I recently received a ticket for failure to pay full time and attention. Basically it was a side swipe accident and i was hit by a van and I drive a small(so imagine the damage). I went to court to fight the ticket and plead not guilty. The police report is very inconsistent. Now the case is going to trial and I am unsure of what to do. Can someone help with what I should prepare for?
Thanks.

if the case is going to trial you might want to hire a lawyer....or go to law school. either one should help prepare you.

There's more to this one than has been presented...like maybe text messaging? Simple cell phone use? Merging when there was traffic right there?

Come clean - what ELSE was contributing here?

Yeah, absolutely text messaging. I'd bet a paycheck on it. (And I make a lot of dough.)

Too bad for you cunty. Hope you spend some time in the slammer.

Why worry about it?

Failure to Pay Time and Attention carries no points.

Thelma, your driving habits will most certainly kill someone eventually. I just hope it's not me.
Hopefully you'll kill yourself and/or someone else who texts or phones while driving.

I actually wasn't on the phone it was in the ash tray. I didn't have the music on I was paying attention. I had merged from the right lane into the middle lane and was there for at least 5 seconds when I was hit on my drivers side. I don't think the driver of the van saw me when they tried to merge into my lane.

Ok

How is your record?

Never an accident and 1 traffic ticket in 2003

I say that no lawyer is worth for this type of ticket.

that code section carries no points. you should have prepaid. when you lose in general district court, make sure you appeal.

Well, if she thinks that she is not guilty, she needs to make an argument in court.

Thelma Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I actually wasn't on the phone it was in the ash
> tray. I didn't have the music on I was paying
> attention. I had merged from the right lane into
> the middle lane and was there for at least 5
> seconds when I was hit on my drivers side. I don't
> think the driver of the van saw me when they tried
> to merge into my lane.

Right. So another car hit you while you were doing nothing wrong, and the cop ticketed *you*. Is that what you want us to believe?

I guess the cop was hallucinating.

Yeah, sounds like two cars attempting to occupy the same spot with a cop watching.

A lot of judges, when they feel sorry for someone, or have doubts about the officer's account of events, usually give the person "Fail to pay full attention" bit..

Sitting in the court room one day (with probalbly one of the best judges in the state), he was telling people that instead of finding them guilty of the original charge, he will instead find them guilty of Failure to pay attention..

The reasoning behind it was "We cannot enter this charge in as a moving violation, and it does not show as any points or conviction, the insurance company will not know and your rates will not go up"

He also added that the state has a "funny" computer system in which how this charge comes up - basically benefiting the driver in most cases.. Anywho, that judge was pretty funny himself.

Kilton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thelma Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I actually wasn't on the phone it was in the
> ash
> > tray. I didn't have the music on I was paying
> > attention. I had merged from the right lane
> into
> > the middle lane and was there for at least 5
> > seconds when I was hit on my drivers side. I
> don't
> > think the driver of the van saw me when they
> tried
> > to merge into my lane.
>
> Right. So another car hit you while you were doing
> nothing wrong, and the cop ticketed *you*. Is that
> what you want us to believe?
>
> I guess the cop was hallucinating.


I can see this happening, with how everyone rushes now these days. As in all cars, im sure the van had a bigger blind spot in his mirror, than little ole thelma who happen to be in the lane first...

Where was the damage at on the driver side? Was it towards the rear of your car or the front? What about the van? Was the van a minivan with a billion windows or was it a cargo van that had no windows (except in the front cab)..

Just because an officer cited this person base on his judgement does not mean this person did something wrong.

But as a poster suggested above, this infraction is just an infraction, its not a moving violation and does not carry points. It's just an over glorified fine that is not worth a lawyer's time or your money.

What did your insurance company do? and how are you recouping or reimbursing for damages?

a lawyer for traffic court?

o_0

i don't even think you can do that - have a lawyer for a traffic case where no jail time is in the picture or nobody was injured, can you?

either way, no reason to hire a lawyer - just tell the judge your side - other guy/gal will tell their side - and the judge will decide, plain and simple.

If you are the one who got the ticket, your prolly out of luck unless you can explain extenuating circumstances which could suggest error on the part of the cop

Forgot to add,

If the cop was confident in his judgement and whatnot, wouldnt the officer cited this person differently? Such as causing an accident?

What is usually charged to an "at fault" driver in Virginia?

So you are saying that you are not guilty? Next time pay attention, get off the phone or stopped texting!!

lolyer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I can see this happening, with how everyone rushes
> now these days.

That's because you're an idiot.

You and the OP would make a perfect couple. :-)

The cop was not at the scene. On the police report he indicated that it was a rear end collison and had one car going W and one going E. That clearly is not what happened.

It was a cargo van.

The damage to my car was the left front while the van only had paint behind the wheel to the middle doors. I can only say I don't think they saw me and attempted to merge over into my lane.

Kilton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Right. So another car hit you while you were doing
> nothing wrong, and the cop ticketed *you*. Is that
> what you want us to believe?
>
> I guess the cop was hallucinating.

Eh... This isn't all that unbelievable. I was in a car accident that resulted in no property damage or injury to anyone but me. I had no passengers, and I wasn't under the influence of anything. There was no cop there to witness it. I still got cited for reckless driving and "driving too fast for conditions" (it was snowy out).

Thelma,

You really just have to weigh the costs.

If insurance isn't covering repair to your car because the cop found you to be culpable in the accident, then not fighting it is going to cost you the repair work plus the cost of the ticket.

If insurance is covering repair to your car, then you need to decide if hiring a lawyer and spending the time to fight it in court is going to cost less than the actual ticket. If your driving record is as clean as you say, there's no reason to spend more on a lawyer to clear you of the charges than the actual ticket costs. It might not be fair, but grinning and bearing it might be more financially sound.

Definitely hire a lawyer if the case is going to trial and you want to fight it. Unless you have a law background or irrefutable evidence that you were not at fault in any way (such as video footage of the incident), it probably won't end well for you.

Good luck.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

mrmephesto...i know you this is off topic...but if it was snowing and you lost control...good chance you were driving ''too fast for conditions''...the condition being THE SNOW...now for the original post...someone mentioned that the judge tries to be nice by reducing the charge to ''fail to pay full time and attention''...the same is true for the cop...instead of charging you with say ''improper lane change'' which carries points and a hefty fine not to mention insurance increase...he gave you a no point non moving violation that doesnt get reported to insurance...you should have prepaid and called it a day...im sure the cop asked for both sides of the story and decided you were at fault...now the judge will hear both sides of the story too and will most likely agree with the cop...now instead of a $25fine you have to lose 2 days of work and pay the fine...doesnt seem worth it to me

> I went to court to fight the ticket and plead not
> guilty. The police report is very inconsistent. Now
> the case is going to trial and I am unsure of what to do.

I don't understand why there is a followup trial... this is traffic court. If you went there and pleaded not guilty, usually the judge either takes your side or doesn't but it ends there. I don't understand why there is a second trial, do you know why?

the reason there is a second date is so the witness or the other driver can be summoned to court

Just sayin-As suggested the reason for the second hearing date is so that they can summon witnesses to appear for the trial. What this probably means is that the officer on the scene heard two different versions of the incident, found the other driver's version to be more plausible and wrote a ticket based on that. The OP probably did not say anything that incriminated herself and the physical evidence at the scene was not definitive, so the prosecution NEEDS to have the other driver present for the trial.

Years ago a cop told me that if he is summoned to the scene of a highway accident SOMEONE is going to get a ticket. It is just a matter of what the person is going to be cited for. In the hierarchy of things to cite someone for failure to pay full time and attention is fairly low on the list (this is one of the charges that judges will reduce tickets to when they want to cut the driver a break), which indicates to me that the cop thought the OP was at fault but the fault was minimal. Fairlure to pay full time and attention CAN include texting, talking on the cell phone, eating or drinking or adjusting the radio, but it is also written in cases where the driver misjudged the width of his car and sideswiped a parked car, or where there is a line of traffic and somebody suddenly slams on the brakes. If the copy thought there was something more he would have written the ticket for reckless. If he thought the driver had done something specific wrong he would have written for that.

While failure to pay full time and attention is a very minor infraction, pleading guilty is an admission of guilt that can be used in a civil trial. A guilty verdict can't. I'm also betting this is one where the chances of beating it, even without legal brilliance, are close to 50-50 IF you have a clean record.

Thanks hmm and Bill N, good info!

I got into a minor car accident where I was trying to move out the way of a fire truck at a red light. In doing so I accidently hit the car behind me. The officer cited me "Failure to pay full time attention" 82-4-24. My question is will the DMV know about this? and will my license possibly be suspended? Im really worry bc my driving record is not too clean.

Please on reply with serious answer
Thanks God bless

How the fuck do you hit a car BEHIND you when trying to get out of the way for a fire truck?

Sounds like your should not be driving to start with if your record is that bad.