license taken away by cop
 

happened to friend.

-a very short simple stop
clocked at 160~170 on HWY1. 2-3am ish.
cop came, took license, and said come see him at officce tmrw.
and cop left.
driver and cop talked for a minute or two total.

what happened? cop is too busy to write out ticket? or getting prepared to give as much violations as possible? cop is being nice and wants to give a lecture at office and no ticket? he ran out of ticket papers? no more pens to write with?

driver is left without a license on highway.
lol?

is this normal thing to happen? why would cop leave a driver without a license on a highway then leave?

on something related ive always wondered if one gets caught for speeding, can he also be charged with other things for the same offence such as
speeding + driving without due consid + other thhings that are vague.

was it a marked or unmarked car? my guess was he wasn't a cop, and now somebody else has your ID and is probably using it for something. A cop isn't going to leave you on the side of the road and drive away.


yes

well i think its a real cop.
friend went to the office today in the afternoon and said the cop isnt working till nightshift. so i guess the cop exist.
i will update with info later when friend meets cop.

Yes, I think we need "the rest of the story" before there is much to respond to.

ok update.
two info i missed out on.
he was a motorcycle cop
and he had to go to an accident scene.

^ driver was told that info when pulled over, and so cop took the license and left.

still, the whole "pull oover" took a 1-2minutes.
driver is left without license on a highway.

so cop did have a reason, but can he/shouldve done what he did?

friend wanst able to meet the cop today despite going to the office 4 times.

Was he giving him a suspension or did he just take the license so he had the perps ( been watching CSI too much ) info? If he wasn't told he was suspended from driving IMO he was still able to drive,had he needed to provide a license ,I'm sure a radio check to the Motorcycle officer could have proved he had a valid License (assuming the Motorcycle Officer hadn't suspended him).

That's just bizarre... what's the guy supposed to do if he's pulled over again five miles down the road and doesn't have a license to show? "Well, this other cop just took it and left..." isn't gonna wash.

Skid's right, there's something substantial missing from this story.

not suspended. i guess cop just wanted info so he can ticket later or something.
although friend is guilty,

i think its just gay that cop took his liccense, did not meet my friend today despite him saying come see him.

<deleted>

the whole story is there.

RECAP.
clocked at 160-170km on #1.
motorcycle cop pulls driver over.
talks for 1-2min and takes the driver's license away.
officer gives the reason that he has to respond to an accident scene,
so the driver should come see the officer at his office the next day.
the driver now has no DL on him, cop has left to his accident scene.
Driver is left without license on the highway, he drives home.
Next day driver goes to office but was unable to meet the officer.
the office told him a mmessage will be left and the driver should just wait for a call instead of coming to the office, even though officer said to come see him.

there is nothing missing from the story. the driver has no reason to lie to me. he already admits guilt of speeding. hhes just scared what will happen to him.

he doesnt even know im posting, im just curious if cop can do what he did.

*driver is N but did not have passenger nor alcohol and had N display so i dont think this info matters.

...as YOU were told it.

That's the part that doesn't make sense - I can't imagine any circumstances that would compel the cop to just grab the guy's license and then take off without even a warning not to drive.

Nobody says he's LYING... but he must be leaving something out.

It would be one way to insure that the driver did show up for his excessive speed ticket the next day. It is a huge problem getting a VT served on someone who lives out of your working area....lots of paperwork, other members having to attend court etc. It's a lot simpler to do what the member did. If it was a MC rider, then chances are I trained him...but I never suggested that tactic. There have been times when I was interrupted in the middle of a VT to go somewhere else in a huge hurry. I neved seized the DL but I was never dealing with that kind of serious offence at the time. It had to be a really urgent call to take off. I have often written a VT for an infraction but told the driver I would hold it for 24 hours IF the reported in by a certain time with the problem fixed/paperwork produced etc. Hasving the DL is a huge motivating factor.

If the driver had been stopped again he could have told whoever stopped him what had happened and the member's name. That should have avoided any fail to produce DL ticket. It certainly would be a 100% valid defence in court, although I don't know if mentioning the speed he had been driving, would be a good idea?

As far as the charges go...depending on what you did, the Cop has up to 12 months to charge you with a motor vehicle act/regulation offense. Criminal Code charges may or may not have limitations of action, depending on the charge. There would have to be evidence to suport any and every charge laid. The Member may decide to charge you for any number of things you did...or cut you some slack on them. The evidence must support the charge...and nothing is "vague". There are precedents that decide what is required to convict. Hope that helps.

^k type of response i wanted.
driver told me cop sounded pissed. so i guess when he meets the cop, all hell will be brought unleashed.

and people may think parts of story are missing, but the basic facts are there. driver was able to go home but without a DL on him.

I'm curious to hear what happens to your friend after he meets with the officer.

I would say all that I needed to respond with was there after your second post.

Yes, there is no reason why the officer shouldn't do this. It was an out of the ordinary situation, both with your friend's speed and the collision needing attention right away. As zulutango says, it is a simple way to insure that the situation is dealt with from the officer's point of view.

Your friend has a legitimate excuse for not producing his license if he is stopped again before he gets it back. He can provide the officer's name and detachment phone number along with his story. I would have accepted it at the roadside.

The friend should have taken the instruction and sat tight until the original officer called back. It would have saved him 3 wasted trips.

well hes instructions was to come see the officer at the office.
one time he went during the day and was told that the officer is a night shift.
then i guess he kept going back with time interval. he hasnt got a call from the officer yet. so i guess the officer will give him a call tonight.

There is a flaw for using this tactic of taking the license and ask him to report to the officer at a later date. So what the officer did was removing the driver's authority to drive on public road, without making proper accommodations for the revoked driver. If he is driving alone on the highway (which happened to OP's friend), then how is he going to get home. Technically, he can't drive the car anymore as his license was temporary suspended. Also, if he drove home and another police officer stopped him and found out officer so-and-so had taken his license away without issuing any notices, the driver will now be charged with driving without a license. I think this tactic will make the driver suffer more agony than needed.

^Well, skidmark explains that if he gets stopped again, he can tell that cop how the other cop has his license, giving the first cop's name, etc.

Problem is, buddy still needs to drive to go meet to first cop to get his license back as well... and if he can't get ahold of the first cop, he still has to get around in the interim. And the thing is, he hasn't been written up, suspended, prohibited, or according to the story, even INSTRUCTED not to drive anymore. It would be one thing if the cop told him, "Meet me tomorrow to get your license back, and you're not allowed to drive until then"... it's quite another if the cop simply took the license and left him there on the side of the road.

(deleted)

I've posted and deleted twice now, because I know how your friend can get out of this ticket, but since your friend is probably not very bright, he pretty much deserves the ticket.

.

help a revscener's friend out!

^ i have also thought about a possibility of a way out of this ticket, that is why i created this thread in the first place because what the officer did is (IMO) "unprofessional" (not following the correct procedure) and weird.

Although he said he was in a hurry, what he did to my freind sounds illeagal.
im not 100% sure but
1. the officer left my friend without license making it for him illeagal to drive.
2. by taking away his license and then just leaving to another scene, he left my friend stranded. which sounds worng.

#1. NO...it is not illegal for him to drive. He can still drive. He was not arrested, suspended or whatever. IF stopped by the Police he could not produce his DL. That could get him a VT, which could be handled as already stated above.

#2 No...he was not stranded...he just did not have his DL with him.

If I had stopped the "friend" for driving 110 mph on a public Highway, I would have been very reluctant to let him continue to drive...but getting called away to a serious crash means that sometimes you have to deal with the most serious set of circumstances at the time. It would be dereliction of duty to have stayed there and processed a street racing/excessive speed or whatever charge, if someone was injured or dying at roadside. I would have done exactly what the other MC Cop did...and likely also radioed ahead to other cars to keep any eye open for him...if I had time while riding code 3 to a crash site.
It was not unprofessional or wierd at all. Based on what we have been told here, it was entirely professional and proper. Have your "friend" contest it in court and let the JP hear the total circumstances of the situation....keeping in mind that the fines can go up to a $2000 max limit for any MV Act conviction. Telling the JP that a driver who got stopped for doing 170 plus on a public road found the Police action "wierd and unprofessional".,..is going to go a long way to helping your case.......:(

No, he was not prohibited or suspended by this and his ability to drive on a public road was not affected. He also has a legal defence to "fail to produce."

although if the driver is ticketed for fail to produce, and it can be disputed and won,
isnt it a fact that it is illeagal to drive without a license? hence it is a ticketable offence?

my logic is this:
it is like you had a drink. it is temporary illegal for one to drive until he is sober.
License is taken away. It is temporary illeagal for one to drive until he gets his license.

It's just what i am thinking. by the looks of what the police members are replying though, it is probably wrong?.

Yes, it is illegal to drive without a license, if you mean not having one at all. It is only an offence to fail to produce your license if it is demanded of you and you don't have a legal excuse.

If you stay "under the radar" there will be no demand, and if there is, he has an excuse.