Do you feel this was a decision made based on prejudice?

Question

A deer jumped out in front of a moving vehicle. Driver swirves (on his own lane) into a ditch causing vehicle (Van) to tip over and roll into opposite side of road in a wooded area. Nobody hurt, driver was not speeding, nor under the influence, or been in any other accidents. Driver calls police. Who later send him a ticket in the mail for having "disregarded lane". Officer stated in report there were 90 ft tire marks on road when the vehicle at no time had all four tires on the ground thats why driver could not brake..Problem this driver doesn't speak fluent English. Driver disputes ticket in court and the judge questions how long driver has lived in the county and if he can read English and finds him guilty. without giving reason. This ticket wasn't worth points to license. If driver was at fault he wouldnt have even called for police. Aren't they supposed to help? Do you think judge was racist in decision?

Translator was present in court.

Answer 1

No.

It sounds more like a lack of evidence on the driver's part to plead his case to the judge, and he should have had an interpreter there with him. (Later read there was an interpreter...okay, good)

I should clarify what I mean by evidence:

There are different types of tire marks; there are tread marks, break marks and yaw marks. They each represent a different type of situation that a car must have been under in order to make each of those marks. The cop, must have interpreted those in his evidence to the judge and there's no way that the driver or anyone else here could know that...that's part of a traffic collition scene investigation...and it's done at the time the report is made.

So...my answer is still NO, its wasn't based on prejudice but lack of understanding from the driver's knowledge on forensic evidence and law. Your driver can't dispute what he doesn't know. So the judge found him guilty because he could not dispute the cops report on the driver, there was no doubt about the report.

Answer 2

There might have been some prejudice involved, but not necessarily racism. I don't understand the original charge, "disregarded lane," but I think the police officer should be given the benefit of the doubt. The judge's decision could probably be appealled, but I'm in this case (which I'm assuming is hypothetical), the driver probably does not have good legal representation, or the means to secure it; even not being able to speak English, if he had had the means he could have gotten a good lawyer to get him out of the original charge, so an appeal is probably out of the question.

Answer 3

Sounds a little dicey to me. The circumstances show that the person in question was swerving to avoid a major accident on a major thouroughfare. If he can read English, or if he can't, that's not the situation here. He can read it well enough to pass his driving test and obtain a license. Furthermore, even if he couldn't read English fluently, every sign we have has pictures in them so people who cannot read (e.g. illiterate Americans) can still follow the street signs.

Yeah, I think this issue is boarderline discrimination.

Answer 4

i would agree with you, my mom is form Thailand and when law enforcement talk to her they speak all loud like shes deaf or real talks real slow. they said their not racist but isn't everyone just a little racist.

Answer 5

Sounds like it.