[BiggsAtlas]

In response to Useless' statements about the "hollowness" of my statements regarding defending myself and how judges dont easily let someone represent themselves, I feel the need to clarify something. This whole matter has been blown up far larger than it is on here over the last few months. As I said before, this matter was civil and not criminal. This wasnt a Law & Orderesque trial with jurors and packed courtrooms. It was a slot of time set aside for contested hearings in TRAFFIC COURT. Most people who get tickets and either contest or mitigate it dont bring lawyers unless they have a lot to lose. I know we have all been talking about this for months but when you get get down to the core of it, this is a traffic ticket. I may be partially to blame for the misconception due to my use of the phrases "NOT GUILTY" and "acquitted". Instead I should say I was found to have "NOT COMMITTED" the infraction and sent packing. Apologies for the miscommunication.

[Useless]

Originally Posted by BiggsAtlas

In response to Useless' statements about the "hollowness" of my statements regarding defending myself and how judges dont easily let someone represent themselves, I feel the need to clarify something. This whole matter has been blown up far larger than it is on here over the last few months. As I said before, this matter was civil and not criminal. This wasnt a Law & Orderesque trial with jurors and packed courtrooms. It was a slot of time set aside for contested hearings in TRAFFIC COURT. Most people who get tickets and either contest or mitigate it dont bring lawyers unless they have a lot to lose. I know we have all been talking about this for months but when you get get down to the core of it, this is a traffic ticket. I may be partially to blame for the misconception due to my use of the phrases "NOT GUILTY" and "acquitted". Instead I should say I was found to have "NOT COMMITTED" the infraction and sent packing. Apologies for the miscommunication.

Okay, Shawn!! (BiggsAtlas)

I promised you that I would come back here, offer a complete retraction of my statements, and offer my aplogies if I was shown to be wrong..

I believe that you have shown me, as well as others here, that I was wrong, and yes, I am a man of my word.

On another thread, I discussed the importance of forgiveness, the need to forgive, and the need to be able to accept forgiveness. I am working to really understand those dimenssions more clearly, and to embrace those beliefs more fully. As I stated before, The tradgedy of what happened at Virginia Tech was an eppiphany for me, but I kow that although the awkwning was quite discernable, enacting the values that I discovered does not happen all at once.

Now, while it is important to better understand and embrace the dimmensions of forgiveness, there is another parameter that is closely related to those dynamics; that is, the dimmensions of true confession. Again, this is another area in which I find myself woefully lacking, and, it is also something that I am deplorably late in realizing.

My understanding was that this case involved criminal implications, which are COMPLETELY different from civil proceedings, including cases which are handled through a traffic court; that would easily explain your decission to represent yourself.

Now, I will freely and willingly confess that I was wrong, not only in my unqualified perceptions involving the nature of your case, but also in my premature, unfounded, and erroneous rush to judge you.

I do wish to offer my most humble and sincere apologies to you, BiggA. From a personal vantage point, these situations illuminate personal failings on my part; this is something that I am trying to address and rectify, but it is a work in progress.

The tradgedy that was suffered by so many at Virginia Tech just two days ago (as of this posting) really grabbed me by the "yin-yang", and have caused me to examine my onwn life from a much more "frank and candid" perspective. Unfortunately, in that respect, I am in the all too tardy and early stages of development. I do ask forgiveness for the errors in my ways.

I am truly sorry, Shawn!

The quality of your reply to my posting illuminated a side of you that I had not previously recognized. You showed yourself to be a person with true dignity. Yoy conducted yourself with grace in dealing with someone who was very ungracious to you. You showed yourself to be a person of true class. I applaud you for that.

In any event, I do wish you well, and I hope that you will keep it safe out there.

Friends??

Peace,
Bill

[murray]

I've just got done reading through this subject and at first I thought holly Shit ect. I'm usually objective. I rarely believe every thing that a news reporter reports,Canadian or U.S. , If they reported all the true facts and done all there investigating ,They would either have nothing to report or It would be so boring it wouldn't be worth watch thus no ratings then no news , then we wouldn't know what was going on in this small world. You have to be objective until you know all the facts , remember , it's more than just the evening news ,it's competing with other shows and stations .

[golfhobo]

Although I posted early on in this thread, I haven't been following it. Like Murray, I just read the whole thing today.

I must admit I was SHOCKED when I saw the driver (Shawn) come on here to defend himself. And like Useless finally admitted, I found his posts to be well worded and "mostly" dignified.

I will say that, I have often noticed a "rush to judgement" mentality on this board, but I understand it... to a degree.

But, I hope we all remember that we are all (or mostly) truckers, and we wouldn't want to suffer the slings and arrows that were thrown at Shawn, whether we deserved them or not.

Useless, that must have been one Heckuva(n) epiphany you had! But, I think you needed it. I've always liked your more humorous posts, but lately you've been "on the rag" a bit. I don't know what was eating at you, but I hope it has eased up a bit. (I read your other posts on that.)

Shawn, I hope you are telling the truth, and that you did all you could, and more importantly that you ALWAYS drive in a responsible and careful manner. Surely, after this, you realize how easily one can be caught up in an accident that MIGHT have killed someone.... in which case, your plight might have been worse.

It's been said quite often recently, but we must ALL be circumspect of media hype. They are mostly, as I've mentioned, "average" people, who don't usually recognize the impact of their words.

As others have said, there is always more than ONE side to every story. Right or wrong, true or false, I'm glad we heard both sides to THIS one.

Yall be SAFE out there! We indeed are all part of a very SERIOUS business!

Hobo

[rcso]

here's my take on this. I'd of hung you; with my own hands.

[golfhobo]

Originally Posted by Goin Fer It

golfhobo

Guess Homer must have seen more on the news about it. I am surprised he did not call for someone else to come in and slow the traffic down. Even more surprised that traffic was slowed down at the very presence of the Highway Patrol being there.

Goin Fer It's Wife

Not sure why you are surprised that traffic slowed down at the very presence of a trooper car. Happens ALL the time, and in fact, can CAUSE just such an accident.

I once came upon a situation, 4 lane road in my direction - curve up ahead. Blue lights LOOKED like they were side by side on the right, so I went left. In the curve I realized that one of the Troopers was on the LEFT lane! (and one on the right.) Had to squeeze between them! Was extremely confusing and dangerous!

We are taught that if we break down over a hill or around a curve, we MUST put our last triangle where it will warn those approaching from a position "out of sight."

I see hundreds of examples of a single vehicle pulled over with as many as 4 troopers parked RIGHT BEHIND THEM.

In a situation like the accident described in this thread... there should have been a trooper parked WAY BACK (around the curve) to warn drivers to slow down.

And I STILL don't understand how a radar gun, in an unmanned patrol car, could have singled out THIS driver from all others, who were REPORTEDLY doing 70 mph! :shock:

No offense intended, but if YOU were a driver, you might have been somewhat circumspect about the report you read, and posted here in the first place. Not trying to blame you, but....

[Doghouse]

Gotta agree with Golf on this one.
Yes this driver was a bad driver, his record spells that out.(maybe why it was so easy for the police to blame him, and make it stick).
But,........
A good number of police are not qualified to wear a badge, let alone enforce laws.They write citations that they are ignorant about.
Law enforcement should have go waaaay out of their way to secure this accident scene, and make sure that it didn't get worse,...they didn't appear to do this,...therefore they are to blame, more than the hooligan truck driver (at least this time!!)

[BanditsCousin]

I'm confused about "I'd have hung him with my own hands" comment- who?what?why?where?

And doghouse, this driver isn't that bad of a driver, as you point to his record. Being an idiot and putting neons on your car to be fast and furious doesn't qualify as bad driving. As he stated, he has 700,000 miles in a CMV with a clean record up until this point. All of you judging him need to look in the mirror- mostly the ones without CDL's, ones that never ran the northwest, and those with >1year exp.

Nuff said

Leave it to useless to sniff out anny BS. :lol: Hes one of the few people that drill posters until they give ALL the facts, and he doesn't rest till he gets them

[Doghouse]

I am also guilty of not reading this whole thread, but after reading it,...I also agree that this driver was not a bad driver.
The point being however,....it was far too easy to point the finger at him (by the police) it seemed to me that he made a great diversion due to his history.
The fact that he was able to defend himself with the facts, (and not have it reduced by a lawyer), and win the case is a testament to the LEO's poor ability to take responsibility for their ,....repeat,.. their fault in this accident.

I understand that being judged on your past is not fair, (some of the time) because some of us do learn from our mistakes.
Now,....driver,..its up to you to keep your nose clean, or this is bound to happen again.

I think Useless did a great job getting the facts out, but it only proved that Shawn was actually innocent, and I still believe the LEO's were taking advantage of his less than perfect record.

[uglymutt]

I agree, bad driving skills, a spokane driver should know about that mountain, thats one bad twisty hill and this year I had to chain up twice on it... I been over that hill and know when its slick it don't matter on speed and you will slip off the hill going slow, I am shocked the chain law was not in effect . There is always 200 wrecks or more every year on that stretch of road, so if you are like me and love the northwest mountains please take your time and enjoy your trip...

oh another thing was his age of 27, I personally think CDL should start at 34 years old before you can get one, 27 with 18 tickets, bet he smokes crack too... but raise the age and get more mature people to drive.. 27 is still the wreckless years to me, not stable at all at that age... 34 you got a grip on responsability and respect, 27 is still a punk in my book...