bluesnut
08-14-2009, 02:17 AM
I'll try to be as brief as possible here. This involves an auto accident (my car, my adult son driving). We were in a left turn lane out in the intersection when the light went red. My son completed the turn on red and a gentleman ran a red light and broadsided us in the right rear of the car.
My son was cited for failure to yield and being a bit banged up I did not get involved with what was going on with the police, etc.
The gentleman who hit us claimed to be in the truck alone but a witness backed this guy up that we were at fault by making a turn on straight ahead green. This witness claims to have actually seen the lights from his position in the cross-traffic lane.
The lights are shrouded by visors and the lights cannot be seen from the position of the witness; no way, no how.
In traffic court this alleged witness did not appear and the judge would not dismiss the case. The guy who hit us did show and not only did we prove the lights could not be seen by anyone in that position, we caught the other driver in several flat out lies in front of the judge and backed it up with pics and printed matter.
The judge delayed a decision and after a week said we were guilty. My question is this, and the state in question is OK.
Should a case be dismissed, as we asked at the start, if the testimony of the witness is the predominant part of the case and the witness did not appear?
I thought one was entitled to face their accuser, cross-examine them, etc.?
Also, we maintain this "witness" was likely a passenger in the vehicle that hit us although the driver claimed to be by himself. In traffic court he did let slip the comment that "WE were on our way to....".
Thank you in advance for any advice.
My son was cited for failure to yield and being a bit banged up I did not get involved with what was going on with the police, etc.
The gentleman who hit us claimed to be in the truck alone but a witness backed this guy up that we were at fault by making a turn on straight ahead green. This witness claims to have actually seen the lights from his position in the cross-traffic lane.
The lights are shrouded by visors and the lights cannot be seen from the position of the witness; no way, no how.
In traffic court this alleged witness did not appear and the judge would not dismiss the case. The guy who hit us did show and not only did we prove the lights could not be seen by anyone in that position, we caught the other driver in several flat out lies in front of the judge and backed it up with pics and printed matter.
The judge delayed a decision and after a week said we were guilty. My question is this, and the state in question is OK.
Should a case be dismissed, as we asked at the start, if the testimony of the witness is the predominant part of the case and the witness did not appear?
I thought one was entitled to face their accuser, cross-examine them, etc.?
Also, we maintain this "witness" was likely a passenger in the vehicle that hit us although the driver claimed to be by himself. In traffic court he did let slip the comment that "WE were on our way to....".
Thank you in advance for any advice.