Overly aggressive law enforcement

[Number Six]

I have a hearing in the morning that I have been dreading.

I was walking a few miles down to my mechanic to pick up a car that was being repaired.

I committed the transgression a cop saw fit to cite me on of walking over some railroad tracks. $136 ticket.

This is the law: https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/con ... s_53a-110d

One strategy is to challenge the law:

(a) A person is guilty of simple trespass of railroad property when, knowing that such person is not licensed or privileged to do so, such person enters or remains on railroad property without lawful authority or the consent of the railroad car.

Is that the "out"? I didn't know.

If I honestly had no knowledge that it was trespassing and it was not posted as no trespassing, I can't be guilty of trespassing? The law itself states that to be guilty, one must have foreknowledge that they are on property they do not have permission to be on.

If it wasn't marked, I take pics of the area where I entered RR property as evidence for Court and present them along with the law that says that to be guilty requires that I knew I was trespassing and that the officer did not give me the opportunity to remove yourself from the property after informing you that you weren't permitted to be there.

One side:

Other side:

The other side abuts a police station, it was open when I came over the rr tracks. There was one slow moving train when I went over far away.

So I get there early, look for the prosecutor and look for terms as a good citizen?

[Judge Roy Bean]

This is certainly not legal advice, but I would suggest you wait to see if the issuing officer even shows up. If he or she doesn't seem to be there, the prosecutor may approach you with an offer before the case is called.

[JohnPCapitalist]

I have a hearing in the morning that I have been dreading.

I was walking a few miles down to my mechanic to pick up a car that was being repaired.

I committed the transgression a cop saw fit to cite me on of walking over some railroad tracks. $136 ticket.

If I honestly had no knowledge that it was trespassing and it was not posted as no trespassing, I can't be guilty of trespassing? The law itself states that to be guilty, one must have foreknowledge that they are on property they do not have permission to be on.

If it wasn't marked, I take pics of the area where I entered RR property as evidence for Court and present them along with the law that says that to be guilty requires that I knew I was trespassing and that the officer did not give me the opportunity to remove yourself from the property after informing you that you weren't permitted to be there.

The other side abuts a police station, it was open when I came over the rr tracks. There was one slow moving train when I went over far away.

So I get there early, look for the prosecutor and look for terms as a good citizen?

I wish you the best in the hearing. One observation: that looks like the Metro North tracks somewhere in Fairfield County. Your reasoned argument about the law and about there being nothing to tell you that you were trespassing may work, or they may reason that given how busy those tracks are, with trains ripping down the track every couple of minutes during the rush hour commute, they are going to teach you a lesson. When I lived in Fairfield County, I recall horror stories of people ending up on the tracks and being killed a couple of times a year. So they may have a zero tolerance policy.

I've been in court on a couple of occasions and the irrational fears in one's mind make the time beforehand miserable. Usually, the imagination of what it's like is far worse than the reality.

[bmxninja357]

So I get there early, look for the prosecutor and look for terms as a good citizen?

hell no. you need to order some more ink cartridges and stamps! its time you get back at the man and go full freeman! your reasoned and rational thoughts have no place in the legal system. your probably at 5 worth suing already. this is no way to treat a freeman!

give em hell!
ninj

[Number Six]

So I get there early, look for the prosecutor and look for terms as a good citizen?

hell no. you need to order some more ink cartridges and stamps! its time you get back at the man and go full freeman! your reasoned and rational thoughts have no place in the legal system. your probably at 5 worth suing already. this is no way to treat a freeman!

give em hell!
ninj

That was the advice on this site:

"The cop is a Corporate person that has no standing on a federal right of way to issue a corporate arrest ticket.
Rail Roads are domestic/federal; cop is city/state. The cop swears to support the constitution of the USA but not the federal codes but he does swear to support the constitution of the state and it's laws/codes."

"Because the RR does not hold title but only the right of way for commerce.....what they hold is SERFACE RIGHTS and commercial passage on that right of way. This is why they only operate on designated lines of which they hold the right. It is not because it is difficult to put in switching or even because they will crash into each other: IT IS BECAUSE IT IS A COMMERCIAL TRESSPASS to operate on or to impede those that hold the right of passage. now if there is an agreement/contract then it is all mitigation to or about "the catastrophe" if there is one"
https://www.goldismoney2.com/threads/13 ... ks.227864/

[NYGman]

Just tell them you are Number of the Family Six. Make sure to ask for number One, and be sure to tell them, you are not a number, but a free man.

[Number Six]

The prosecutor said that I was "required" to know. Omg, what a laugh riot. The cop said common sense that people are supposed to know, you don't walk over rr tracks, I questioned what that is based on? When we got to who owns the rr tracks and property the prosecutor said the rr company owns it therefore John Q Public is "trespassing". I hiked the Long Trail in VT 4x, and 70% of the Appalachian Trail where crossings happen without big bad warnings or tickets.

As a chess player I like to hash things out but chose not to go to trial. Not sure how that would play out. Reduced the infraction by $100, not sure if I have a record now...

[JohnPCapitalist]

Reduced the infraction by $100, not sure if I have a record now...

IANAL, but...

The question is whether you were convicted of criminal trespass, in which case you would have a record, or whether it was an infraction, of which case you wouldn't. The latter is like a parking ticket.

Depending on the circumstances, they might have reduced an initial charge at the misdemeanor level to an infraction when they settled the case.

If they only talked about a fine and there was no mention of potential jail time at any point, that increases the odds that this was an infraction, but you should dig through the paperwork to find out what section you were charged and convicted under. In Connecticut, 53a-110a is an infraction, also called "simple trespass." 53a-107 through 109 are misdemeanor criminal trespass, with 109 being the least serious misdemeanor and 107 being the most serious.

[Manny]

"I can't be guilty of trespassing?"

Ummmm... Yeah, you can and are. PLEASE remember that in court, ignorance of the law is NOT a valid excuse. Please realize that due to my experiences in 70 years of life I have no reason to like cops in general, and I don't. I'd advise being quietly respectful in court and offering NO information. Keep your responses as short as possible. Let the judge determine that you're a good guy.

This is putting your faith in the mercy of the court and if the judge has gotten laid recently you should get a reduction and NO record. I hope this helps man, and I do agree with you. But fecal matter doth occur. Move on...