
A Woman Who Spent Six Years Fighting a Traffic Stop - danso
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/08/10/the-woman-who-spent-six-years-fighting-a-traffic-stop
======
rayiner
> Larvadain, who is now 74, worries that young lawyers are less concerned with
> right and wrong than with chasing dollars. Although Patricia Parker’s
> lawsuit against Woodworth offered small hope of a big payday, Larvadain
> agreed to represent her. “Because I saw wrong had taken place. And I knew
> someone had to take a stand.”

I know a lot of young lawyers who'd love to take on a case like this one. But
matching people who need help to lawyers who have the time and institutional
resources to take on these projects _pro bono_ isn't easy when you're talking
about folks wronged in rural Louisiana.

Also, I think there's something of a hesitancy to for business law firms to
add suing municipalities to their pro bono docket. Which is a shame--a few New
Orleans firms building up a pipeline of pro bono suits against places like
Woodsworth could do a lot of good.

EDIT: If you're interested in (potential) justice porn, it's worth following
_Fant v. City of Ferguson_. The DOJ gave a lot of ammunition to plaintiffs'
lawyers when it concluded that the city was systematically using fines and
other police actions as revenue sources, particularly against poor black
people. It's Woodsworth writ large. The complaint is here:
[http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/02/08/us/ferguson-
co...](http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/02/08/us/ferguson-
complaint.html). The docket is available here on Justia:
[https://dockets.justia.com/docket/missouri/moedce/4:2015cv00...](https://dockets.justia.com/docket/missouri/moedce/4:2015cv00253/138015).
With her opinion last month on reconsideration, the judge has effectively
denied the city's motion to dismiss. Dispositive motions are due May of next
year, so we'll likely see by then whether this is granted class status. If so,
things will get interesting.

~~~
edw519
First:

 _...young lawyers are less concerned with right and wrong than with chasing
dollars._

then:

 _But matching people who need help to lawyers who have the time and
institutional resources to take on these projects pro bono isn 't easy..._

Sounds like an excellent opportunity for a startup that is more concerned with
right and wrong than with chasing dollars.

Any takers?

~~~
sandworm101
Right and wrong is also a subject of opinion. Even the story in the OP is
based on some real lawbreaking. We might all agree that these traffic stops go
way to far, but they often do start with legitimate infractions (no insurance
etc). Perhaps the better answer is to change these petty laws, or amalgamate
them into something less difficult to obey. Frankly, the american approach of
license+registration+insurance on three separate plans with three separate
expiry dates is a minefield.

~~~
chetanahuja
_" We might all agree that these traffic stops go way to far, but they often
do start with legitimate infractions (no insurance etc)."_

Umm... Did you read the story? The original stop was illegal to begin with
(that is, _the cop_ was doing an illegal activity). Then the driver in
question had all her papers in order (which she proved to the Mayor/Judge with
documentation). But the fine was not just not dropped... they _arrested_ her
for not paying that unjust fine and threw her in prison for 25 days.

~~~
sandworm101
Lawyers can argue about the stop, but it happened. They happen all the time.
The cop might not have had probable cause, he stopped the car for no better
reason than he wanted to, but that isn't the cause of all the difficulties. It
hit the fan when the cop starts running the paperwork.

"When Godwin ran Parker’s license, the computer said it was suspended. He also
said the registration card was expired."

That's the root problem, not the stop. There was, from the cops perspective, a
real infraction here. So rather than debate the constitutionality of the stop,
we should address the overly-complex system that resulted in this perceived
infraction. If the computer was wrong, fix the machine. If the paperwork was
actually expired, why are they still using paper? If we don't want cops
issuing onerous citations for these things, change the laws so they cannot. We
should not patch over bad laws by simply not enforcing them.

In many jurisdictions (ie mine) the entire stop would have been perfectly
legal. We display out registration/insurance details on a license plates. So
cops are perfectly justified in pulling cars over with expired
registration/insurance/plates. They need not speculate. They cannot claim
suspicion or the need to check paperwork when the plate shows validity. And
and driver stepping into a car can see on the plate whether everything is
correct. Every cop should be able to lookup a plate and check all the
paperwork prior to pulling anyone over.

~~~
anu_gupta
> That's the root problem, not the stop.

No, the root problem is that a police officer decided to unconstitutionally
stop a car with 3 African Americans, because they had committed the crime of
being African American.

~~~
sophacles
This discussion of the root problem is useful, but let's not let it become a
red herring or distraction from the rest of the problem: I mean even if the
stop happened and was legal, there is a real and valid problem in the way the
trial occured, once she presented the proof of valid license and insurance,
that should have been the end of it - including a reimbursement for expenses
incurred.

I am curious about racial motivations and racial disparity though. It might be
reasonable to think that the cop didn't pull over the people due to their
race, as it was dark and I don't know if there was any way he could have seen
that well. I wonder though if there is a way to find out a stops vs "run the
license" ratio and if it indicates any racial biases. The run the license part
should be gleanable from logs, but the number of stops part may be difficult -
I don't know how those are recorded and how accurately they are recorded.

~~~
anu_gupta
From the article (and the actual judgement the article links to)

> Absent a traffic violation, so far as can be gleaned from this record, the
> only visible attribute of Parker and her passengers that might have
> distinguished them from other motorists turning on Methodist Parkway was
> they are all African Americans. There simply is no other distinguishing
> thing that can be surmised.

------
ars
I've always felt that all fines - for any cause - should be turned over to the
state. Even simple parking tickets.

The state should fund the court for hearing those cases (but not enforcement).

Then we'll see if cities really care about safety or about money.

~~~
dibujante
Probably the money should simply be destroyed. There's too much conflict of
interest when law enforcement can become a profit centre.

~~~
sliverstorm
You could say the same thing about alcohol & vice taxes.

It might make more sense than I realize, but destroying punitive damages seems
like a terrible option. Damages are meant to penalize the offender; destroying
wealth penalizes everyone.

~~~
ahallock
So how do you remove the conflict of interest? They have every incentive to
abuse these revenue (more like theft) streams and become dependent on them.

~~~
dghughes
Give or take demerit points, in my area of the world there are 9 points and
when gone you no longer have a driver's license. It's for severe infractions
such as DUI, reckless driving, excessive speed.

Although for a speeding ticket one point is harsh maybe 1/2 point or 1/4 point
if less than 30km/h over the posted speed with a 10km/h grace (speedometer
error/wind etc.).

No monetary gain or loss for either side no incentive to catch speeders going
a little bit over the limit and a big incentive as a driver to not get caught.

~~~
uxp
My area of the world (Utah, USA) also has a licensing point system. Accrue
enough points and your license gets suspended.

Problem is, like my wife a decade ago when she tried to get her license
renewed, it had been revoked a year prior to that because of excessive
speeding tickets and due to her being young and moving a lot managed to not
receive the postal notification (or she ignored it, you can choose). What do
you do when people just start ignoring the points? Have more points that
accrue on subsequent violations that further prevent someone from renewing
their license after a probationary period? What if they ignore that point
system also?

The executors of the Justice system of the United States relies almost
entirely on trust. It's trivial to break trust.

~~~
allannienhuis
Up here in BC, we have a points system for traffic violations. A typical
speeding-just-a-bit ticket would earn you 3 points. But 3 points get removed
from your balance every year, so it's like being able to have one 'free'
speeding ticket per year. When your points exceed 3 points your insurance
rates go up and if I remember right there is a threshold at which you can no
longer purchase insurance. So the points are a pretty good enforcement system
for most people. Of course it still won't stop the people willing to drive
without insurance or a valid license, but that's a different (smaller)
category of offenders :).

------
jugad
It boils my blood to read about such incidences.

US is turning into the India that I came here to avoid. Policemen in India
will stop you at their whim and find a reason to fine you (exact a bribe
really).

A cop followed my car in Salt lake city for 10 miles before he stopped me for
turning on my blinkers for only 2 seconds before changing lanes. Apparently
the law in Utah says that it should be 3 seconds. I wish I had recorded that
incident, simply because it is so unbelievable.

The incident smelled racist, and made sure I will never live in Utah / Salt
Lake City.

~~~
nitrogen
Did you have an out of state plate? It frustrates me how often one hears
stories about out-of-towners being singled out.

------
netfire
“Godwin’s testimony shows a complete lack of knowledge of the restraints
imposed upon police conduct by the U.S. Constitution and the laws and
Constitution of the State of Louisiana.”

This. The 4th amendment protects against seizure (which a police stop
constitutes) without reasonable suspicion of a crime. The problem is, unless
you are fined, as the woman was in this case, and then appeal, what recourse
do you have?

Is there some way to seek damages for the violation of your constitutional
rights? (even if the inconvenience is minor) It seems like this problem would
go away if the police department and city had to pay for their violations of
the constitution instead of just forfeiting potential money from fines.

~~~
ryanhuff
There are "stops" all the time without suspicion of a crime. As a passenger, I
went through a sobriety check point last week, where the police officer asked
for ID, and then asked the driver if he had been drinking. Every car that
passed through that part of town during that hour or so did the same.

~~~
photosinensis
The key there is that every car that passed through that part of town during
that hour or so did the same.

You can set up checkpoints as per Federal law (though your state may vary--
some states have provisions against it, in which case your recourse is to
state, not Federal law). However, these checkpoints must be indiscriminate:
they have to stop everybody that passes them while they're active.

A cop cannot just pull a single car over to see what's going on. He has to
have reason.

------
qiqing
Wow. "A woman told the paper that she was pulled over by Woodworth police
while in labor — and was kept for more than a half hour."

~~~
bernardom
Yeah, that got to me. I spent a good few minutes wondering whether I'd
physically assault a police officer who was preventing my wife from getting to
the hospital.

~~~
mikeash
I wonder if it would be useful to call 911 in that situation. Even though the
authorities are involved, getting some more people aware of what's going on
might put a stop to the nonsense.

~~~
icebraining
It might help - but then again, it might not:
[http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/547/t...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-
archives/episode/547/transcript)

------
gknoy
In case you miss the link inside the article, be sure to read the ruling[0].
It is both thorough and entertaining.

[http://www.la3circuit.org/Opinions/2015/03/030415/14-0943opi...](http://www.la3circuit.org/Opinions/2015/03/030415/14-0943opi.pdf)

------
11thEarlOfMar
Read the judges findings from the appeal. The article did not even mention the
purported signed confession:

"Ms. Parker admitted that she made the initials “PP” but stated that none of
the other handwriting was hers. She also indicated that none of the other
handwriting was on the document, including Ms. Gunter’s signature, when she
filled in the initials “PP.”"

Woodsworth went so far as to commit fraud in order to take money from Parker.

[http://www.la3circuit.org/Opinions/2015/03/030415/14-0943opi...](http://www.la3circuit.org/Opinions/2015/03/030415/14-0943opi.pdf)

(thx gknoy)

------
drzaiusapelord
I used to live near a town like this. Thornton, Illinois is the site of a
giant limestone quarry and there's one major road you can drive on to get
around the quarry if you don't want to get on the expressway (which is a bit
out of the way depending on where you're coming from). These streets have 25
or 30mph signs, yet are wide and underutilized enough to easily be 35-45mph
streets. Drivers unfamiliar with the area would be taken off-guard by these
slow speed zones as they enter from neighboring towns. The police there pull
people over for 2 or 3 mph over regularly.

According to IDOT, there were 2,334 traffic stops in Thornton in 2014. This
town's population? About 2,300. That's one stop per man, woman, and child in
this town! This is naked profiteering and pretty much all small towns in
strategic areas turn into police-led profit centers. The real question is why
isn't anyone stopping this?

~~~
wanderingstan
It would be nice if gps apps (Google, Waze, Apple Maps, etc) would start
showing this on their maps, and effectively treating them as a toll road. All
the needed data is publicly available: town population, number of tickets,
percentage of town revenue coming from fines, etc.

If the law isn't going to require signage for speed traps, the software can.

~~~
redblacktree
Waze would inform you, (assuming enough nearby users) but not in any special
way. You'd just see a cop ahead.

By the way, if you aren't using Waze on trips of any significant length, I
highly recommend it. It's good for more than just cop-spotting. You'll also
know when a semi loses a tire in the road.

------
542458
Wow - that's a much more interesting article than the title would imply. I
wonder if anything changed in Woodworth in response to the verdict (I doubt
that it did, but still).

~~~
repsilat
The article seemed to try to indicate that Parker's (outragrous) treatment was
indicative of a more systemic problem, but I didn't think the argument held up
very well.

So Woodworth collects a lot of revenue by enforcing the speed limits. Good for
them. What is the connection to Parker's case? Is it just the implication that
the town is too focussed on revenue-raising? That's pretty weak.

As is the implication of racism, really. This one incident seemed _arbitrary_
, not targeted. Again, without evidence of a wider pattern this just seems
like one (egregiously) bad case of motivated reasoning in a town that
(charitably put) seems generally to be interested in upholding the law to the
letter.

~~~
cperkins
This is an issue that people are only recently getting a grip on. In isolation
all these cases seem arbitrary and not targeted. And, absent any overt action,
it can seem difficult to ascribe racism. Additionally the court system has
made it very difficult to use "statistical" evidence in individual cases.

But, when one steps back and look at the statistics, an overwhelming number of
practices by law enforcement are disproportionately applied to people of
color. This includes "fishing trip" stops, "consent" pretext searches, as well
as unequal application in the court system (bail practices, pressuring to
plead guilty by "overcharging", and more).

------
tempestn
> On Feb. 18, she provided the documentation. Her license had, indeed, been
> valid. But the mayor didn’t drop the two license-related charges. Instead,
> he “asked her how much money she had with her,” an appeals court wrote. “She
> responded she only had about $300. The Mayor informed her she could at least
> pay the unlawful use of a driver’s license charge that day.”

> So she did, paying $215.

> But despite what she paid, despite the documentation she showed, despite the
> registration count having earlier been dismissed, she was presented this
> same day with a bill of information, saying Woodworth was charging her with
> all four counts originally written up by the officer. She was given until
> March 18 to pay whatever money was still owed.

Uh... what? I didn't expect the shakedown to be quite that blatant.

------
barsonme
> in fiscal year 2006, each officer wrote an average of 1,539 tickets.

Assuming a 2080 hour work year, that's 1.3 tickets per hour. To my (admittedly
naive) idea of how many tickets police write per hour, that's nuts.

~~~
NathanKP
Your ratio is reversed. It is 1.3 hours per ticket, or .73 tickets per hour.

------
cafard
Good for Lavardain and the appellate court.

------
joesmo
"The case also exemplifies a suspicion that, at times, law enforcement’s
motive is profit."

"At times"? Really?

I think they mean all the time for a growing majority of districts.

------
breakingcups
“You can’t help it that you’re a racist. Your daddy’s a racist. Your children
will be racist. It’s in your blood.”

Now, is it me, or does that sound racist?

~~~
kragen
No, not unless the person who said it is attributing the racism to a race,
rather than a family.

------
xacaxulu
This is quintessential americana.

------
rasz_pl
Life imitates art? This is straight from 'Nothing But Trouble' (1991)

------
travelervdriver
it is completely unlawful to require non-commercial travellers on public roads
to have licenses, insurance, inspections, and registrations, let alone subject
them to stops, arrests and tickets or fines when no crime has been committed.
unless actual or imminent destruction of property, or violation of anothers'
rights has occurred, there is no valid cause of action. no right for a stop.
traveling on public roads is not a privilege granted by the government [1].

it's already been adjudicated, by the supreme court, and state supreme courts,
many times [2]. it seems, however, that the irrational fear of chaos and harm
that might result from people travelling without government licensing and
regulation is enough to keep these absurd and sometimes incredibly harmful and
costly situations going for the foreseeable future.

ask yourself; would you spend tens of thousands on a vehicle only to crash it
into others' property, or use it to intentionally murder or otherwise harm
others? no? have you ever met anyone who would? if yes, would having or not
having a license in their wallet stop such a person? i don't think so.

police should only be involved when actual crimes occur or are potentially
about to occur. see a vehicle hit a mailbox, get in a wreck, with a leaky
exhaust disturbing the peace, or someone driving recklessly endangering
others, etc. then you can call 911.

search "Driver Licensing vs. Right to Travel", for a fuller list of relevant
case law.

[1] "Personal liberty largely consists of the Right of locomotion -- to go
where and when one pleases -- only so far restrained as the Rights of others
may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The Right of the
Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property
thereon, by horse drawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere
privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common Right
which he has under his Right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal
conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public
places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither
interfering with nor disturbing another's Rights, he will be protected, not
only in his person, but in his safe conduct."

II Am.Jur. (1st) Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p.1135

[2] "The right to travel is part of the Liberty of which a citizen cannot
deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. This Right was
emerging as early as the Magna Carta."

Kent vs. Dulles, 357 US 116 (1958)

    
    
        "The essential elements of due process of law are ... Notice and The Opportunity to defend."
    

Simon vs. Craft, 182 US 427

    
    
        "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."
    

Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491

    
    
        "Moreover, a distinction must be observed between the regulation of an activity which may be engaged in as a matter of right and one carried on by government sufferance of permission."
    

Davis vs. Massachusetts, 167 US 43; Pachard vs. Banton, supra.

    
    
        "... the only limitations found restricting the right of the state to condition the use of the public highways as a means of vehicular transportation for compensation are (1) that the state must not exact of those it permits to use the highways for hauling for gain that they surrender any of their inherent U.S. Constitutional Rights as a condition precedent to obtaining permission for such use ..."
    

Riley vs. Laeson, 142 So. 619; Stephenson vs. Binford, supra.

    
    
        "We find it intolerable that one Constitutional Right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another."
    

Simons vs. United States, 390 US 389

    
    
        "... For while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose, no person has a vested right to use the highways of the state, but is a privilege or a license which the legislature may grant or withhold at its discretion."
    

State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs.
Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256; Hadfield vs. Lundin, 98 Wash 516

------
bbcbasic
Is this hacker news?

There are loads of general news stories or people being wronged that I would
love to post here, but I resist because although interesting and relevant to
people (as this article is) it isn't really tech news.

~~~
542458
I feel that (much like yesterday's story on selling lead settlements) it's a
very specific, interesting, and well written case of systematic wrongdoing
that can provoke some interesting discussion. Just like how there's lots of
math in the world, but every once in a while somebody posts a particularly
interesting tidbit that makes it to #1 on HN.

------
revelation
If you want this to stop, presumably you need to step out of the middle age
and allow actual automated speed cams as every other country does.

Now, there are two sides here. A matter of fact debtors prison for poor people
and a vicious cycle where they keep accumulating more fines through inability
of paying is a travesty of law.

But I can hardly sympathize with the discussion on speed traps, in a country
where apparently 10mph over is considered a crass misuse of law (here, this
nets you a month long driving ban) and tickets need to be written by officers,
which naturally drastically limits enforcement, and driving on a suspended
license is seen as a violation on the level of failure to use turn signals.
Frankly, driving without a valid license should cause your car to be
immediately and permanently impounded and any license only reissued on a
retest after a ban. We can't get into a situation where having a valid license
is more or less immaterial.

~~~
gorena
Americans complaining about speed traps and red light cameras are a constant
embarrassment to me.

I live in New York. This city should look like a less architecturally tasteful
version of Amsterdam. Instead, it's infested with cars. We should have red
light cameras at every intersection, zero-tolerance enforcement of speeding
laws, congestion charging, etc., instead the subway is crumbling.

I've given up, I'm starting to learn Dutch... I want to live somewhere that
actually cares about transportation.

~~~
redblacktree
Red light cameras are a real problem. Since tickets are incentivized, some of
the more greedy agencies have shortened the yellow light timing, leading to
more tickets and also more accidents.

~~~
gambiting
I literally can't understand how some agencies can just go ahead and "shorten
the yellow light timing". In EU the length of the yellow light is mandated by
law and a small town in a middle of nowhere can do nothing to change it. There
are a few exceptions - like in Portugal light changing from red directly to
green, but no one anywhere has any power to change the length of the yellow
light timing. It's mind boggling because EU consists of different countries
which could very well make their own rules but decided to standardize them so
all EU citizens can drive all over EU and expect the same rules everywhere.
Yet US is a single country and can't have consistent driving rules??

~~~
cowsandmilk
There is a difference between having rules and the governments actually
following them...

