Letters to California Highway Patrol Lies

This page documents charges of moving violations issued by the California Highway Patrol to people who were not violating any laws.
Below are letters from victims, most recent at top.

I just went to court for a Traffic Ticket with two charges.

\"Speeding 85 in a 65 zone\" "Unsafe lane change"

Driving on the FWY 5 North in congested traffic I was driving at 45 mph with stop and go traffic in the third lane. Ahead on the right-hand shoulder was a CHP patrol car with another vehicle pulled over. While getting closer to the CHP officer the car that he had stopped merged into traffic, while I was passing the CHP officer he merged into traffic. I could see the two officers in the vehicle. Getting closer to the 78 hwy I put on my signal to merge into the 4th lane to get onto the 78 hwy. The vehicle in front and behind me were unsuccessful and as I was about to give up I looked to the car next to me in the lane I was attempting to merge. It was a silver Dodge Ram truck and the driver had made eye contact with me and began to deaccelerate to allow me to merge. I accelerated and merged into the lawfully, and continued to accelerate to 65 mph to maintain the speed of traffic. Continuing on to the 78 hwy East I could see in my rear view mirror the CHP Officer trying to weave through traffic. So I set my cruise control to 65 mph. The Officer once making it past the traffic pulled up behind me and pulled me over. He stated that I was being pulled over for unsafe lane change, then when giving me the ticket stated that I was speeding on the 78 hwy.

When I went to court this is the story the officer told the judge.

Wearing the CHP uniform in a marked patrol car was driving on the 5 North in the 4th lane. There was not congestion or traffic. Witnessed me speeding and continued to "Clock" me for approx. 1/2 a mile until observing me make an unsafe lane change to catch the 78 hwy. Cutting off a black sedan and causing them to change lanes.

Questioning the officer on the fact that he was pulled over prior, he denied it.

Questioning that he stated that I cut off a black sedan when it was a grey Dodge Ram Truck, he re-stated that he meant to say "I was driving a black sedan." Which is also wrong it is a 2-door "Coupe" maybe if he had really remembered he would have known that.

Questiong the congestion he stated it was not and asking if it usually is at this time he again said usually at that time no. It was around 7 am rush hour traffic.

He had failed to supply sufficient evidence for the speeding because he didn't submit the odometer check, which was insufficient for reasons I forgot.

But I was still found guilty of the "unsafe lane change" that is B.S. the "Vista" court house is bias, and favors the CHP Officers false statements as if to be hard evidence.

I will now file perjury against the officer once further evidence of what really happened is collected, and will update with results.

Cheer me on fellow CHP Lies guests.

The following is what I had prepared for court:

On April 28th, 2010 at 2:47pm I was South bound on the 2 Freeway coming towards Glendale from La Crescenta. I had just finished working on a marketing project at a group member's house for school, and had absolutely no reason to be in a rush. It was a clear and sunny day, no clouds, with very high visibility. I was going with the flow of traffic, as were the cars around me. I passed the Mountain Ave. exit and began to prepare to change lanes and get onto the 134 on ramp and go home. As I proceeded to check my soundings before turning on my signal and changing over to the first lane, from the second lane, I noticed Highway patrol officer Gonzales, who is sitting next to me, on his motorcycle entering the freeway from the mountain avenue onramp, the officer had not yet looked in my direction and I had spotted him just as he had gotten onto the onramp. The officer was just beginning to accelerate and was not yet traveling anywhere near normal highway speeds. Considering this section of the freeway requires one to choose to either stay on the 2s or get onto the onramp for the 134 freeways I decided to remain in my line for the time being and allow the officer to have an open path and get on the freeway he needs. At this time I noticed that the officer accelerated to the speed of traffic, changed lanes, and was now directly behind me. He immediately turned on his lights and proceeded to initiate a stop. My initial reaction was maybe he's in a rush and is going to pass me right now but I immediately realized he wanted me to stop. I changed lanes to the number one lane, and considering the amount of accidents that have occurred around that area, for both of our safety I decided to proceed to the next exit on 134 west, which is Glendale Ave. and stop. I stopped my vehicle immediately upon exiting the freeway, took the keys out of the ignition and placed them on the dash, and waited. At this point I had only 1 guess as to why he had stopped me and that was to talk to me about the tints on the front driver and passenger side windows. Considering California law says the front windows cannot have any tint whatsoever, my graceful tints where still considered illegal. Officer Gonzales approached my passenger side window and told me that he had stopped me for the tints, and for speeding. Needless to say I was caught by surprise on the speeding allegation. I then attempted to explain to the officer that I was traveling at a very safe speed, following the flow of traffic, and was not putting me or anybody else in danger. The car I was driving was a 2008 civic, which, uses a digital readout for its speedometer instead of a traditional gauge with a needle and I knew for a fact that me and the cars around me where traveling between 65-73mph the entire time. The officer did not tell me how fast I was going because he didn't know, never said he used a radar gun, my car just caught his eye when he entered the freeway and he unjustly decided to cite me for a vehicle code 22349(a) speed excess of 65mph. I believe I should have been cited for a VC 22350 instead. Considering all of the variables involved a VC 22350 would have been the more justified citation. I had been on the freeway for 10 minutes and was aware of the conditions at the time, I was traveling at a very reasonable and safe speed along with the light traffic surrounding me the entire time. Officer Gonzales was just entering the freeway and traveling at a slow speed, causing his perception of speed to be skewed and he did not have a feel for the conditions of the freeway at that time because he wasn't even on it yet. I believe that officer Gonzales made an unintentional mistake considering the speed of traffic, the weather and road conditions at the time, my excessive focus on safety, and his low speed when he first saw me. I should not have been cited for VC22349(a) and instead for a VC 22350 which states that you cannot drive faster than speeds that are safe for the conditions.

Also I'd like to mention that the officer put 81 mph as the approximate speed. This is 100% completely false. I have no idea how he came up with this number and didn't notice it until after he had left. If he used a radar gun, I need to see that it was calibrated within the requirements of the law that the serial # matches the unit that cited me.

Edrik A.: 9-3-11
Took the guy all the way to State Personnel Board, but bad day for Def. (in re CA Health Dept. case involving huge public toxic case before Board of E.): physical features/measurements on CHP report total lies and the "officer" in question would not back down nor allow testimony from Mormon ("Teenagers lie") - this in favor of 40+ male pick-up driver with metal front tooth living 2 miles from one-way bridge "officer" couldn't accurately measurereport within 10', plus more (video 'proofed'). County magically produced "one-way bridge" sign three months later. Insurance company said, "Yup, CHP's lie a LOT," and crossed off CHP's report and didn't increase premium. Teenagers, now adults, still doing mainstream Christian mission work but also dealing with medical bills and problems never-before seen in family medical history. Officer George: die with the Devil or Repent!
anonymous: 8-14-11
i was driving at the posted speed in a 55 zone of the 5 freway which is otherwise 65 ,,, you can imagine all the pissed off drivers zooming around me ,,,, every time i drive this route ,,, i make sure to never exceede the 55 for this stretch of a couple miles,,,also i can count no less than 50 vehicles which will zoom past me,,,, well the chp must have been watching all this and figured i was suspicious,,,, ,,, apparently i did have one of my rear lights out,,,, however imideatly at the end of the zone when it said end of 55 zone just as i began to increase my speed ,,, red lights behind me,,,,,,,,

well they immideatley used it as an excuse to get me out of my vehicle and conduct field soberiety,,, which i passed,,,

before they began the field soberiety test,,,,, i specifficly asked ,,, was i driving erradicly or improperly,,,,, i was told ,, no as a mater of fact you were driving at the speed limit and that is highly unusual and suspicious,,, well i was shocked and flabergasted to be told that my driving at the speed limit was somehow suspicious,,,,
and now that i think back ,, including this time,, the last two times they stoped me,,,,,,, i was driving at the speed limit,,,,, and ,, i am certain WITHOUT ANY DOUBT this was the pirmary factor of my being a vehicle of interest,,,,,(while ignoring the other vehicles which were speeding) i guess there is some kind of unwritten code that one who drives at the speed limit is a hidden gold mine,,, or something,,,,,,

Joseph: 5-27-11

Top Back Home
Web Design by Kenneth A. Larson Copyright © 2000 - 2017, Kenneth A. Larson. All Rights Reserved.
Website content including photographic and graphic images may not be redistributed for use on another website.
This page last updated: Friday, 12-Jul-2013 16:10:59 EDT
Valid HTML 5 Transitional Valid CSS!