Reply #52: i agree, 400Years

[jukes]

but some understanding of the machine is necessary.

refusing to allow the officer to 'print you on-sight will probably result in an "actual" arrest, and you will be taken to the station, booked, & fingerprinted.

any courtcase will be to determine whether the actual traffic offense occured, not whether the on-scene fingerprinting was a violation of your civil rights.

lower courts tend to give "carte blanche" to police in these matters. a lawyer MIGHT be able to 'suade the court, but that's VERY expensive, & may not avail in any case.

IF the charges are deemed to be valid, THEN you can appeal on the basis of a civil-rights violation, but the appeals court may well decide that, since the issue of fingerprinting was NOT a factor in your conviction for a traffic violation, the appeals court has no jurisdiction. again, you're facing extensive legal fees, unless you can interest the ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Centere, or some other "pro bono" organization to try the case gratis.

the ONLY time that the appeals court wd HAVE to render a verdict is if you were charged for some crime base SOLELY on the fingerprint evidence, in which case your appeal wd only have merit IF you were fingerprinted @ the scene. failure to cooperate & subsequently being arrested wd generate booking-procedure fingerprinting, & there's tons of precedent to justify that scenario. so you MUST submit in order to have an appealable issue.


MY APOLOGIES IF THIS SEEMS CONVOLUTED, BUT THE LAW IS NOT GEARED TO PROTECTING ANY BUT THE RICHEST OF US. PLEASE DO NOT TAKE ANY OF THIS MISSIVE TO MEAN THAT I APPROVE OF ON-SCENE FINGERPRINTING, I AM MERELY EXPLAINING THE MECHANICS OF THE SYSTEM LEST SOME OF US MISS_STEP & PAY AN UNWITTING PENALTY.

oh, and any1 stupid enough to think i'm a troll or an apologist can kiss my streisand collecting, fonda-revering, socialist ASS!