the answers I needed out of the Police Officer, I proceeded. It was obvious that he lied on one of his answers, but I quickly dismissed it rather than jump to the bait to argue with him. Got to stay on your toes or these “Trained Professionals”, or they will quickly turn things against you.

After that the Judge gave me an opportunity to plead my case. I simply told the Judge that I had evidence for him to see that proved that my tag was legible, and that is why I was there.

The Judge asks the officer to look at the photos first. I watched intently as he looked through them and I saw his look of defeat when he realized how legible the photographs turned out and that I included his vehicle in on of the photos.

Now I was starting to feel pretty confident. The Judge then looked at the photos and hands them back. BUT, he isn’t convinced for some reason, so he asks for them back.

He takes another look and he hands them back. He then pauses and starts flipping through the State Statutes and he reads 316.605.

He asks for my photographs one more time and he looks at them and then looks at the book and goes back and forth like this as he carefully reads through every piece of verbiage in the statute.

The legibility of my tag by this time was no longer in question -- what the Judge did was to make sure that even though my stop was for legibility of the tags, that my tag did not violate any other aspect stated in the Statute.

Finally, he nails me for my tag "Not being visible from 60 yards". The photos were taken from as far away as 50 ft. and my bike was next to another that was NOT fined, because the tag was supposedly being properly displayed.

Nevertheless, the fact that neither tag was legible from 50 ft. was IRRELEVANT, because the other vehicle was not on trial!

“How you like them apples?” Needless to say I left with my intelligence insulted. Short of a lawyer (another "Trained Professional”), I could not have presented my case any better.

In the end, the Judge imposed a fine of $50.00, reduced from the original $85.00. I'm not sure why -- I didn’t ask for leniency. I did ask for a chance to correct it, but he said I waved that right by pleading not guilty. And in the end, no instructions where provided to make the impossible happen -- the impossible being the ability to read a motorcycle tag from 100 ft.

Is it really impossible? Absolutely! I have 20/20 vision, and the letters on the motorcycle tags are 25.9 mm tall and the size of the letters on a vision chart at 60 ft. is 27mm. In other words, for an officer to be able to see a properly mounted tag from 100 ft., he has to have better than 20/20 vision.

Should I note that both the “Trained Professionals” (The Judge and the Police Officer) both wore eyeglasses? That’s probably irrelevant -- their eyes are trained to see better than 20/20.

Conclusion
In my honest opinion, if you plan to contest a fine, go in there only with the hope of getting your points removed and just pay the fine. That is, just plead "No Contest" and ask to withhold adjudication.

But here's the trick, and my advice to you: When requesting a hearing, you have a chance to plead. In most states, the only way to get a court date is to plead "Not Guilty". Do it and this will automatically require the Police Officer to court to testify against you. There's a good chance that he or she will not show up, due to scheduling. If this happens, you’re in luck! Case dismissed!

But if the Police Officer is present, you will still get a chance to plead again in court. Now plead "No Contest" and ask to withhold adjudication . Your driving record will be reviewed, and based on that the Judge may or may not assess points… Good Luck!

Hopefully this serves everyone with useful information regarding traffic offenses; if so, I think my time and effort was worth the experience. However, the next time I get a B.S. ticket for my tag, I will just pay it. My time is worth more than trying to fighting another small fine.

ADDENDUM From R.T.: "To the readers I would like to point out that on both tags the letters of the tags in the pictures are in between the mounting screw holes.

Mine, the orange bike, has 7 letters that are clearly smaller than the bike on the left which has 6 letters.

This is a state issued tag. And as such even if mounted behind the rear tire, it's impossible to see from beyond 50 ft.
What we need to pay close attention to here is the fact that I was fined for something that is impossible to achieve whether mounted properly or not."

Date Published: June 2008