home

Stupid Citation of the Week

By TChris, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 04:02:59 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Has the LAPD declared war on slow moving pedestrians? Mayvis Coyle, a resident of Monte Vista Mobile Estates, was ticketed for crossing the street too slowly. Mayvis didn't sprint across the intersection, but at 82, her inability to generate much speed is surely forgivable.

Senior citizens who live in the neighborhood complain that the walk lights aren't timed to permit a safe crossing. One might expect the LAPD to have some compassion for those who need to take a little extra time, but none are safe from this officer's "by the book" approach to traffic code enforcement. Public funds would be better spent on crossing guards than on officers who would rather ticket the elderly and disabled than help them.

Mayvis is no pushover. Not only is she fighting the ticket (wouldn't it be fun to watch Mayvis cross-examine the cop for a couple of hours?), she's fighting for a longer walk signal. The LAPD riled up the wrong woman. Go Mayvis!

< Rubber Stamps to Republican Congress Delivered | Richard Mellon Scaife's Divorce Woes >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Stupid Citation of the Week | 33 comments (33 topical)
    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#1)
    by Punchy on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 04:49:36 PM EST
    This could very well be the stupidest citation EVER. Cited for walking too slowly? Are you kidding me? The article also states that even high school-aged kids had difficulty making the 5-lane intersection in time. I simply cannot believe a policeman, noticing how slow she was moving, instead of helping her and/or stopping traffic to get her across safely, instead writes a ticket. Incredible. I would give a lot of money to have a transcript to exactly what was said between the two while he was citing her. My grandma woulda burned his ears off...

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#2)
    by jen on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 05:22:03 PM EST
    If teens have to run, how is anyone else supposed to make it? Is this a rarely crossed intersection or something?

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#4)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 06:13:03 PM EST
    LA is infamous for jaywalking citations, and if you talk back they haul you to jail for 'assaulting an officer.' And if another pedestrian complains, they haul them off for 'interfering.' Sounds silly? Yep, but been there, done that.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#5)
    by Joe Bob on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 06:24:44 PM EST
    Yep, aside from a pathetic lack of judgment on the part of the officer, I think revenue raising is the most likely explanation for this. After all, times are tough all over. Also, this being LA it doesn't surprise me that anything which interferes with the supremacy of automobile traffic is dealt with harshly. To give you a sense of contrast, fathom this: last year the city of St. Paul, MN actually mounted an enforcement campaign that targetted drivers who didn't properly yield to pedestrians in crosswalks.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dick Durata on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 06:41:00 PM EST
    Mayvis also dresses like some kind of hippy, and that has always provoked the LAPD.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimcee on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 06:55:30 PM EST
    Why wasn't this woman treated by the police the same as they treated the pro-illegal immigrant marchers last week. The protesters blocked traffic illegaly and no one busted them and the media lauded them but poor Ms Mayvis gets the full brunt of the LAPD. I guess Ms Mavis ought to travel with a pack of protesters if she wants to avoid future arrest.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 07:32:38 PM EST
    LA is legendary for its hostility to pedestrians. There's a quote in this book from some LA city planning type to the effect that they consider pedestrians to be the area's biggest obstacle to the efficient flow of traffic.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#9)
    by kdog on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 07:46:19 PM EST
    I'd thought I heard it all when it comes to the depths a municipality would go to just to get another hundo. Laugh or cry.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#10)
    by Sailor on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 08:03:52 PM EST
    Why wasn't this woman treated by the police the same as they treated the pro-illegal immigrant marchers last week.
    Yes, I recommend every person travel with 10,000 other folks when they cross the street. Sheesh, what a maroon!

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#11)
    by cpinva on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 10:06:43 PM EST
    obviously, this police officer is not a former boy scout. on the other hand, maybe he's a former "new, private club" boy scout.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#12)
    by Al on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 10:12:16 PM EST
    Dear LAPD: Here's a thought. When you see an elderly person taking too long to cross the street, GO AND HELP THEM GET TO THE OTHER SIDE SAFELY, YOU DIMWITS.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#13)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 10:23:46 PM EST
    "To Protect and Serve"? Haw.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#14)
    by squeaky on Tue Apr 11, 2006 at 10:27:30 PM EST
    To "To Protect and Serve" the Master.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#15)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 05:40:28 AM EST
    jimcee writes:
    Why wasn't this woman treated by the police the same as they treated the pro-illegal immigrant marchers last week.
    Because she has no politicans looking out for her.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:02:12 AM EST
    Sure, that's why TALKLEFT brought it up. That's why they closed by saying Go Mayvis! NEXT!

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#17)
    by HK on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:08:39 AM EST
    I think that the elderly are treated increasingly badly in the world today. People complain they are living too long, putting a strain on society that has to support them. Their needs, views and contributions are frequently overlooked. This incident is, in my opinion, indicative of a general attitude that needs to change.
    My grandma woulda burned his ears off...
    My Grandma (who also happens to be 82) would have blown his ears off. She is very deaf and consequently talks at a volume that would register on the Richter scale. If only the cop had picked on her. I went to see her two hours ago and my head is banging.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#18)
    by Edger on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:23:14 AM EST
    Al: Dear LAPD: Here's a thought. When you see an elderly person taking too long to cross the street, GO AND HELP THEM GET TO THE OTHER SIDE SAFELY, YOU DIMWITS. What? And show them what weak kneed little girl wusses LAPD is? Hang her from the nearest lamppost, or mace her and taser her, or just shoot her on the spot. Who does she think she is taking so long any way? Krist, if she can't walk fast enough she should buy a skateboard. What is it with these old biddies anyway? Whatever happened to personal responsibility? She could cause someone to be late for the next republican rally fer gawds sakes. String her up. Deport all her descendants after their parole dates. She's holdin' up progress. Terrist...

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 06:40:15 AM EST
    Wow, where is a good boy scout when you need one, i.e., doing good deeds aby helping little old ladies cross the street? Where I live (Seattle) we have some of the safest downtown streets in the country. That is because both pedestrians and drivers are very vigilant about obeying the crosswalk laws. Give 'em hell, Mayvis!

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#20)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:03:15 AM EST
    I was under the impression, when push comes to shove, that the pedestrian always has the right of way.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:24:05 AM EST
    Kdog, They do. But, apparently, in LA, you now have to pay for that right of way if the light turns against you. This woman is going to take the LAPD to the cleaners in court.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#22)
    by kdog on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:34:36 AM EST
    This woman is going to take the LAPD to the cleaners in court
    Seems to happen to LAPD quite a bit, doesn't it jp? If the NYPD tried to give out a jaywalking ticket there would be a riot....and rightly so. How stupid.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#23)
    by peacrevol on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:42:06 AM EST
    Tickets, fines, and arresting people is not about breaking the law any more. It's all about dollars and cents. I thought y'all knew that already. If there is any way a cop can twist a situation to make it look like he was following the book by arresting you, he will. They look for a reason to make arrests and write tickets so that they can steal some more money from you. Protect and serve my a$$.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#24)
    by peacrevol on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 07:42:32 AM EST
    Tickets, fines, and arresting people is not about breaking the law any more. It's all about dollars and cents. I thought y'all knew that already. If there is any way a cop can twist a situation to make it look like he was following the book by arresting you, he will. They look for a reason to make arrests and write tickets so that they can steal some more money from you. Protect and serve my a$$.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#25)
    by swingvote on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 08:38:03 AM EST
    Kdog, They've been getting pretty hardcore about ticketing people in DC as well, but they claim it's because of a recent upswing in the number of people killed because they walked out into the street right in front of a car. Apparently some people can't walk and yak on their cell phone at the same time. In that kind of case, where do we draw the line? Do the police have a duty to protect us by ticketing us for being stupid? Little old ladies in the crosswalk are obviously another matter entirely, but where is the line between protecting and serving?

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#26)
    by peacrevol on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 08:46:26 AM EST
    Apparently some people can't walk and yak on their cell phone at the same time. In that kind of case, where do we draw the line? Do the police have a duty to protect us by ticketing us for being stupid?
    No...police have the duty to let the stupid people that cant walk and talk on a phone get run over if they try to walk and talk and cant. They have the duty to HELP elderly folks cross the road instead of ticketing them. They have a duty to allow US citizens to live as free Americans, protect them from the real criminals, and assist them when possible or necessary.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#27)
    by swingvote on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 08:55:24 AM EST
    No...police have the duty to let the stupid people that cant walk and talk on a phone get run over if they try to walk and talk and cant. Fair enough, but what about the right of everyone else to drive down the street without having to run over some idiot who can't walk and talk at the same time? Do the police have a duty to protect them from the stupidity of others? Or is life just a free-for-all until you hit a certain age, at which point the duty to serve kicks in? If so, at what age is that? There's no doubt that the cop in LA over-reacted, and I would be inclined to believe this is predominately a revenue thing, but there is always another side of the coin to consider.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#28)
    by peacrevol on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 09:35:19 AM EST
    what about the right of everyone else to drive down the street without having to run over some idiot who can't walk and talk at the same time? Do the police have a duty to protect them from the stupidity of others?
    Most people in society have enough common sense to not get run over in the street b/c they are on their cell phones. The police and other drivers should trust that most people will not just step in front of a car. I dont have any statistics, but I would imagine that it is a rare enough occurrance that they could probably limit the tickets issued for this sort of thing to be issued only when people get hit. The tickets then should be issued based on comparative neglegence (still remember that from from POLS 101, college, what an investment) on a case by case basis. Of course jay-walking laws should probably still be enforced when it impedes traffic even if nobody runs anybody over.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#29)
    by peacrevol on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 09:39:47 AM EST
    By the way, writing unnecessary tickets to increase revenue to the PD is bull$^1t. I already pay plenty of my money to the govt in the form of income tax, sales tax, vehicle registration, vehicle inspection, fishing licenses, etc, etc, etc...

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#30)
    by swingvote on Wed Apr 12, 2006 at 10:22:20 AM EST
    I would imagine that it is a rare enough occurrance that they could probably limit the tickets issued for this sort of thing to be issued only when people get hit. I believe the number was three people killed in DC in January alone. And it's pretty hard to cite a dead man. Of course jay-walking laws should probably still be enforced when it impedes traffic even if nobody runs anybody over. That's a very different statement from: They have the duty to HELP elderly folks cross the road instead of ticketing them. They have a duty to allow US citizens to live as free Americans, protect them from the real criminals, and assist them when possible or necessary. If the elderly person is jaywalking and impeding traffic, do they get the ticket, or the help? I don't thnk there is a perfect answer to this situation. By the way, writing unnecessary tickets to increase revenue to the PD is bull$^1t. No argument there. Same is true for a lot of speeding tickets as well.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#31)
    by peacrevol on Thu Apr 13, 2006 at 06:58:48 AM EST
    If the elderly person is jaywalking and impeding traffic, do they get the ticket, or the help?
    The ticket...if they are at an intersection they get the help. This elderly lady was trying to walk across an intersection and the light changed on her. Then she got her ticket. Crossing the street does not mean jaywalking.
    I believe the number was three people killed in DC in January alone. And it's pretty hard to cite a dead man.
    Were these people crossing at an intersection with a legal crosswalk? Were they hit b/c a car ran a red light? Were they jaywalking? Did they stumble out into the street b/c they were impaired or their mobility was somehow hindered otherwise? Three people in a month getting run over is not specific enough of a stat for this discussion. But my biggest point is that cops should be a little more selective of when they use their ticketing/arresting and all other powers. It seems they are too quick to assume that they can wave a badge and do what ever the hell they want.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 14, 2006 at 12:36:33 PM EST
    1. To use taxpayers money to hire crossing guards at every intersection is ridiculous 2. I don't want to sit at a green light, creating pollution, and traffic, wasting gas, while some selfish, rebellious hippy person blocks me. 3. She is clearly inconsiderate, since she started crossing when the light was changing, knowing it would take longer for her to get across. 4. She should get a ride like my Grandpa. I know ALOT of elderly people that get rides from family, friends, the bus, Access van service, Dial-A-Ride, etc., or get a free scooter from thescooterstore.com.

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#33)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 07:06:14 PM EST
    This whole deal with the woman getting the ticket for crossing the street too slowly is a total joke. Why in the heck didn't the policeman on the motorcycle do his duty and help to escort her to safety? What's wrong with this sick society we live in anyway? There are plenty of other concerns that would have much more priority than this. What a total waste of government money. This officer should be reprimanded for failure to do his proper duty, protection of the elderly. I just can't believe that this has happened!! I have never been so moved as to respond to something of this nature, but for crying out loud.......give this woman a break. No wonder law enforcement is getting such a bad rap lately......nothing better to do than ticket an old woman for jaywalking, when that is not actually the case. The policeman should be fined for failure to do a proper thing and help an elderly person to safety!! Way to go.....totally uncalled for and ridiculous............

    Re: Stupid Citation of the Week (none / 0) (#34)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Apr 15, 2006 at 11:07:29 PM EST
    Why in the heck didn't the policeman on the motorcycle do his duty and help to escort her to safety? Since when is it the duty of a police officer to be a crossing job. He is protecting her. By teaching her not to cross into the intersection when the light is already changing and she knows it will take her longer to get across. There are bad drivers here in the SFV on there cell phones etc. that wouldn't expect someone to be in the middle of the intersection when the light is green for them and red for the pedestrian. An elderly person was killed in another intersection a week earlier, so the officer was probably told to look out for unsafe pedestrians.

    Stupid Citation of the Week | 33 comments (33 topical)