Can a police officer issue a ticket for an accident he didn't witness?

Question

I was recently in a small accident. The police officer gave out a ticket to myself and the driver of the other car, though he wasn't on the scene during the accident and was basing the tickets on our statements and the witnesses. I know that laws vary from state to state, so I would appreciate answers pertaining only to New Jersey.

Answer 1

sure...they always make stuff up anyway......

Answer 2

Yes..

Answer 3

Yes. I was in a accident less than a month ago and the cop came like 20 minutes later :( but he gave the other guy a ticket for careless driving cuz he crashed into me.

Answer 4

The police file a report based on the evidence they see before them, including witness and subject statements, skid marks, impact damage on the vehicles, etc.  It is NOT their job to say what happened, but there are times when the evidence before them just doesn't leave a lot of room for questions.

They are an investigative branch of the local government and their job is to conduct investigations and report any probable violations to the authorities who take matters to court for evidentiary findings.

Answer 5

Yes they can. Talking to you, the other driver, witnesses and looking at the crash site. It's called an investigation..............

Answer 6

Traveling is a Right

For many years professionals within the criminal justice system have acted upon the belief that traveling by motor vehicle upon the roadway was a privilege that was gained by a citizen only after approval by their respective state governments in the form of a permit or drivers license.

Legislators, police officers, and court officials are being made aware that there are court decisions disproving the opinion that traveling is a privilege that requires government approval.

"Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 22.

("Regulated" here means traffic safety enforcement: stop lights, signs, etc.)

"The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 179.

State Police powers extends only to immediate theats to the public safety, health, and welfare; which driving and speeding are not. Supreme Court

It could not be stated more conclusively that citizens of the states have a right to travel, without approval or restrictions (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S. Constitution. Here are other court decisions that expound the same facts:

"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to move from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the 14th amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." Schactman v. Dulles, 96 App DC 287, 293.

Traveling in an automobile on the public roads was not a threat to the public safety or health and constituted no hazard to the public. As such a traveler owe nothing more than due care as regard to tort or negligence to the public and the owner owed nothing or no other duty to the public e.g. the state. He and his oil having equal rights to be on the roadways and highways as horses and wagons etc. and the same right is still a substantive rule that speeding, running stop signs, traveling without license plates or traveling without registration are not threats to the public and are not arresting offenses.  U. S. Supreme Court

As hard as it is for those in law enforcement to believe, there is no room for speculation in these court decisions. The American citizen does indeed have the inalienable right to use the roadways unrestricted in any manner as long as they are not damaging or violating property or rights of other’s.

Government, in requiring the people to file for drivers license, vehicle registrations, mandatory insurance, and demanding they stop for vehicle inspections, roadblocks, etc. are restricting and therefore violating the peoples’ common law right to travel.

Is this a new legal interpretation on this subject? Apparently not. The American Citizens and Lawmen Association, in conjunction with the U.S. Federal Law Research Center are presently involved in studies in several areas involving questions on constitutional law. One of the many areas under review is that of the citizen’s right to travel. A spokesman stated in an interview:

"Upon researching this subject over many months, substantial case law has presented itself that completely substantiates the position that the ‘right to travel unrestricted upon the nations highways’ is and always has been a fundamental right of every Citizen."

This means that the beliefs and opinions of our state legislators, the courts, and those of us involved in the law enforcement profession have acted upon for years have been in error. Researchers armed with actual facts state that U.S. case law is overwhelming. To restrict in any fashion the movement of the individual American, in free exercise of the right to travel upon the roadways (excluding commerce, which the state legislatures are correct in regulating), is a serious breach of those freedoms secured by the U.S. Constitution, as well as most state constitutions.

Our system of law dictates that there is only one way to remove a right belonging to the people. That is by a person knowingly waiving a particular right.

Some of the confusion in our present system has arisen because many millions of people have waived their right to travel unrestricted, and opted into the jurisdiction of the state. Those who have knowingly given up these rights are legally regulated by state law, and must obtain permits, registrations, insurance, etc.

Every police officer should keep the following U.S. court ruling in mind before issuing citations:

"The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." Miller v. U.S., F.2d 486, 489.

Reprinted from a special edition of "Aid and Abet" bulletin #11, P.O. Box 8787, Phoenix, AZ. 85066, by Officer Jack McLamb.

It is important to be aware of a different point of view about traffic since a near police state exists on America’s highways today. Traffic Support Services’ goal is to reestablish the RIGHT to travel!

Answer 7

The police don't determine fault unless there's obvious negligence, or someone admits it. Insurance companies determine liability.

Answer 8

Yes, they can.  They can base it on, witness testimony, skid marks and the conditions of the cars at the accident scene.  It happens all the time and most experienced officers are very good at it.

Answer 9

What kind of ticket did you get? And what kind did the other driver get?

Answer 10

Most likely yes. The officer is basing his ticket on evidence of the accident, plus from probable witnesses that gave their acccount of what they saw, and maybe video from an unnamed business or person(s). Your job is to prove your case, and that you were not at fault. Have your witness testify on your behalf, and prepare for a legal battle if the other person involved contests what you say. Good Luck

Answer 11

yes certainly

Answer 12

Yes, they can! All they really need to do is look at the remnants of the accident and listen to your stories to know who is at fault. I mean when you think about it how many officers just happen to be at the scene of an accident?

Answer 13

Yes, they can issue tickets if they didn't witness the accident. In fact, that's how most of them are done. They go based off of involved drivers and witnesses.