Re “A Culver City Officer Treated Me Despicably. He Is a Jerk”
Some months back I informed your readers that I had had a horrendous experience with Culver City Police Officer Houck. I finally had my day in court week, on July 27.
But first I wanted to share with your readers my impression of the system I took part in.
I'd not been in a courtroom for years, and the last time I was there for a friend. I had thought that the ticket (straddling the line and refusing to stop for an emergency vehicle) would be handled that day, and seeing that there were quite a few people on the roster, I thought it would take the entire day. Once people were put in order, however, the process was very quick and efficient.
For those unfamiliar with the process, as I was, on the first appearance you simply tell the judge whether you plead guilty or not guilty. If you plead guilty, you pay the fine then and it's done. If you plead not guilty, it is held over for trial at a later date.
It was fascinating to me how many people were there not only for a ticket, but for missing their initial court date (an expensive mistake). It was also interesting how many were there for overloaded trucks. (And the fines were absurdly large).
When they pleaded guilty, the judge reduced their initial fine, some down to $5, which I thought was generous, except that the court fees are still tacked on. So the $5 ticket could become $150 to $250. To my mind, the fees were absurd but if they pleaded not guilty and lost, they'd be considerably more. I think it's what the city counts on.
It also occurred to me that many of the people in court looked as though they were in no condition to pay a sizable fine. One of the options is to do community service. Ever wonder where the city gets all those people to clean the freeways? Bingo. It was very disturbing to see people in a bad financial situation being forced to spend dozens of hours doing this type of menial thing when they could be working and earning money for their families.
I pled not guilty in my case. I'd filed a formal complaint against the officer the day after my confrontation with Mr. Houck because of his inexcusable conduct. Naturally, the department gave him a complete pass, and the city officials dropped it. This was my last chance for some sort of justice in regards to Mr. Houck.
I came prepared with photographs and text, a set for myself, a set for the judge and a set for Mr. Houck. This can make a big difference! Also being direct, succinct and clear is helpful and certainly appreciated by all those waiting to be heard after your case is done. Many persons came in with nothing to back them up, and meandering defenses. I started to wonder why they'd bothered to fight it.
Then I found out.
Over half of the officers for the cases to be heard that day didn't show up, so the cases were immediately dismissed. All the people were out was their time.
Amazingly, Officer Houck actually showed up, but I was glad. I wanted a judge to hear the whole thing, and tell it in front of all the officers present.
It works like this:
1)The officer tells his side.
2) The judge asks if you want to ask the officer any questions. I told the judge that I had no desire to converse with him in any way.
3) The defendant pleads his case: I used pictures to explain my actions that evening and why I felt Mr. Houck’s actions were so inexcusable.
4) Then there's rebuttal.
5) Each is asked if he has anything else to say, then a verdict is reached.
There are far more details than I will share here, but that is the gist.
The straddling portion of the ticket was upheld. He'd said I was straddling the center line on Sawtelle between Madison and Washington Place. Anyone who exits the 405 Freeway south at Venice and turns left knows that when the curb is filled with cars, there's hardly a lane at all. But no matter. It was the other charge that mattered to me.
The other portion, refusing to stop, was thrown out! And the fine for the part of the ticket left was $35. Of course with fees, it was $250, but that was far better than the $705 I had to pay up front.
The judge and the crew in the courtroom I found very attentive and fair. I was pleasantly surprised that the judge didn't automatically find for Mr. Houck.
Unfortunately, my initial impressions of Mr. Houck were confirmed by his conduct in the courtroom, or should I say, the interesting take on his actions that night.
The “changes” were so numerous that I had to tell the judge, “I understand that I'm under oath, so I don't take it lightly when I have to tell you that he is simply not telling the truth.” It seems to me the judge realized this, too.
Luckily, even Mr. Houck’s pictures couldn't lie. Though he had a picture of the closed cul-de-sac I live on, he still thought there might be as many as 10 homes (there are 6) And that it was 120 feet to my garage, when the pictures make it clear for all to see that it's no more than 60.
It was a series of statements along those lines, trying to reframe the situation, that I believe the judge saw as well.
In any case, the refusing to stop was thrown out!
I want to thank the Santa Monica court judge for seeing through the games played and rendering a proper verdict. It was a pleasant surprise.
If you are mistreated by an officer, and truly are not guilty of what they charge you with, it's worth it to take the time to file complaints and take them to court. That is, if you're lucky enough to get a judge as observant as the one I had. If people don't fight horrendous misconduct, there will be no reason for unethical police personnel to change their conduct.
Still, overall I saw a lot of people in that courtroom who were burdened with outrageously exorbitant fines, fines levied on people that were far beyond their ability to pay, thus forcing them into cleaning freeways or whatever. It just didn't seem right.
Mr. Fernandez, a Mar Vista resident, may be contacted at tronec@charlesfernandez.com or www.charlesfernandez.com
