$100 Citation and almost 10 cents!

[Tom_in_CA]

That's odd, this old link just got referenced, directed at me, in the general "metal detecting" forum too.

My reply to it, as I stated on that forum, is that this ticket was for DIGGING, not detecting. So those that take the stance that you need to attain permission (or inquire about prohibitions) on all public property, will have a problem with this. Even if this guy had confirmed there were no prohibitions on detecting in his town's park, it wouldn't have mattered. He wasn't ticketed for detecting, but for digging.

What are we to do? Start inquiring not only about whether or not we can detect, but also inquire "are there prohibitions on digging?" Be honest, is there ANY city in the USA that would tell you "sure, go ahead and dig in the park!" Woohooo! Oh, and when you go make that inquiry, be sure to show up with a shovel in your hand, lest they not fully understand the implications of your question. Make sure they're aware of ARPA, buried PG&E power lines you'll be sure to be careful not to hit, etc....

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[George (MN)]

Naperville has experienced rapid growth, over 57,000 new residents since 1990. This could mean they might not be able to be as selective in hiring new officers as they would like. I have heard of officers in suburbs with growing pains not knowing the wording of the law, let alone how to interpret it.

Call police dept & ask "could I be fined for detecting in Naperville parks?" The person
that answers the phone will most likely ask the dispatcher. The police generally know that detecting involves removing both surface & sub-surface coins, etc. You might ask if they say no digging if that includes screwdrivers or just cutting plugs & if this also applies to schoolyards.

The laws that say "no digging" almost always predate the development of metal detectors, & were intended to prevent damage & injury. Also, the no removing of anything was generally intended to refer to natural objects & park equipment & structures, not coins.

If park & rec somehow makes police enforce letter of law rather than spirit of law, maybe you could try to change non-removal law to exclude coins & other low value man-made objects, as long as no damage is done. Many police detect, so they generally look the other way unless damage is reported & might even help change the law?

Usually, city park & rec says mission is to provide widest possible variety of activities. Detecting is rarely prohibited city-wide, but sometimes 1 park is off limits as a historic site, confusing detectorists & maybe even some police to think the ban is for all parks.

You might try asking the park & rec people if it is illegal to remove pulltabs, bottlecaps, rusty nails & sharp pieces of cans. If they say that's legal, you might ask if you can also remove other man-made objects of low value, such as coins. HH, George (MN)

 

[lou423]

As usual, big government encroaches into our daily lives.
Metal detecting is not a crime. Our elected officials make it a crime.
It is our fault. We keep electing the same people over and over.



In Chattanooga, the new sheriff, a mister Long, just elected by the people last year,
was arrested by the FBI for extortion on local business owners and
giving guns to felons in exchange for money.

 

[I_Dig_NYC]

Sounds like you were the victim of an over zealous cop with too many blank pages in his ticket book that needed filling up. Maybe he was bucking for a raise or for that seargents position? No offense to the cops on here.
I know here in New York City they are pretty strict on where you can dig. Lucky for me that there are plenty of real law breakers here for them to worry about me and my detector..

 

[firedup]

Just getting started,all good information to me. THANKS!

 

[teverly]

We didn't get charged with destruction of property at all. We MIGHT get charged for that if the sod we turned turns brown and doesn't regrow. We did follow the code fo MD'ing by filling our holes back in so you could hardly see where we dug. (besides asking the land owner, we pay taxes, figured we "owned" it) The 50 dollar citation was for digging alone. They must consider "turning sod" as digging.

Here is a story i heard from texas a few years back:The city had laws against digging,even on private property.So one of the guys that had gotten busted for detecting saw the city doing work on a water line and called the cops.
Turned out that the cops made the workers stop digging as the law made no exception for anyone...So the detecting clubs and the city worked things out...
I can not vouch for this,but the person telling the story was a long time detectorist and had fought for detectorist rights for a long time.

 

[rmptr]

I guess I'm bumping this back up....

Probably a good thing, since it's summer!

Perhaps the officer was a bit of a dufus for pressing such a matter instead of getting out there and fighting crime.
Maybe it was an 'off day' for him and he didn't quite feel up to dealing with more important evils within society.
OR, maybe he has his own metal detector, AND would like to detect at that park!

He didn't take $50 from each of you, he only did his job and cited you according to his book of municipal ordnances. Many of them are ridiculous, and frequently taken out of context.

Take the opportunity to visit with a clerk of the court, enter a plea of 'Not Guilty of a Crime' and ask for a trial.
A court trial is sufficient.

Chances are, the complaining party (the officer) will not even show, in court! DISMISSED!

The muni court administrator, (judge), will hear your side of the story when you visit with him.
Take any kind of evidence you feel may be pertinent and attempt to present it all, before him.
Go in the company of your friends!

It's most likely the administrator will listen to you for a bit, if you are respectful of his authority, and he'll take the matter under consideration and offer to mail you his decision within a few weeks.
Chances are he'll dismiss in the interest of justice, and the police force may be given an advisory NOT to cite citizens without provocation.

If you get an adverse decision, an appeal is NOT a difficult process to prepare.
It's kinda fun learning about new stuff.

...If everyone who is cited for small infractions were to ask for their day in court, it would put the system into gridlock worse than it already is.

Police would go back to fighting crime instead of collecting revenue.
Most, that I know, would strongly prefer that, anyway.

Best,
Recovers Many Pull Tab Relics

 

[treasurefiend]

I live in Cook Co. IL, just so you know--- you cannot detect in the forest preserves in Du Page Co. at all!!!!

 

[EDDE]

Last Active: Oct 09, 2007, 07:26:44 PM

 

[jeff of pa]

yes this is an old post.
but when I think aout it they should have
handed them some cards & said
"we will help you if you need a detector for an Investigation,
We charge $100.00 an hour"

 

[jim4silver]

The muni court administrator, (judge), will hear your side of the story when you visit with him.
Take any kind of evidence you feel may be pertinent and attempt to present it all, before him.
Go in the company of your friends!

It's most likely the administrator will listen to you for a bit, if you are respectful of his authority, and he'll take the matter under consideration and offer to mail you his decision within a few weeks.
Chances are he'll dismiss in the interest of justice, and the police force may be given an advisory NOT to cite citizens without provocation.

If you get an adverse decision, an appeal is NOT a difficult process to prepare.
It's kinda fun learning about new stuff.

You must live in a much different jurisdiction than I do. Bench trials (where the Judge decides both guilt and punishment) rarely result in not guilty verdicts where the person clearly violated the law. If the judge wants to be nice, he will usually find the person guilty and give them a suspended sentence or impose a minimal fine, but that's it. Also, appeals, as well as the trial itself, should be left in the hands of competent counsel. I have seen some attorneys not even know how to properly prepare an appellate brief (in more serious state matters) and get their appeal bounced because they failed to comply with local rules. Maybe in a minor municipal case it is easier, but it is still too much for 99.9% of the population.

The old wives tale about cops not showing up for trial is only accurate in rare instances in most jurisdictions as well. Most prosecutors here subpoena weeks in advance of a hearing and the cop gets paid to show up (usually is overtime for the cop, so he or she might even get time and a half).

Never represent yourself in a criminal or city ordinance violation case if you want to fight the charge. Pro se defendants (those who represent themselves) never know what they are doing and almost always lose because they lack any understanding of the rules of evidence. It is aggravating as hell too when a pro se defendant thinks he knows what he is doing and tries to imitate what he sees lawyers do on TV. Of course this does not apply in small claims cases where the judge will give a person more leeway in not knowing proper procedure and rules.


Jim

 

[rmptr]

Jim, if I spent an hour re-reading your reply to mine, I could probably find something to debate over.

Just think...

If EVERYONE went in and plead Not Guilty, and represented themselves before a court trial, or even jury trial, what the consequences would be.

I am of the opinion the cash cow would come to a screeching halt.
I HAVE had a judge come out and personally ask me to postpone because of a schedule conflict.
(Like a dummy, I waived time.)
And he slaughtered me when I came back!

At least here in the USA you can rest assured they MAY shoot you, but they probably won't eat you.

Best,
rmptr

 

[jim4silver]

Jim, if I spent an hour re-reading your reply to mine, I could probably find something to debate over.

Just think...

If EVERYONE went in and plead Not Guilty, and represented themselves before a court trial, or even jury trial, what the consequences would be.

I am of the opinion the cash cow would come to a screeching halt.
I HAVE had a judge come out and personally ask me to postpone because of a schedule conflict.
(Like a dummy, I waived time.)
And he slaughtered me when I came back!

At least here in the USA you can rest assured they MAY shoot you, but they probably won't eat you.

Best,
rmptr

rmptr,

I think if everyone did what you suggest, it would cause havoc initially in the court system. But it would not take long for the court system to adjust and find ways to handle the overload. Maybe appoint new judges, etc. To solve the problem, the judges would probably start giving jail time in cases where normally a person would get probation or a fine, to send a message to those who where requesting trials just to clog things up. The average joe would change his mind fast and accept a fine instead of going to jail. Of course if the offense did not include jail, the judge could hit the person with the highest fine possible, and tag on whatever other punishment available, community service, etc.

If a person really wants to fight a criminal case, they should hire an attorney. Unfortunately it costs money, but if you need a medical procedure would you do it yourself or go to the doctor? I have seen relatively intelligent non-lawyers try to handle their case on their own and lose just because they did not know the rules of evidence and proper procedure.

If someone actually has a valid defense and cannot afford counsel in a municipal case, then maybe they can handle it alone and with a sympathetic judge get a not guilty. But if they don't have good evidence to present showing they are not guilty, they will probably lose (yes the burden is on the gov to prove you guilty, not you having to prove innocence, but in reality a defendant is going to have to prove his defense to win in my experience).

Jim

 

[rmptr]

Again, your experience seems to trump my own!

Good presentation, Jim.

How did you suspect I self-medicate?
(Not doing so well at it, either!)

Best,
rmptr

 

[rmptr]

Yet I just recalled this...


In Yolo County, if it's a question of doing the jail time or paying the fine, they're taking the 30 days because they know they'll be free in three.

In Sacramento, the jailers tell the cops to hold off on things like domestic violence sweeps until they know they'll have enough space to accommodate the spousal abusers.

In Placer County, one of the top early-release jurisdictions in the state, more than 2,000 inmates skated out of jail last year before they served a collective total of 94 years of the time they owed.

In El Dorado County, the jail space shortage is such that even a sentenced felon has a chance to hit the streets before his time is up.

Everywhere you look in the Sacramento area and around the state, county jails are so full that sheriffs are being forced to let inmates out early or to adjust their policies so that they don't even try to hold their lowest-level miscreants.

Last year in California, the 58 counties released 86,064 convicted inmates from jail before they had completed their sentences, according to California State Sheriffs Association data submitted to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The jails released another 103,859 local inmates before trial because they didn't have any room.
<eof>

And I'll admit, my afterthought is a clear example of doing a poor job of marshalling evidence,
as you had described in your post.

rmptr

 

[kakcsdad]

what an ahole.