An Unnecessary Comment?

[EllieOPKS]

I agree with Sometimes Miss as far as discussing it with the prosecutor. He is really your best hope in eliminating the ticket and don't hesitate to tell him you have been unemployed for some time and this will cause an undue hardship. You can explain that you haven't had a ticket in decades because you are a safe an conscientious driver.
Now for the bad news - Judges in traffic court are not real judges in my opinion. They are cashiers. They work for the city and this is a revenue source for the city, plain and simple. You are guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent. I know because I have been there. If it reaches the "judge" ask for legal guidance and a court appointed attorney as you can't afford one. Be humble when you speak and you MIGHT get it dropped. Good luck.

[TxCassie]

A Police Officer has every right to ask and make note of any identifier of the person he/she detains. The Police Officer had every right to ask Susan if was she transgender,transsexual, or a crossdresser if he had any doubt. It seems he determined he made contact with a crossdresser and he noted it. Is the fact Susan is a crossdresser relevant to the violation, maybe not, but the information can be and in this case, is part of the arrest.

Susan was given the citation for violating a traffic code; i.e. not coming to a complete stop at a traffic device (aka, a stop sign). I don't remember Susan saying the police officer eluded she was stopped and cited because she was a crossdresser. If she fights the citation, the fact she is a crossdresser will not be a factor. From Susan's account, the information was used as an identifier alone.

I assure you when a Police Officer is watching for "rolling stops" or "drivers not wearing seat belts", it is because that is his/her job, as frivolous as you may view that to be, that's the job. Just think being the officer who has perform the task for 8,10,or 12 hours a day. Management may even instructed their officers to attend to these specific violations, so they are following their supervisor's directives. Something I think most of us can relate, having a boss.

Warnings are usually given for non moving violations. "Rolling Stops are moving violations and a citation is justified. While it is true, to issue a warning or citation is at the officer's discretion to a point for certain violations, a Police Officer is trained to decide if a warning or citation will be given before approaches your vehicle. Believe it or not. Of course, nothing is set in stone, but such a determination should be made to avoid putting his foot in his mouth when question in court. So, it is very possible that "Officer Friendly" already knew what he was going to do before he ever knew Susan was a crossdresser.

I can assure you many Police Officers would rather be doing other things than stand on a corner watching for as it was said, "Mickey Mouse" Stop Violation" which is incorrect, a "rolling stop" is a "moving violation" and is treated as such. But you know, if we as a society do not want Police Officers enforcing such "Mickey Mouse" laws, I suggest we get our state and local legislatures to pass laws more to our liking. In such, don't be crying foul, when those "Mickey Mouse Rolling Stops" escalate to out right disregard of traffic codes and we begin to have crashes bringing certain property damages and possible human injuries or worse. Until then, the Police will enact the laws passed by the state and local legislatures as instructed by management. Don't blame the officer for doing his/her job. The officer stated fact on the citation, nothing more will be made of the information unless the defendant wishes to escalate a non-issue.

Quotas, no, doing the best job one can do so I can keep my job and not trash the enormous number of training hours, and monetary and personal investment HE YES!

Susan, I advise you do not embellish your argument with a "joke" about the officer looking at your breast, unless you have a specific complaint. If you do, you can make a direct complaint to the Police Agency itself. From Susan account, I did not sense the officer acted unprofessionally. On contrary, a traffic violation occurred, a Police Officer view the violation, as required by law and employment requirements, the Police Officer detained the violator, the violator cited, and released without prejudice, that is as professional as it can get.

The truth and the merit of the stop should be sufficient for the judge to make a judgement on the validity of the citation.

[Eryn]

One thing that I haven't seen suggested yet is to visit the court that you will eventually appear in and see how the judge handles other ticket cases. If he sits there and says "guilty, guilty, guilty..." as each case comes up you have your answer. If he actually listens to what the defendants have to say and occasionally finds one not guilty you might have a chance.

Alternatives to court vary widely by state. Here in California we used to be able to do traffic school and have the ticket dismissed. Pretty soon the courts realized that they still wanted the money so now we have to pay the fine (oops, "Administrative fee") to the court and then do traffic school but the result still leaves the offense off your record. It's all about the revenue!

[BRANDYJ]

Cassie, you sound like a police officer. I agree with you to an extent. But officers have some discretion in most cities, county's and states. I'm sure it varies. I had a nephew that was a police officer killed in the line of duty, so I am very appreciative of the job they do. However, if I was a police officer, I'd have a problem writing tickets for such minor offenses if the subject was respectful when approached. The reason I'd have a problem is the price of some of these tickets, especially in today's economy. $250.00 for a rolling stop is outrageous and grossly unfair. If the subject literally ran through a stop sign, then maybe... The average worker can not afford this kind of government ripoff. I have talked to many officers that agree and do use discretion based on their own feelings about where and when the offense took place, and how cooperative the subject was during the stop. I was stopped by a Miccosukee Indian police officer for doing 74 MPH in a 45 MPH zone. He said the ticket was $384.00. I challenged him on exactly where he clocked me since when I saw him coming toward me, I thought I was short of the posted sign entering the jurisdiction of the reservation when I was clocked. That is a 70 MPH zone. He then said he was in a good mood and would do me a favor and give me a choice of a seat belt violation or the speeding ticket. I was still sitting in my van with the seat belt still buckled. The seat belt violation was only $28.00. Which one do ya think I chose? But he was doing it for selfish reasons. The speeding ticket demanded a court appearance. The Miccosukee Reservation in the middle of the Everglades is about 50 miles to downtown Miami. He did not want to make that drive to appear in court is the real reason he was being so nice. lol Yes they have a job to do, but they still can be selective in most jurisdictions. I know i would think twice before writing a ticket for a person in a 10 to 12 year old Ford Escort or similar older low price car then I would for someone in a 1-3 year old Mercedes. I don't want some hard working guy not be able tpo feed his family over a simple rolling stop violation. Fortunately there are many good cops that would agree.

In Florida the standard traffic ticket has a warning written on it. It says that if you elect to go to court and are found guilty, the fine can be assessed to as much as $500.00. That to me is blackmail! That get most people afraid to go to court, so guilty or not, they pay the fine instead.

[jillleanne]

Texas? " crossdresser?" Are you kidding me? You live in the land of lawsuits. Call a lawyer that will take the case with nothing up front. Texas is full of them. You will get a reward when it's all said and done.

[Debglam]

What if instead of "crossdresser" the ticket said "black" or "Mexican" or "Jew" under occupation? I believe Cassie makes some good points but I think the issuing officer may have screwed himself with this. Your appearance is completely irrelevant to whether or not you were guilty of a traffic infraction.

Find the local Lambda Law Center, and if you can't find them in the book, try the local LGBT Center and seek legal advice. If no luck, contact the local ACLU.

[TxCassie]

Actually Debglam, ethnicity and race are one of the identifiers on a Texas citation by law. The arresting officer did not screw himself, it happens all the time without incident. If the officer cannot determine the answers, he is free to ask. If the detainee refuses to answer, the officer can make his best judgement with a note of the refusal. If you present yourself as a crossdresser in public, and stopped by a Police Officer in the state of Texas, you very well can be identify as one on the citation. As far as calling a lawyer, Jillieanne, Susan is free do so if she wishes to incur that expense, for what purpose, I don't know. It will cost her more money to have the ticket dismissed (with no guarantee of the outcome) than to pay the fine. If you are referring to "fixing a ticket", that can be done, and those within the agencies involved usually are reprimanded or fired in time which is fact.

I don't know what reference you are using by saying Texas is a land of lawsuits. I would imagine it's not more,no less than any other state. If Susan feels she was discriminated because she was identified as a crossdresser, which she is, then she is free do so,but with the current political environment that has prevailed in this state for the last thirty years I don't see what valid argument Susan has to make. She may not like being identified in writing, but I think she'd be barking up a dead tree if she argues the Police Officer did anything illegal, discriminatory, or was denied any civil right or due process. The best I see is a complaint to the Dallas PD in which will not be successful because the officer did not violate any departmental policy. Frankly, from a law enforcement perspective, any information that gives a better description of the violator is welcome.

I recognize the "attitude" but the fact remains, we all are subject to the laws in the local we reside. When we are caught violating one of the laws, our power, our rights, are suspended and things we may not think is agreeable occur. Doesn't 'mean you have been discriminated or mistreated. It makes us angry, emotional, and revengeful. It is best cooler and more rational thought be called upon and look for the best possible outcome. We all have our agenda, Susan needs to do what is best for Susan, not be a poster child for anyone agenda or perspective. Eyes wide open Susan, no matter what you choose to do in your quest for a resolution.

[Debglam]

Cassie,

I'm guessing you are a LEO so I'm going to defer to your knowledge of TX law. I'm a lawyer out here in CA and I have seen unnecessary commentary on citations and reports get the officer in trouble. Typically, even with the comment, I would advise a client to just pay the damn ticket or infraction. It's just not worth the aggravation to fight it. Here, the OP seems to want to pursue the matter and mentions that she would have difficulty paying the fine. I would be arguing relevance of the comment and suggest fighting this in the court of public opinion. It maybe a legitimate comment on the ticket but it "looks" bad. Out here it could cause some heat for the issuing department.

[Jacqueline Winona]

JUst my opinions here: 1) It is unnecessary and irrelevant. 2) the Judge will probably have a bit more sympathy for you because of the comment, unless there's some reason in Texas why that comment is made it certainly looks like an attempt to humiliate you for no good reason. 3) You could talk to an attorney about this, but I don't see it getting far, it's hard to prove more obvious discrimination cases but you never know. The question is do you really want to go through this and relive it over and over again for several months? 4) My bet is the judge will look at your record, consider what is going on, and give you a more fair hearing than the cop would like. No guarantees of course, but stand up for yourself if you think you're right.

[Eryn]

Another consideration is why did the LEO choose to write "crossdresser" as an occupation? That likely isn't actually your occupation unless you happen to be Eddie Izzard!

[TxCassie]

because there is no other space for the identifier..that will not be an issue.

[Jacqueline Winona]

Cassie, the question I have is, why do you need "crossdresser" as an identifier in the first place? If he knows he is dealing with a crossdresser, he knows the gender of the person who is receiving the ticket. Does Tx. recognize a more fluid description of gender than most states? If so, I could understand this, but otherwise I just don't see why it is listed at all.

[ImAlexis]

What if instead of "crossdresser" the ticket said "black" or "Mexican" or "Jew" under occupation? I believe Cassie makes some good points but I think the issuing officer may have screwed himself with this. Your appearance is completely irrelevant to whether or not you were guilty of a traffic infraction.

Find the local Lambda Law Center, and if you can't find them in the book, try the local LGBT Center and seek legal advice. If no luck, contact the local ACLU.

Actually, in California there is a section for race, as well as height, weight, etc. I was originally outraged (outraged you hear) when I read the OP, then I realized something. If this goes to trial the officer is going to have to identify the OP as the defendant. Noting that the defendant was crossdressing all of a sudden seems to be a valid thing to record in the notes section, albeit not the occupation section.

[Tracii G]

I would contact LGBT and see if there is a fairness law in that municipality.
Deff go to court and take your chances.

[lingerieLiz]

Police officers watch intersections where people run red lights or stop signs. Others become more carefull seeing the pretty red and blue lights flashing. You may have felt that you stopped, but the officer didn't see it that way. He wrote you a ticket because that is his job. I understand the financial issues. The officer probably put crossdresser on the ticket so he would know you appeared to be female since he might not recognise you in male mode.

You can go to court and see how the judge works. He may be very liberal about throwing out cases or he could be a hard one. Rules in Texas say you have to decide if you are ging to take defensive driving before trying the trial. You can't try it and then say you want to take DD. If you loose your auto insurance may go up. If you take DD then it will go down.

As for the officer not showing up unless you have a lawyer your trial will be postponed. Usually the DA just says the officer has other duties.

[SusanLCD]

I appreciate the points of view expressed here. That's exactly what I was hoping you would all do. I needed the collective feedback from so many others who may think differently from me.

I want to clarify that the officer was not visibly or verbally disrespectful to me when writing the ticket. He treated me in a way that I suspect would have been the same had I been en drab. I tried to be equally respectful in my conversation with him. There would have been no gain in being confrontational.

I agree that he was doing his job as we (the taxpaying public) expect him to do it. I also realize that there is economic pressure to keep funds flowing toward the city's coffers. I don't know how that is communicated to him from his superiors, but, I'm confident that he would rather be riding around in the air conditioned police cruiser than standing outside in the 98F degree heat watching for someone to roll through a stop sign so he can issue a citation. The fact that he was doing so tells me that is one of the the priorities he was given.

The suggestion of discussing this with a prosecutor (there seem to be many in the Dallas system) ahead of court date is appealing, although I'm not sure how to identify or make an appointment with one. I'll investigate that further.

Again, thanks to all of you for your feedback and opinions. This helps a lot.

[Cheryl T]

He may not have verbally or visibly been disrespectful, but there was absolutely no need for that comment on the ticket. It had no relationship to anything in the traffic stop and had no business being written on the ticket.

[Ressie]

I had an officer jump in front of my car a few years ago and got a ticket for going 10 mph over the speed limit. It's a surprising way to get pulled over, yet I didn't feel the paranoia that I would normally get (being followed, lights go on etc.).

I was so surprised that I told the officer I was eating, (which I was). He wrote on the ticket that I was eating. Anyway, I think it's standard practice for them to write anything that is happening during the infraction. If there was a dog in the passenger seat, he would have noted that. I've been pulled over and ticketed so many times that it just seems to be part of life as a driver. The more one drives, the more chances one has of being pulled over. Sometimes it's just a tail light out that gives the cop a reason.

[Veronica27]

The crossdresser comment is a fair and legitimate one, given the fact that the officer could be called upon to identify you in court, should you claim that you were not the driver. Identification could be difficult, depending upon your level of passability. The relevance of the fact that it was written in a space for employer depends upon several factors, such as the mood and opinion of the judge, the available space for comments, and any departmental rules regarding how the tickets are to be filled out. Also, ability to pay the fine does not usually carry much weight in court, again depending upon the attitude of the judge.

Most winnable cases are ones in which the infraction itself is the emphasis of the defence. It is usually very difficult to prove these things one way or the other, so the officer's word is usually given more credibility than the defendant's. The best hope is to show that he erred in some aspect of the situation. I once fought a ticket for making an illegal left turn from travelling eastbound to proceed northbound. I went to court armed with facts such as the weather (the middle of a snow storm), the lack of visibility of the signs, and the fact that I was looking for the first intersection at which a left turn was allowed. Fortunately, the officer stated that the weather was cloudy with good visibility, and that he was parked 30 metres south of the intersection. I simply mentioned the storm, which was a matter of record, and the fact that he was parked north of the intersection, which was what enabled him to pull me over without a chase. Case dismissed, and as I walked out of court I could hear the other officers present kidding my accuser for his faux pas.

Veronica

[tgirl2b]

you mentioned you had a tg friend with you ,Is that not a witness

[ImAlexis]

you mentioned you had a tg friend with you ,Is that not a witness

Is the witness going to testify that the OP was not violating the law? Furthermore, the courts aren't a "majority rules" when it comes to witnesses. The friend has a reason to be bias with the friend's testimony. The officer, arguably, does not.

[lingerieLiz]

I'd get over it and pay unless you have a very good objective argument why he was wrong. Talking to the prosicuter is not going to do you any good. I've seen people try that and they almost never win. He has a job to do also. Since you have the time go sit through traffic court for a couple of days and listen to what people tell him and what the judge says and does. Be sure to find out which judge will hear your case. They all are different. I've been on both sides of the argument.

As for quotas, most municipalities don't have them. Except for speed trap cities. The officer doesn't get to choose his assignment most of the time. The shift commander gets the assignments and tells the officers what to do. Running radar was not the most fun assignment nor was watching an intersection. If you were assigned something the brass knew what the results should be. Writing a few tickets durring an 8 hour shift was not going to fly for very many days when everyone else issued twice as many. You do your job.

You can hire a lawyer who specializes in killing tickets. I knew one years ago and it was interesting how he worked it. If it is avoiding the ticket then you need a lawyer. If you want the cheapest way out then take defensive driving.

By the way let us know what happens.
Good Luck

[DonnaT]

Here's the deal. If you go to court and lose, you'll pay the fine and court costs.

The court will be packed with other offenders, will you be ok with discussing crossdressing in open court, if you decide to bring it up?

The ticket should have a box marked to indicate whether you can call to determine the amount of the fine. With a clean 40 year record, your insurance shouldn't go up, but it can if you plead guilty by paying the fine.

Beating the ticket?

It's possible. I wouldn't count on the officer not showing. I imagine he gave a few tickets on that corner.

Assume the officer was not watching your lane only, but was also monitoring several lanes. He could have easily missed your stop. Reasonable doubt.

Any obstructions to the officers view? Street signs, etc.

Is there a wide white strip indicating where you are supposed to stop painted in the lane? If so, you can tell the court you stopped where indicated by that line, and the officer apparently missed your stop, and instead saw you easing forward after the stop, which is how you normally move through such an intersection to avoid accidents.

Especially if there were a number of pedestrians present. You can never tell when someone will dart out in front of you these days.

Your record will show you've been a safe driver having no accidents.

If there is no painted line tell the court you made two stops, then eased forward, like above.

Of course, you could always argue physics.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loca...147450815.html

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.0162v2.pdf

[donnatracey]

He may not have verbally or visibly been disrespectful, but there was absolutely no need for that comment on the ticket. It had no relationship to anything in the traffic stop and had no business being written on the ticket.

Have you not read Cassie's explanations?......

[Karen Francis]

Tx Cassie has it exactly right. The fact about your driving record is irrelevant in court. Your MUST say in court that you specifically stopped at the stop sign. Anything less is an admission of guilt. Let the judge decide who is telling the truth. When the officer stopped you he didn't know you were a crossdresser. He stopped a vehicle he saw run a stop sign. Bringing up the crossdressing subject would probably backfire, depending on the judge and his/her attitude.