Photos: Batavia hit with a bit of spring snow and cold

Hi, Cheri!
Sorry I missed you when you were down here in FL.

Are the city police going to cite her for violating the leash law? Or will they ignore the photographic proof?

Hey Alvin....maybe you should look closer to the picture. In Cheri's left hand is a red object called a pet lead or leash, and on the dog to her right is a walking harness. So to my way of thinking she has photographic proof of following the leash law, not violating it.

Perhaps they should knock at YOUR door and cite you for harassment? What do you think?

FWIW, the dog isn't on the leash in the photograph.

Maybe you should get your eyesight checked, and look up the definition of harassment after. I didn't vote for the law. The police should have to act on direct proof of a violation. They are not judges. It is a fact that she is breaking the law. Favoritism is not ok. They are neglecting their duties by not enforcing the law.

However, Alvin, if her dog causes injuries to someone because it's off the leash, that'll be her mess to clean up, in addition to the other mess she has to clean up, i.e. # 2

Crime on every corner, police malfeasance under every bush. And that vicious cur probably benefit-surfed here, straight out of Rochester. . .

The sky is falling, and none of us are safe.

Alvin, get a life

"They are neglecting their duties by not enforcing the law."

It's not the crime of the century, only a violation no different than a traffic ticket, and for my money I would rather cops go after more serious violations of the penal code, i.e. misdemeanors & felonies.

"They are neglecting their duties by not enforcing the law."

Even police have the discretion to employ common sense.

I am just going to guess, that since she had the leash in her hand, the dog was not on it for the picture.

It was stupid for this to even come up.

Alvin...no where did I say that the dog was on a leash or lead when the picture was taken. I said she had a leash in her hand and the dog had a walking harness on.

You made the assumption that she did not have the dog on a leash, yet it is in her hand. Ready to be attached for the walk home.

As for the leash law.... she is not in violation as the law states...

No dog shall be permitted upon the public streets or upon any public property within the City of Batavia unless it shall be accompanied by an adult or by a minor who is able to restrain and control said dog and unless such person accompanying said dog shall actually control and restrain said dog by a leash.

She has the leash with her and the dog is under control so what exactly is being violated here again Alvin?

It says very clearly that a leash is required to be considered restrained and under control. Try rereading it slower this time, maybe then you will comprehend it.

They are by definition enforcers, discretion is for judges. The current legal system is becoming to crowded with these trivial laws that only apply if the cop wants to stick it to someone. They shouldn't be able to give this person a break and that person the shaft because they are in a bad mood. If they did their job the flow of traffic wouldn't be 10mph over the speed limit. Everyone that goes 1mph over the limit gets a ticket. Tons of people will get tickets get pissed off and realize that that actual speed limit is to low. The uproar will cause the mph to be raised to the current flow of traffic or split the difference. Making the mph artificially low because it is expected that people will break is absurd. This gives officers probable cause to stop anyone anytime. Go the speed limit and flow of traffic is 10mph faster then they will claim you are suspicious and that is their probable cause.

"They are by definition enforcers, discretion is for judges."

Not true at all.

How many people get pulled over for speeding, and then are ticketed for something lesser?

I for one was, a couple of years ago In Indian Falls. I was stopped for doing 75 in a 40. I was ticketed for not wearing a seatbelt. I plead to a parking violation, no points, paid a $90 fine, done deal.

Police have the discretion at their disposal, and use it when they feel it is warranted.

It's no different than arresting someone for possession of pot, and giving them an appearance ticket, rather than take them to jail and book them in, and set jail bail, or hold them for an court appearance for arraignment and bail.

They shouldn't be able to do that either. Everyone likes being let off but that means they are not doing their job. This creates an unfair justice system. Other people that got caught doing the exact same thing didn't get let off at the scene and in court. The same offense has wildly different outcomes. Why? That is not true justice. As far as the court writing it up as a parking ticket, that is fraud. Everyone knows their was no actual instance of you parking illegally. It's a lie. I'm not saying they couldn't or shouldn't have reduced the fine and points to give you a break. Why is the only way to do that lying? The cop lied by omission and neglected his duty by not charging you with everything. The judge lied by fabricating a situation that never happened. You lied by taking the plea and paying the reduced fine. I don't blame you for taking the offer but that doesn't change the truth. How can a true justice system lie ever?

First of all, we are talking about violations, not misdemeanors and felonies.

Secondly, I was only guilty of one violation, speeding. The cop could have reduced the ticket from 75 in a 40, using his discretion, he wrote me for a seatbelt violation instead, still a moving violation and points on my license.

Thirdly, the A.D.A, not the court, accepted my offer to plead to a lesser violation than I was ticketed for, and his offer was the non-moving violation, which added no points to my license, and the fine remained in the local court. Had I plead to the violation on the ticket, the court is required to turn over the entire amount of the fine over to the state. By accepting the plea to the parking violation, the entire $90 remains in the local court.

Lastly, this is nothing to new whatsoever in the court system either. This kind of dealing occurs daily in the criminal court system. Whether you think about it or not, it saves the taxpayers thousands in court costs for a case to plead out before going to trial rather than going to trial.

So getting a seatbelt violation for speeding 35 mph over the speed limit is a good thing?? I believe you can lose your license for 25 mph over. I think it is ridiculous! If I was guessing, you have probably drove 75 through the same 40 zone again because by cutting you a unbelievable break the first time, you didn`t learn a thing! Again, it`s back to tax dollars! Well a few should have been spent in your case when you are 35 mph over the limit!

I naively read every post. There's several minutes of my life I'll never get back.

"I believe you can lose your license for 25 mph over."

Do you ever research anything before you run on like that? Post the Vehicle & Traffic law that says that?

"If I was guessing, you have probably drove 75 through the same 40 zone again because by cutting you a unbelievable break the first time, you didn`t learn a thing!"

Your guessing is as bad as your research skills.

The only reason I sped through there the first time is I wasn't paying attention to how fast I was going. Nothing more. And, no, I have not sped through there again.

I could have fought the seat belt violation and might have won too, but I knew I was in the wrong, and I deserved to pay the consequences for it.

"Well a few should have been spent in your case when you are 35 mph over the limit!"

So the postage cost for the A.D.A. to mail correspondence to me doesn't count as a few tax dollars being spent in my case? You don't honesty think Mr. Zickl took the money from his own pocket to mail two letters to me, do you?

As Howard said, move to another planet because you'll not find a perfect system of law & order, or anything for that matter, here on this one.

I don`t need to research anything to know that going 75 in a 40 isn`t good for anybody. Maybe you want to pay attention a little better when your driving! Knowing that you got cut a 35 mph break sure isn`t getting us any closer to a perfect system on this planet or any other one for that matter.

Just for you Ray I researched for you the speeding penalties.

1-10 miles an hour over the speed limit = 3 points.
11-20 miles per hour over the speed limit = 4 points.
21-30 miles per hour over the speed limit = 6 points*.
31-40 miles per hour over the speed limit = 8 points*
41 mph + over the speed limit = 11 points*.
11 points means that your license will be suspended.
For 35 mph over you wouldn`t have lost it but you`d be well on your way and for 6 mph more you would have lost it. 8 points would have done wonders for your insurance as well. I`d say you got an unbelievable break huh? SLOW DOWN!

Jim, in your world, Ray would have his license suspended, a fine to Dmv, a court fine, a surcharge, a lawyers fee, fleeced by his auto ins.co., and sent to defensive driving classes to remove points of his license.
Yeah, he got a hell of break, but one he will remember for a long time.
To me, thats good law enforcement, Not to say all people deserve such a break, but
to follow the law to the line is expensive for all, the people, the offender, and can be
cumbersome to the courts.

Laws are made for a reason Frank! In your world Frank I guess you feel better that a guy got cut a 35 mph over break huh? You probably live in a house in a 30 mph zone. Would it be ok for a guy to drive 65 mph by your house? You would go nuts! I can see a break for 10 mph or so but not 35 and if I did get a break like that I wouldn`t be talking about it on a news site! Again, it`s not all about the money or at least it shouldn`t be.

"sure isn`t getting us any closer to a perfect system on this planet or any other one for that matter."

There is no perfect system Jim, and never will be. Why? Because any system, regardless of what it is, is created by humans who are, as Howard pointed out, incapable of perfection.

Did I get a break? Yes I did, not expected, nor did I feel I was entitled to one either. The cop could have written me the ticket for speeding, and the end result would have still been the same. The A.D.A would offer to reduce the violation to a non-moving one, for a guilty plea, and I still would have paid a fine.

As far as you thinking you didn't need to research anything, by eventually doing so, now you know that, "I believe you can lose your license for 25 mph over ", is not true at all, and just to clarify for you, those points are added only after the court finds you guilty of the speeding violation, just saying. But as I stated before, you can make a plea deal with the A.D.A. by mail, to offer to plead guilty if they reduce the violation, which 99% of the time they will. As I mentioned before, if your convicted of the violation on the U.T.T., the local court only keeps the court surcharge, the fine has to be sent into the state. If the court accepts a guilty plea to a reduced violation, they keep the entire fine, plus the surcharge.

Oh, and your other belief of deception and omissions on these bargains, not true. Everything is well documented, and FYI, if the court, or the A.D.A. feels the violation cited on the ticket is not warranted, they can upgrade that violation, by their own discretion.