Get out of jail free

[Happy with no god]

Hi (would have posted elsewhere on forum, but have restricted rights at the moment)

Not sure if this would work, but amused me while writing.

Imagine driving down the motorway at 100miles per hour, you are stopped by the Police and end up in court.

You are in the dock when the court clerk hands you a bible, you swear on the bible to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So by doing this I would assume that the court accepts the relevance of the bible.

Now can you explain to the court why you put others and yourself at risk by driving at such excessive speed?

"God told me to do it; I was driving at the speed limit when God said go faster. God is the creator, the one we must all obey, who am I to disobey God?"

But you cannot prove this.

"The bible is truth; we must accept that everything in the bible is true. The bible has many accounts of man being directly instructed by God, Noah for example, go and build an ark. So the court must accept that it is possible that I was acting on gods orders"

"In law it is up to the prosecution to prove beyond doubt that I was unlawful, not for me to prove my innocence, so the court will need a statement from God saying he did not instruct me to speed"

"I rest my case"

You could use this whenever you are caught in the act.

Hope you found amusing.

[Evilbeagle]

Sounds like fun but nowhere near to the consternation caused in court by asking to swear on a copy of the holy book
for my chosen religion and then producing a copy of "The Satanic Bible" by Anton LaVey.

[Sweetdeath]

I actually think some people have used the "God told me to..." in court before, but I don't think it works.  Though some cases, people have used this to justify murdering innocent people.   

[xSilverPhinx]

Do you think something along the lines of "the devil made me do it" or "I must've been possessed by the devil" would work?

I wonder what some people think would happen if they gave that answer to saint Peter upon arriving at the pearly gates (as they believe...)

[GDL]

I've sat through a boat load of court and I'd almost guarantee this would not work.  Especially if you put it as bluntly as "god told me to."  But, always worth a try.  Traffic court is always the hardest for the ticket(ee) to win anyways.

[Tank]

I've sat through a boat load of court and I'd almost guarantee this would not work.  Especially if you put it as bluntly as "god told me to."  But, always worth a try.  Traffic court is always the hardest for the ticket(ee) to win anyways.

I presume that is because it's generally witnessed by a police officer so you're generally only going to get off based on a procedural technicality?

[GDL]

Correct, its extremely cut and dry.  I saw vehicle "A" commit violation "A", I stopped the vehicle, identified the driver and issued a citation.  End of Story.  Usually nothing too tricky i.e. rights per Miranda.  If speed was the violation and radar was used, you are usually asked if you tested you're radar during that shift at all.  Most of the time people will take the ticket to trial just to see if it is possible to get out of it. Example the officer not showing up for court.  Another reason is to prolong having to pay the fine of the ticket, which is understandable.

[Tank]

Correct, its extremely cut and dry.  I saw vehicle "A" commit violation "A", I stopped the vehicle, identified the driver and issued a citation.  End of Story.  Usually nothing too tricky i.e. rights per Miranda.  If speed was the violation and radar was used, you are usually asked if you tested you're radar during that shift at all.  Most of the time people will take the ticket to trial just to see if it is possible to get out of it. Example the officer not showing up for court.  Another reason is to prolong having to pay the fine of the ticket, which is understandable.

I live in the UK and if one contests a ticket in court the fine is often higher if you don't have a good reason to contest the ticket. Is this the case in the US or do you get the same fine whether you contest or just pay up?

[GDL]

Where I work, and I can only speak on the jurisdiction I work in, the fine stays the same if the infraction has a set amount with added court costs. No matter whether you take it to trial or not.  Taking it to trial is your right as a citizen.

[Tank]

Where I work, and I can only speak on the jurisdiction I work in, the fine stays the same if the infraction has a set amount with added court costs. No matter whether you take it to trial or not.  Taking it to trial is your right as a citizen.

I thought it was like that in the US. I think you'll find that in the UK the percentage of tickets that get retracted, if the recipient goes to court, is higher than in the US as time wasters don't take their tickets to court in the hope that they might get off. The down side is one does not know how many invalid tickets don't get taken to court because the ticket(ee) does not want to take the risk of the higher penalty if they don't prove their case. Swings and roundabouts. Personally I prefer the US outlook on this.

[GDL]

I can see pros and cons of both.  I myself am not a big ticket writer.  I do write for no insurance and expired tags.  My opinion is if I have to pay for it for my personal vehicle, you should for yours.  But speed, stop signs, defective lights, a simple stop and warning will usually get the point across.  My main reason for traffic stops myself is for a reason to come into contact with drivers.  I work at night so I try and get consent searches on vehicles in search of narcotics and weapons, as well as DUI enforcement.

[GDL]

And am I right when I say that in the UK if you get arrested, you got "knicked"?

[Tank]

And am I right when I say that in the UK if you get arrested, you got "knicked"?

"Your knicked mate!" Would be the coloquial term! Collared would be another term, as in grabbed by the collar. I'm sure there are more terms, I'll add them as I remember them.