Posted on 06/26/2015 5:23:23 AM PDT by JoeProBono
SEATTLE -- Panhandlers carry them. Protestors call them essential.
But one Seattle man's sign -- warning of a speed trap -- has been dubbed illegal and could end up costing him $138.
"I thought it was nonsense," said Daniel Gehlke, who made the handwritten sign "Cops Ahead! Stop at sign and light!" with a marker and a Rubbermaid top. "I am a believer that the Constitution, the Bill of Rights are there specifically so they can't be modified or restricted. This clearly is not a stop sign."
Gehlke was holding the sign near 14th Avenue S. and S. Washington Street about 10 days ago to warn drivers of traffic enforcement at a nearby intersection. He said he stood down the street from police for about five minutes before officers saw the sign and confronted him.
"I'm Officer Elliott. I'm with the Seattle Police Department, and I'm letting you know that's against the law," a motorcycle cop is heard saying on the interaction, which was caught on cell phone video.
Gehlke asks the officer to clarify what is illegal.
"What specifically am I breaking, Officer Elliott?" Gehlke asks.
"11.50.560," replies the officer, referring to municipal code, "which is forbidden devices or signs."
"So I can't hold a sign?" Gehlke responds.
"No you can't," the officer says.
"The specific issue is that he was giving instructions to motorists through the words that he chose, like 'slow down' or 'caution,' " said Sgt. Sean Whitcomb, a spokesman for the Seattle Police Department. "That's exactly the issue. It's the words that give people orders referring traffic."
Municipal code outlaws any sign or device "bearing any such words as 'danger,' 'stop,' 'slow,'" and more. "Directions likely to be construed as giving warning to or regulating traffic," it says.
Gehlke believes he's being targeted because of the content of the sign, not because of the crafting of the language.
"I do think this is police overstepping their bounds and using, twisting laws," he said. "(The code) doesn't read like it's meant for stop signs like this. It's clearly meant for people trying to put up 'no parking' signs or stop sign or a yield signs on a public right-of-way. Not someone who made a sign on a Rubbermaid."
He wonders if protestors holding signs reading "stop police brutality" in a city intersection would also be cited for the same infraction, or suburban families who post notices reading "slow, children at play."
He plans to appeal -- and use a modified sign in the future, with the word "stop" removed.
"I wasn't trying to bother the cops," he said. "The idea was to get people to look and say, 'oh, there are cops. Maybe I should slow down.' "
Texas Penal Code – Sec. 38.05. HINDERING APPREHENSION OR PROSECUTION.
(a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to hinder the arrest, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of another for an offense [...] he:
(1) harbors or conceals the other;
(2) provides or aids in providing the other with any means of avoiding arrest or effecting escape; or
(3) warns the other of impending discovery or apprehension.
(b) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(3) that the warning was given in connection with an effort to bring another into compliance with the law.
I think the qualifiers here would have to be "simulating" or "likely to be mistaken" neither of which apply in his case. Otherwise places like a Truck Stop, or Slow Jimmy's Restaurant, or Danger Dan's Deals Used Cars would all have to come down.
If Daniel Gehlke gets a good Attorney to throw this ticket out, then he should file 3 counter civil lawsuits against the city, the local police department, the harassing officer for Attorney fees, lost time, wages and money.
Traffic law does not apply here. How does warning someone of a speed trap hinder apprehension? This has to do with fugitives, not drivers.
He was very fortunate that the police did not kill him. Either shoot him or beat him to death for “resisting arrest”.
Oh, and the taxpayers ...
Also, if you note, both stories from Texas cited in your link had nothing to do with signs being illegal. The lady was charged with standing in the street when a sidewalk was available, and the people who erected the signs warning drives were able to get the cop fired for attempting to take them down. Clearly that penal code isn’t meant for traffic violations.
If one is going to Norfolk, VA from I-95 they have to get off and take US 58 at Emporia. What a speed trap! You’re used to driving 70 on I-95 and are slowed down to 55. Cops are rampant!!
Back in 79 when I was in the Navy I had to drive from Morehead City, NC where I was on leave to Fort Gordon, GA for a school. Along the freeway in SC I was between two semis. Cooking along at a good speed. Then the truck ahead of me started to slow down, as did the one behind me. I started to pass, but then thought better. I stayed between them, and after rounding a corner, there was a massive speed trap (at least 6 HP cars) under an overpass. As soon as we rounded the next curve, we all sped back up. Oh, the joys of the CB days.
This is in the state of Washington and not Texas.
Is the objective for motorists to obey the laws —— or to stuff the cops’ slush fund?
By doing this, he placed himself in great peril. He attempted to interfere as the Government [police] collected money, or as they refer to it as, revenue. this is the number one reason that the Government has the police go after thieves, they [Government] doesn't want the competition.
Especially since this is the rest of that particular ordinance.
B. Any structure or device erected or maintained contrary to the provisions of this section is a public nuisance and the Director of Engineering shall notify the owner thereof that it constitutes a public nuisance and must be removed, and if the owner fails to do so, the Director of Engineering may abate the nuisance. Any and all actions undertaken by the Director of Engineering or his duly authorized agent to abate such a nuisance shall not attach any liability to the City, its agents, or employees. (RCW 47.36.180)
It's not a traffic offense, and no fine can be given by officers, it's not within their authority under this statute.
What if he just said “pigs ahead”, maybe because he thought he saw a loose hog?
But he was depriving them of their revenue stream.. that’s the REAL reason.
You would think slowing people down would be their MAIN concern, but NO, we need to GIVE OUT TICKETS!~!!
Good thing he didn’t a dog.
Nope. the Government does not want you to obey the law[s]. They want you to speed. They want you to drink and drive. Else, why would bars have parking lots? They want you to drive without driver’s license. If everyone obeyed the law[s], they would be out of a job.
What if he just said “Drive cautiously. Obey all traffic laws. Ya never know if a cop is hiding up ahead.”
Better yet, “Will warn of speed traps for money.” Might as well make a couple dollars for his time.
...HAVE a dog.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.