This is the letter sent to Curry County District Court as a result of the alleged infractions by one of Curry County's "finest":
April 14, 1996
District Court
County of Curry
Gold Beach, Oregon 97444
To whom it may concern:
Attached you will find a citation (#5130) I received on April 8th at approximately 2:50pm, from an Officer William Clark, for the alleged offense of "careless driving". This citation has caused me no lack of concern, because I feel that it has been issued based on extremely subjective criteria. I am not a careless driver, and I want to clear my record of that charge against me.
As I am not an Oregon resident, and instead a tourist who unfortunately happened to be passing through Oregon to visit friends in the Portland area and points further north, I feel I am at a disadvantage in protesting the citation in person, in court. I can unfortunately not afford either the expense or time it would take to make it from New Hampshire to Gold Beach on April 30th, as required on the summons. As such, I feel I have no other option than to throw myself on the judgement of the court in this case, as per Option 2 in responding to infractions. The bail amount of $165 indicated on the citation is also enclosed.
What follows is the explanation I'm required to provide under Infraction Option #2, and I hope you read it thoroughly, even though it may seem to get sidetracked at times.
My wife and I have gone over and retraced our trail and the events leading up to being pulled over, and here is what we recall as the sequence of events on April 8th.
At about a quarter of three in the afternoon, after having spent the last 10 days driving a total of 1000 miles throughout California in our rented Hertz mini-van, we crossed over the border into Oregon from California on Route 101. At the border we commented on the cute family that was having their picture taken while standing in front of the Welcome to Oregon sign. The sign was almost immediately followed by a small parking lot, where traffic was waiting to join us northbound on Route 101.
In front of us was a large car with Oregon plates that we had been following for several miles in California. The vehicle had maintained inconsistent speed, sometimes speeding up, and more frequently slowing down, usually well below the posted speed limits in California.
As we drove along, my wife and discussed the signs we saw for Myrtlewood, and I explained to her that my understanding was that what made Myrtlewood so unique was that it grew natively only in Oregon and in the Holy Land. My wife didn't believe me, so we decided to resolve that at a gift shop at some point later in the day (which we never did, due to the distress of being pulled over).
As our conversation about Myrtlewood came to an end, we came upon a 4 lane highway (i.e. the road we were on split into two lanes, and there were also two lanes on the southbound side of the highway). I moved the van out into the left lane so we could get out from behind the erratically driven car in front of us.
I asked my wife if she had seen any speed limit signs lately so that I could set the cruise control, now that the road had changed, and she indicated she didn't recall having seen any speed limit signs whatsoever since we left California. We therefore assumed that speed limits in Oregon were like those in California, and the speed limit on the 4 lane highway would therefore be 65 miles per hour. The cars further in front of us, some with Oregon plates, seemed to have sped up to approximately 65MPH, so we followed suit. Shortly thereafter, while glancing into my rear view mirror, I noticed what appeared to be a police vehicle of some sort speeding up behind me. Based on past observation with rapidly approaching police vehicles which do not have their flashing lights on, I assumed that the driver of the vehicle had urgent business somewhere ahead, and I therefore tapped on my brakes to match pace with a slightly slower vehicle in the right lane, about 80-100 feet ahead, with the erratic vehicle about 60-80 feet back, and slowly moved into the right lane to allow the police vehicle to pass. I ironically made a comment to my wife at the time that I was glad he wasn't after me, since I knew I had been driving well within what I believed to be the normal safety parameters of the local area.
Alas, the police vehicle, instead of passing me, pulled in behind me and shortly thereafter turned on his flashing lights. I obediently pulled over into the emergency lane at the police vehicle's urging, and stopped my mini-van. One of the two officers in the police vehicle, the driver, got out and approached our mini-van on the driver side, peering intently through our sun-protection coated rear windows. By this time, I had opened my window and was waiting for him, curious as to why he had pulled us over.
His first words were "Driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance. Do you know why I have pulled you over?", and seemed very agitated and hostile.
As my wife and I scrambled to find everything he requested, I responded "I honestly have no idea. This is the first time I have ever driven in Oregon." My response seemed to annoy him.
He explained that he had pulled us over because I was following the car in front of me too closely, and that along the way, he had observed me speeding in excess of clearly posted limits.
I was confused, as I didn't think I had been following anyone too closely, and didn't think I had been speeding, and asked him to explain further, as I handed him my driver's license and car rental agreement (the closest thing we had to a registration). I also tried to hand him a copy of my car insurance for my car back home, but he refused it.
In response to my confusion, he condescendingly explained that I should know that in Oregon the speed limit is 55, and that it was clearly posted just a little while back (see below on this item), and that California driving laws and speed limits don't apply in Oregon, and anyhow, in California, 65MPH speed limits only apply on 4 lane highways (which we were on, by the way). He then looked at my driver's license and noticed I wasn't from California, and subsequently toned down his anti-California tirade.
After that, he went back to his vehicle, while my wife and I tried to figure out where we might have missed a speed limit sign, and what the officer meant about following too closely, since we were no closer to the vehicle in front of us, except when we started passing it when the second lane opened up on our side, than were any other vehicles from each other at the time.
After about 10 minutes, the officer returned, and handed me a citation, explaining that instead of writing me up for 4 different infractions, he was doing me a favor and only writing me up for "careless driving". I asked him what the 4 infractions he was talking about were, and he itemized them as follows:
1) Speeding (70MPH in a 55MPH zone).
2) Following too closely
3) Crossing a double yellow line
4) Swerving dangerously when I saw his car
I started to try and argue about these items but my wife stopped me before I got anywhere. Instead, I tried to get an understanding of what he meant by following too closely. After the officer rudely snapped at me about it being obvious, my wife repeated the question to the officer, in almost the same words I used, and he finally replied that anything less that 10 feet per 10 MPH of speed was technically following too closely.
After that whole encounter I was too distraught to continue driving, so I checked with the officer before he returned to his car if he would mind if my wife and I swapped positions while in the breakdown lane. He said to go ahead, but be careful, and returned to his vehicle, and departed with his companion.
My wife took over the driving, and we decided to find a good place to turn around so we could find the speed limit sign the officer had referred to (see below on the results of our search).
That summarizes our basic recollection and encounter. What follows are some of the various facts, details, and other things that strike us as subjective and inconsistent with the officer's actions and comments.
My first concern, perhaps petty, but nonetheless real to me, is that I and my vehicle were selected out of a stream of similarly moving traffic because the rented vehicle my family and I were in had non-Oregon (California) plates, in a swarm of traffic that was primarily composed of Oregon-plated vehicles. Based on conversations with friends of mine who are state and local police officers back home is that this discriminatory practice, while officially forbidden, is still applied by officers who know that the likelihood of having an out of state driver show up in court, requiring a time consuming, and often unproductive court appearance by the officer, is unlikely, resulting in a higher rate of convictions and fines.
Additionally, I feel I may been singled out because I have long hair and a beard. This is a statement born of both instinct in this particular case, and supported by a number of local (Oregon) residents I have mentioned my "welcome" to Oregon to who suggested my long hair may have been at least part of the reason I was pulled over - all without any suggestion from myself as to this matter. In general, I have found people base their initial reactions on external appearances, like men with long hair, regardless of whether their opinions of people with long hair (in a pony tail, in my case) are substantiated by reality. For example, "long hairs" are frequently stereotyped as vegetarians, rebels against society, ear and body piercers, tatoo freaks, and/or drug users. I am none of the above - I just happen to have gotten lazy about cutting my hair one year, and my wife now won't let me cut it - she actually likes my hair long.
In addition to the comments from Curry and Coos County residents about my hair being a major contributor, as well as their amazingly negative comments about Curry County in general, my belief that I and my vehicle were singled out is further supported by both the comments and attitude of Officer Clark, the County Sheriff's representative that pulled me over. In approaching the vehicle, he tried intently to peer inside to see whether we might have anything that could conceivably be considered contraband. The expression on his face upon only finding my wife and 9 month infant daughter in her car seat, along with all of our luggage (most of it for our daughter) was nothing short of sheer disappointment.
To determine whether or not my concerns about out of state vehicles being targeted were unfounded or not, I later called the County Sheriff's office in Gold Beach, and spoke to a Lieutenant Andall, who was unable to confirm whether or not there was a bias against out of state vehicles. The one comment he did make was that County Sheriff officers write very few traffic tickets, which seems to conflict with Officer Clark's statement to my wife and myself that he regularly parks near the Oregon/California state line.
To summarize this issue, I feel I have good grounds for believing that my citation was issued based on discriminatory practices.
Perhaps the only clear issue is the alleged speeding violation, and even that's fuzzy based on a combination of lack of visible information, cues by other traffic on the road, and ignorance as a result of not being from Oregon (or the Northwest for that matter). Based on what was explained to us by the officer, i.e. that Oregon does not have any areas in which 65MPH is the legal speed limit, and that 55MPH is Oregon's maximum speed limit, there's no question that we were 10MPH over the 55MPH state limit. However, we need to take issue with the officer's method of substantiation that we should have had prior knowledge of this.
Below are the facts stated by the officer about our speeding violation, and our observations:
Speed limit was clearly posted.
After the citation for careless driving was issued, my wife and I decided to return to the
California/Oregon border and find the speed limit sign(s) the officer referred to.
Oregon speed laws should be common knowledge as being different from California.
Well, as New Englanders, such common knowledge isn't so for us. Had we been from far northern
California, we might have had that knowledge, but it was unreasonable of Officer Clark to expect us
to know, and then verbally reprimand and chastise us, to the point of near insult, for not knowing
this. He seemed to take it as a personal affront that we just did not know.
Clocked at 70MPH
We find this insinuated charge to border on the unbelievable. If you study the behavioral reactions to police vehicles by a cross section of various drivers and driver demographics, you will find that a vast majority of people will touch their brakes for some duration whenever they see a police vehicle on the road, whether in oncoming traffic, or going in the same direction, and regardless of what speed the person seeing the police vehicle is actually going.
When you add the component of a police car speeding up behind drivers, whether the police car's lights are flashing or not, you will further find that most people, if they can, will move over to allow the police vehicle to pass, as they should.
When I saw the police car in my rear view mirror, speeding up on me, again without flashing lights, my immediate reaction was to try and move aside. I had a gap between cars in the right hand lane of over 150 feet, which I could safely move into if I backed off a bit to put some distance between myself and the car that would be in front of me in the left lane. I accomplished this by tapping my brakes, and then smoothly moving over, thinking I was letting the police officer pass me in the left lane.
In a nutshell, I think Officer Clark, and possibly his companion, decided to make much more out of this than was reality, most probably in order to boost their case for issuing a careless driving citation.
Last I knew, following 40-60 feet behind a vehicle wasn't following too closely - it's a safe distance. When a vehicle slows down, vehicles behind it will slow down too, and depending on reaction times, very likely get somewhat closer as part of the slowing down process.
Officer Clark indicated that he saw us following too closely as early as the Oregon border, where, coincidentally, there was some congestion as a result of the aforementioned market and parking lot, just past the Welcome to Oregon sign, and that it continued right until he pulled us over. While it's possible that at one specific moment we may have been within 30 feet of the erratic Oregon-plated vehicle in front of us near the market and parking area, that certainly wasn't the case the remaining 3 miles until I was pulled over. The only time we got closer was when the vehicle was beside us as we passed it while in the left lane of the two lanes of the four lane highway we ended up one. That certainly would not qualify as following too closely, since we weren't behind the vehicle.
When we asked Officer Clark what he meant by following too closely, he would not elaborate on the actual number of feet between us and the vehicle in front of us. He instead stated that you should always be 10 feet away for every 10MPH of speed, and that we weren't observing that law. As far as we recall, we did observe that requirement, and seeing as we were behind the vehicle the distance was being measured from, and Officer Clark and his companion and vehicle were several cars behind us, along a straight road, I would propose we had a better view of the situation than he did.
Additionally, in terms of road conditions at the time, while there was an overcast sky, the roadways were completely dry, and there was no glare or bright sunlight to momentarily blind a driver. In other words, existing road conditions were very good.
As a final point on this topic, the distance we maintained from the vehicle in front of us was greater than the distance most Oregon drivers have maintained behind our vehicle since being pulled over, and greater than or equivalent than the distances we perceived other vehicles at the time maintaining. One would assume that with the vigilance of Officer Clark and his fellow officers for "maintaining a safe distance", all Curry County drivers would be observing this rule or else be pulled over.
I probably should also point out that I've been driving for 16 years, and never rear ended anyone.
I have no recollection of crossing a double yellow line with my left tires at any time between entering Oregon and being pulled over. If, in fact, it did happen (which I seriously doubt), it could only be in order to avoid a vehicle prematurely attempting to turn into my lane from the side, or to avoid a vehicle, pulled over to the side, jutting too far out into the road. There were several of the latter just after the "Welcome" sign.
Obviously, whatever written testimony you get from Officer Clark would probably be agreed to by his companion, and as such you would be getting alleged eye witnesses. Similarly, everything in this letter has been reviewed (and where appropriate) and edited by my wife, who was sitting in the passenger seat next to me during the entire time these events occurred. Her signature below attests to the validity of the concerns, observations, and facts as presented in this letter.
However, even though the witnesses against us are officers of the law, I believe, with good reason, that I was discriminated against (see above), I would be reluctant to accept just eye witness testimony, especially since several of the alleged infractions are based on viewing traffic situations which would have been impossible to see from the location of Officer Clark's vehicle in the flow of traffic (and would have been quite visible from our perspective).
My belief is that if I in fact did flagrantly violate the laws Officer Clark alleges I did, I have no issue with the charges. As such, I called the Curry County Sheriff's office to determine if perhaps Officer Clark had a video camera mounted and operational in his vehicle at the time he allegedly witnessed the infractions leading to the careless driving citation. On the morning of April 9th, I managed to get in touch with a Lieutenant Andall in the County Sheriff's office. He was quite courteous when I asked him if the infractions were video taped, and offered to find out for me and call me back shortly. When he called back a few minutes later, he indicated that while some vehicles are equipped with working video cameras, the unit in Officer Clark's vehicle was not operating at the time I was pulled over.
Whether the camera was intentionally not turned on, or just not functioning, I have no way of knowing. I am disappointed, however, that no tape exists, because I know it would exonerate me.
As mentioned earlier, Officer Clark seemed to have a serious attitude problem from the start. Initially it seemed that it was directed at the inference that I was from California, which I'm not and never have been. Then he was hostile when I tried to better understand the situation by asking him to explain things to me in greater detail.
He was also quite inconsistent in his comments and requests. For example, when he asked for license, registration, and insurance, he didn't even bother looking at my insurance documents.
When he first spoke to us after pulling me over he mentioned speeding and following too closely as being the only issues reasons for pulling me over. However, when he returned from his vehicle after having written the citation for careless driving, he had added crossing the double yellow line and dangerously swerving to the list of infractions he had observed and combined into the single "careless driving" infraction the citation was written out for.
Finally, his filling out of the citation was woefully incomplete and incorrect, in the following ways:
Now, it's my understanding that in some jurisdictions, failure by the ticketing Officer to completely and accurately fill out a traffic citation is grounds to have said citation thrown out of court. Of course, I have no idea if that applies in the State of Oregon and/or in Curry County, so I have to trust that the court will act fairly in determining whether this issue is a valid one in its jurisdiction.
To summarize, I ask the court to closely evaluate the entire explanation and supporting material I've provided, and contrast this to both the officer's report, and the courts own knowledge of traffic flow as it exists near the California border on Route 101.
My claims are simply that most, if not all, of the charges made by Officer Clark have been either fabricated or significantly exaggerated (either intentionally or by poor observation) in order for him to build enough of a case against me to warrant his writing a citation of careless driving. It's not my place to say whether he used discriminatory processes in selecting me in particular, but his comments and actions, as well as those of people quite familiar with the practices of Officers of the Curry County Sheriffs Department, would indicate that there is some truth to my supposition. Finally, Officer Clark exhibited sloppy police procedures, both in terms of being inconsistent in the number and type of alleged infractions, as well as in completing the citation.
I would like to thank the court for taking the time to review my explanation and supporting documentation, and await its decision.
If I am required to answer any questions, I can be reached via the address and numbers listed at the top of the first page of this document.
Sincerely yours,
/signature/
Jake Richter
Events and preceding explanation also witnessed and attested to by:
/signature/
Linda M. Richter
Back to Curry County article | Richter Scale Home Page | Other Richter Scale Places Columns