unbelieveable shit..mitsu evo gets fined for having FACTORY SPOILER

unbelieveable shit..mitsu evo gets fined for having FACTORY SPOILER

<a href="http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=103547&amp;page=1&amp;pp=15" target="_blank">http://forums.evolutionm.net/showth...47&amp;page=1&amp;pp=15</a>

one of my friends here in vegas for ticketed for the stock exhaust on his srt-4

he got it thrown out

wrong wrong and wrong..... ideally court is based on facts given and not attitudes that form opinions (i.e. profiling which was the case)

the cop is ignorant, but i can see him issuing a ticket anyways so no beef there.

the judge is ignorant, and he should be put under review

i'm suprised the kid didn't contact mitsu before going into court, just to make sure they were in fact up to US specs

Seriously, how can anyone justify the fact that he was found guilty with a &quot;well he probably had a bad attitude in court&quot; idea and actually accept that. It's not the way the courts work. It SHOULDN'T matter what your attitude is in court. The kid got a BS ticket from a cop ignorant about cars. Okay, not a problem, but the judge is a total fucktard. He doesn't need to be sent to review, his ass should be fired. And if somehow that spoiler wasn't legal in the states, I'd sue Mitsu to pay for the ticket and damages to the vehicle when you have holes in the trunk.

Appearently he's going to appeal.

If you guys read the damn thread it didn't say anything about him being an asswipe in the courtroom. There is such a small chance he could have lost the case but he did and I'm assuming he just lacked sufficient resources against a cop and judge that didn't know any better. He needs to contact the legal department at Mitsubishi USA.

i would think it would be real easy to prove that the car was legal to be sold by federal standards, but it looks like the kid is gonna give up

I thought I remember that happening when they first came out.

all i can say is damn!

i fucking hate cops

The cop was an idiot also so in my eye's he is guilty also.

It's the same as the altezza BS in NH a couple years ago. All you have to do is fight it the RIGHT way. Who knows how this kid went into court and with what attitude, so possibly the judge did it just because he had a bad attitude.

bad attitude or not, it is still profiling, u can't say some1 is guilty (even w/ innocent) just for bad attitude...i mean the man is there for some BS that he shouldnt be there for cuz it was a factory spoiler...i'd be pissed too...he showed pics and everything @ the dealership when he bought the car...that court system is fucked now...big time lawsuit

the cop wasnt an idiot he was doing his job.. the kid prob went into court and had a mile high attitude and said this and that..

no, in fact he didnt murder anyone. if he was an ass, it shouldnt be an issue seeing as how he isnt there because of an infraction regarding his actions, get it? or they could get sued for profiling. and as stated in the thread on that site, being that the car is legal for sale in the united states the federal law supercedes local law and no citation should be issued.

there are no ifs ands or buts about it dude.... thats how it should be. it went a different way and that way was wrong because of the obvious ignorance of their judicial system..... simple as that

good luck to him in beating this injustice

but a cocky kid (even though it seems this one wasn't), shouldn't be forced into being guilty because of it... that is the argument. not what a judge can do after guilt is proven

id would have almost the same attitude though, your having to take a day off ( losing money ) for something that he technically didnt do, if anything the cop should have not issued a ticket in the first place, its just retarded

I was on my way to work this morning and just happen to get in front of the boys in blue, the street I take never has cops on it. To set the scene I have a Buschue 3" TB, and tinted windows. So anyway the cop comes up to my window and asks the normal stupid question
cop"Do you know why I pulled you over?"

me"No"

cop"Thats a pretty large spoiler that you have on the back of the car"

me"Are you seriously pulling me over for this?"

cop"Yes, the spoiler is imparing your rear vision"

me"Actually officer it's not, you are more than welcome to sit in the drivers seat get yourself comfortable and see if it impairs your vision"

cop"No thanks"

me"I hope you realize that this spoiler came with the car from the factory"

cop"I highly doubt that, give me your DL so I can take care of this"

me"No problem"

So I'm sitting there for about 10 minutes and he finnaly comes back with the citation.

cop"I am citing you with imparment of vision due to the large wing on your car. Your court date is on Oct 15, 04."

me"I wish I had my camera with me where I can show you many other cars exactly like mine that will have the same wing as mine"

cop"Like I said you have your court date and you can take it up with the judge"

me"Whatever"

cop"Hive a nice day, sir"

me"I bet you will"

So I get to work and some of the guys I work with seen me pulled over, and so I have to tell the story about 20 times. The is one guy that is about 65 and he even knew that the wing came with the car.

So everyone in New Berlin, WI LOOK OUT!!!!!!!
__________________

WTF this is just f*&^$% up

he didnt murder anyone, so his actions arent scrutinized to determine his mental state. a moot point eric

he has a factory installed wing, the ticket or fine should be issued to mitsubishi if it is truly against the local regulations.

Simply put, the guy should contact the ACLU because this is very wrong at the most core of it. The law in the local municipality can in no way supercede federal law and precedent. The car is sold in the US and meets with federal approval period. No locals that wish to change the parts of the law it doesn't like cannot do this with out presenting a rather compelling case as to why the federal regulatory agency's requirements are unsafe. I see no possible way that the law could be enforced other than the often used and very "vague" creating a public distraction clause ofeten envoked by many a officer.

That being said, he should file an appeal if the time to do so has not passed.

So far as the "cocky" issue, both of you are correct. The judge can make judgements as to the severity of the punishment which is in his scope of power to do based on attitude and demenor in the court. He cannot however rule on the fact of innocence OR guilt based on that fact. He would and SHOULD be put under judicial review if that has indeed been the case.

Now to speak to the suing everyone issue, the officer could indeed be sued inf the guy can present a compelling case of evidence via (old ticketing history on the same offense, prior ticketting history of previous drivers of the same car in the past, any name calling or otherwise unproffesional terms used in the process). The judge himself is not above re-proach if it can be shown that he KNOWINGLY ignored evidence presented in the case.

Conclusion: There are good cops and there are "profiling cops" out there. It is the responsibility of the driver ito educate himself and to that end FEROUCIOUSLY defend himself against things when they are flat out wrong. If you don't, the process will continue on.

Sorry so long guys, but I am passionate about the law as it is OFTEN used and abused.

But that isn't what I'm saying. Yes I do understand that your actions in court can determine what sentence the judge sees fit, but it SHOULD NOT in ANY way determine whether you are guilty or not.

well we all know that the way u act in court shouldnt make or break you but it does. have you seen when tim mcvech was in court the oklahoma building bomber he acted like a complete stuck up ass. now if u were a judge and lets say that his defense was insanity do you actually think that he would feel any sort of compassion for this guy who was acting like a shithead in his court no.. and iam not saying that this kid acted like a dork in court but what iam saying is that this does happin dont think that it ever does and its wrong its not

My friend who drives a Lancer Evolution does say that sometimes his wing blocks a view of a cop cars light bars.

---- on another note.

I had jury duty once. The case was about this kid who was beat up by a gang of other kids. The particular defendant (each of the gang was tried seperately) was charged with assult. The testimony came to the point where the witnesses repeatedly said that the defendant did not strike the plaintiff, but just swirled a bat in front of his face and that he gestured like he was going to hit him but didn't. We sat in that jury room and some woman argued that she wanted him to be guilty because she doesn't like kids bullying like that she didn't like his demeanor in the courtroom either.... That wasn't the point though. He did not HIT or CONTACT the victim/plaintiff so he wasn't guilty of "assulting" the guy, he never touched him. Maybe "intent" would be more fitting but whatever, that case is done.

The point is, justice should be delivered based on facts. I can understand things happen situationally but I guess its case by case and if attitude really plays into it that much, then there should be some other means to deal with it. I mean, if you catch an attitude in the courtroom, isn't the judge supposed to order you to shut-up or call the baliff on you?