[Grovenet] Policing in the Grove

[Bonnie Combs]

David,

I am surprised by your last statement, since I know
you to be a very compassionate person.  However, your
observations about the police in Cornelius are similar
to my own experience. On the other hand, Forest Grove
police have always seemed fair and reasonable in my
contacts with them. That certainly militates against
any merger of the Cornelius and Forest Grove police
departments,in my opinion. 

Thanks for your input to this discussion. 

Bonnie Combs, cousin to an officer in another state

--- David Morelli <jo.david at verizon.net> wrote:

> 
> On Mar 10, 2008, at 11:12 PM, Steven wrote:
> 
> > ...
> > Cornelius was notorious for tickets. So is North
> Plains out on 26.  
> > Is that what we want FG to be known for?
> 
> I would certainly hope not.  Cornelius has been
> known as a speed trap  
> and I have always watched my driving there. 
> However, my last  
> experience with Cornelius was a bad one.  One night
> I was targeted  
> for a ticket.  The police did about 40 in a 25 to
> catch up with me in  
> a residential zone, tailgated me, then followed me
> half way across  
> Cornelius and finally pulled me over in Forest Grove
> claiming an  
> improper signal for a lane change the last block
> before leaving  
> Cornelius.  And no, they were not running my plates,
> because I  
> checked and the first radio call came after the
> traffic stop.  And  
> no, there was no watch out for any vehicle similar
> to mine, I asked  
> about that too.
> 
> For the record, you must signal 100 feet before a
> lane change.
> 
> The Cornelius judge, Leon Colas, determined that
> that meant you have  
> to turn on your signal 100 feet before you change
> your position  
> within your lane.  You can still be in the lane for
> the whole 100  
> feet, but, if you have moved closer to the dividing
> line, you are  
> guilty.  I asked him and he said so in the trial. 
> The police had  
> stated a standard of 100 feet before the car was
> completely in the  
> new lane, and the judge changed that standard.  The
> police officer  
> does not have to have any training in estimating
> distances, because  
> the police admitted that they had no training, not
> ever.  The police  
> was allowed to use a rule of thumb that five stripes
> on the pavement  
> equals 100 feet.  When it was pointed out that a
> steel rule tape of  
> that section of road showed that 100 feet was 2 and
> a half stripes in  
> length, the judge still allowed the police estimate
> and said that it  
> met the "preponderance of evidence" rule.  The judge
> would not allow  
> for an illustration prepared in advance showing the
> path that my car  
> took, which was greater than 100 feet because I
> wrote a mathematical  
> conversion on the paper before handing it to the
> judge.  The ticket  
> wasn't even written for the correct block, and the
> trial was delayed  
> twice because for the convenience of the court. 
> But, in Cornelius, I  
> was still guilty.
> 
>   If a police chief needs a reason to avoid that
> sort of behavior, I  
> offer the following.
> 
> I have always had a respect for those who put their
> life on the line  
> to protect me.  When I see a police car, I look to
> see if they are  
> okay.  That is why I know that police was sitting
> there doing work by  
> a red flashlight when I drove by that night.  But,
> after my  
> experience, if I saw a police down in Cornelius, my
> first reaction  
> would be, "they probably did something to deserve
> it".  And, I don't  
> know that I would do anything more.
> 
> David
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
>