FOR THE BACK STORY: I quote an excerpt from www.savescooters.com:
"We’re dedicated to fair laws governing low-impact alternative transpotation in Massachusetts. Beginning on 8/1/2009 Massachusetts will begin enforcing a law which will make owning and operating 49cc scooters expensive and parking them difficult.
This law is an environmentally and socially irresponsible. It penalizes those of us who choose to use one of the most efficient and ecologically sound transportation options in an already over-crowded area.
This law contains no provisions for encouraging the use of alternative transportation, nor does it mandate that cities supply alternative parking options. It only places restrictions and undue burdens on scooter owners in the form of parking restrictions, mandatory registration, and required insurance for 49cc scooters previously classified as “mopeds”.
HERE's MY STORY:
My first day in criminal court as a defendant! For the horrible crime of driving a scooter w/out a scooter operator's permit, uninsured, and unregistered. All pretty serious crimes in a car, but a completely new law that -- as of Jan. 1, 2010 -- began to impact those of us who owned and operated such scooters previous to August, 2009. I purchased my used Honda Met in 2007, after a drunk driver totalled my 2005 Prius. I was left with a 4WD pick up truck and just couldn't justify the insurance on two vehicles, anymore. The new scooter law is one that even the people at the DMV think is silly. They cheered when I told them about my plans to picket, and the TV news saying they'd show up to cover it.
Funny, but the judge did not even know it was a scooter when he read the litany of my violations! Once they passed that @#!*% law, the former "mopeds" are now considered just another "licensed motor vehicle," a phrase that is going to wreak havoc on parking laws, and even loaning the to my daughter Sam, or other friends (not unlike Bermuda!) when they come to visit and need a vehicle to get around when it's good weather. Now I cannot offer this alternative to out of state visitors. My daughter won't have a "modified motorcycle driver's license" because she's a resident of NC, and they don't have such a license down there!
Sam fell in love with the scooter last summer, when she was up for a week between a wedding and a family funeral, and her company let her work out of their Boston branch office.
So....here's a recap of Day #1 of Candace in Criminal Court. I know I should have opted for the fine, but I just could NOT bring myself to do it. And the judge was soooooo sweet and so kind to me....I felt like I was at a yard sale, bartering over an old, used piece of furniture.
This judge was really all about trying to cajole various offenders into paying fines instead of opting for a jury trial, which is really a stupid waste of taxpayer money and judicial time.
Most offenses were really petty things, but the fines are getting steeper (i.e. $200 instead of $100, I'm sure a result of the state's need for revenue, although the judge always made sure to offer people payment plans -- since none in attendance appeared to be wealthy.)
Many of those facing charges appeared to be bright, sweet people that didn't speak English very well, if at all, and therefore didn't quite understand MA's extremely complicated, outrageously expensive, exorbitant motor vehicle laws. They needed translators. When the judge asked the traditional, “do you understand the charges against you,” one frightened, modestly dressed, obviously devout and "good" (i.e. religious) seemingly Latino woman did not understand the charges.
I think she had a vehicle that might have been off the road, so unregistered, and probably loaned it to a visiting relative. Meanwhile, you can't even KEEP and unregistered/unlicensed car on your own property in MA! except maybe in a garage. Can you believe that????
This was actually a little relevant to my own case, as -- in addition to Sam, I once let my friend borrow it to go see her son race in the "Head of the Charles." This rowing event is so popular, there is no parking within miles of the River. She had to rush to drop her son off pre-race, drive home, and then go back a few hours later to watch him race. So I suggested, "take the scooter!" She never had ridden it before. I gave her a crash course (no pun intended) and off she went. She scooteed the few miles, taking the back roads over to Mem Drive, parked right next to one of the bridges where she could cheer him as he passed under, and then scooted back home. She LOVED it, and agreed it was safer, much more balanced, with a much lower learning curve compared to a bicycle.
But I digress…back to criminal court.
One man was charged with having an unlicensed, unregistered vehicle on the street because the leased garage for his antique car had some structural problems, threatening to damage the car. So he backed it out and parked it out on the street for 24 hours while he did the repairs to the buildling. The "no overnight parking" law brought it to the attention of the police, who promptly had it towed, and he was charged with criminally operating an uninsured, unlicensed vehicle. He said he had all the photos, and proof of the circumstances. But the judge said his role was not to hear the case, but to offer him the CHOICE of a fine vs. a hearing. The judge explained that a jury of his peers might appreciate his situation, and decide he s hould not have to pay anything, or he might get a very harsh fine. Because the law is the law!
This wonderful judge offered this man a $50 fine! Wow.....there might be hope for me, yet, I thought. He seems like such a reasonable judge!
I actually applauded out loud when this man gratefully accepted the nominal fine! IT WAS SUCH COMMON SENSE! Yes, the law is the law, and it serves its purpose, to prevent people from diving uninsured cars. But sometimes it truly clashes with common sense! This ruling DESERVED applause. Haha....the entire court room went silent and looked at me.
I think I saw the judge surpress a smile.
BUT, I had three very serious charges.
The judge made me an offer of $200 per "charge." If it weren't a scooter and the law was not brand new this year, would be really bad offenses:
1. Unlicensed driver
2. Unregistered vehicle
3. Uninsured vehicle
Obviously I have my driver's license. I've had one since I was 16. But JUST LAST FALL, the DMV decreed that people who drive scooters that go over 30 mph, but still under 40 mph (so you can't go on the highway...strictly for around town and back roads) need a SPECIAL "modified motorcycle" operator's permit. Which is SUCH a crock! Pretty soon we'll need a permit to operate a snow blower, a golf cart, bumper cars, go-carts, or a lawn mower! I predict eventually, we'll have to pay for our children to get learner's permits to learn how to ride a tricycle!
It gets worse. There are serious, legal remifications CALLING it a "licensed motor vehicle." Worst of all is forcing low-end scooters -- used to be classified w/ the Mopeds which allegedly are limited to 30 mph -- to TAKE UP AN ENTIRE PARKING SPACE ON THE STREET. Gratefully, the cops are still a little fuzzy about enforcing this. But this was the #1 reason I opted for a low speed scooter, and not a high speed one.
It was just so WEIRD to be in criminal court, charged w/ criminal offenses. And to take such a risk because -- not only do I disagree with the law itself (I think low end scooter commuters should be rewarded for alleviating Boston's traffic and parking problems) -- I don't agree with how the new law is being handled.
When the judge told me that the fines totaled $600, I replied "my scooter isn't worth that much." So he countered w/ $400. I told him it probably wasn't worth that much, either. I humorously imagined saying, "Do I hear $300?" As if reading my mind, the judge countered, "$300 -- and that's as low as I'll go." At this point, the judge was indeed smiling, and I truly had to repress a laugh. I felt as if I was an auctioneer!
I smiled politely and respectfully. I said his offer was very tempting. But, not without a little self-doubt, I said that I felt compelled – as a good citizen -- to argue my case. It is complicated, not without a touch of Civil Disobedience. But that's my heritage...my responsibility as a citizen. As a college student -- I protested the Vietnam War. I come from a long line of women activists, and suffragettes -- Lucretia Mott and Debrah Samspon are among my ancestors! My mom, a journalist, would have been proud of me. Even my mom's husband, my step-father, a WW II Vet and P.O.W. once was arrested for picketing against Apartheid. My mom was so proud of him. (He was in his 70’s…and took a bus in to the White House from their retirement center in Md.)
It used to be against the law for women to own property or to vote; it used to be against the law for gays to serve in the military; "the law" used to sanction buying and selling slaves; and it was against "the law" for slaves escape to freedom in the North. So just saying "it's the law" doesn't always mean a responsible citizen should accept the punishment without a protest.
But I really don't want to spend $5 K. Nor do I want to go to jail (except maybe in a warmer climate?) So I need to simplify the case. To prove that the law was so fuzzy, even the folks at the DMV, the police, and the insurance companies were confused. I think just by showing the summary that the Boston Globe did back in july 2009 -- which was given to me by my insurance company -- and basically summarizes that the law is totally half-baked, and many aspects being "reconsidered" -- esp. the requirement for an operator's permit (easier to drive than a tricycle), and need for insurance, as well as the whole parking issue.
The judge asked if I would have counsel or was chosing to represent myself. I said the latter. Did he smile? He then warned me that I was risking a $5 K fine, (no jail time, though), or I could get off paying nothing if the jury agreed w/ me. Next will be a pre-trial hearing on Jan. 20.
All in all, the judge was very personable, and even paternal, praising and encouraging one young mother who -- for reasons I could only guess -- had been separated from her baby until she was deemed fit to be a parent again. I restrained myself from jumping up and yelling, "don't do it. the kids will just get you in MORE trouble! If you're not a substance abuser already, you probably will be by the time you have teenagers!" Now that I think of it, so many of the challenges of having teenagers would be SOLVED if they were encouraged to use one-seater, low-speed scooters instead of cars. (Per my picket sign on Facebook.)
At the end, this wonderful judge asked if I had any questions or comments, and I said, "I was very impressed with your conduct and several of your rulings." He laughed, and asked his stenographer if she got that down.
Recent Comments