Now we turn our attention to these this trooper cited her for crossing a solid white line and his dash cam caught everything. In other words, the trooper's dash cam caught the trooper not only lying, but also putting lives on the roadway on the chopping block by committing gross violations that even if she crossed the white line, she didn't commit anywhere near the violations that he did in trying to catch up to her for uh committing a violation. But listen to how the system railroads this woman. The judge is completely in cahoots with the law enforcement officer. the judge and the law enforcement officer knows that the law enforcement officer is allowed to lie during testimony and he lies and he's going to get away with it. Let's watch how he gets away with it. Then we're going to watch another situation where a person a cop lies and doesn't get away with it. [music] The court has a question for you, Sergeant Smith. And presumably there's no difference between the dash cam video that Miss Williams has today and what you possessed, which I believe you already testified, does not actually capture the infraction that you witnessed. Is that a fair statement? That's correct, your honor, because the distance it took me to catch up to Miss Williams, uh, the camera activates only so far back. So, uh, it actually missed the violation. >> Diane Williams was cited. >> So, the camera missed the violation, but judge, I'm here to tell you, I saw the violation and I cited her for the violation, and you can believe me. She's a liar and I'm not, says the cop. on Koolage Highway in Michigan for improper lane usage after an officer said she crossed a solid white line from a dedicated right turn lane and continued straight. Williams denied the violation and came to court with dash cam footage she believed supported her version of what happened. She argued the officer had been too far behind to clearly see the maneuver and the court reviewed the footage several times. The issue became whether that video actually helped her case or whether the officer's testimony would carry more weight. Calling case number 26B like Berkeley E02255. This is people of the city of Berkeley versus Dion Lin Williams. >> That's BS too because it's not the people of this particular community that are against this woman right here. It's the state. The state is not the people. So they use this as, oh yeah, this is all the people coming against you, ma'am. No, that's not true. This is the state. It's a state functionary. It's a state law enforcement agent. It's not the people at large. It's just a lie. So, the entire the entire court proceeding is predicated on a big fat lie. >> There you are. Good morning, Miss Williams. >> Um, today's the date and time set for your informal hearing. You have three options as to this improper lane usage accident. You may admit responsibility, you can admit and explain, or you may deny responsibility. and we'll commence your trial this morning. What would you like the court to do for you? >> Deny responsibility. >> Please raise your right hands. Uh do you solemnly swear the testimony you shall give before this court should be the truth? >> I do. >> I do. >> Thank you very much. The sergeant has the burden of proof. Miss Williams, and it's your turn. Sergeant Smith. >> Uh your honor, I believe on the last time that we met, um I motioned to amend this to a non-acc ticket. uh that was an error just in the uh computing system. It was a uh fail to use or uh improper lane usage, but there was no accident. >> So So if we didn't have this court proceeding, it would have just a clerical error would have slammed her with a bigger citation. >> Uh Dayton question. Um I have a southbound on Kulage uh coming up to 12 mile. Um actually I was able to review the video. However, uh because of the distance that it took for me to catch up to Miss uh Williams, uh everything was not captured on the um incar camera. >> Um what I witnessed was uh her vehicle actually cross over the solid white line just before 12 mile. >> Imagine that. What I saw and what I witnessed and what I wrote down in the report just happened to not be captured by the camera. I I wonder why that is. It's not because cops lie and cameras don't. Isn't that a truism, officer? I mean, can you just be honest about that? >> Getting over uh to continue straight south instead of making the uh right-hand turn, which that lane was dedicated to. Uh >> okay. >> I did stop Miss Williams for uh the improper lane usage uh and issued a citation for the same. >> That alone is petty. There are real crimes going on in the city. like we say all the time, and you're going to be a petty tyrant and issue a citation for crossing over the white line, you jerk. >> All right. >> And um just for the record, um what if anything is the rule in terms of the motor vehicle code for a solid white line on a roadway? >> Uh the solid white line, uh it is not supposed to be crossed. >> Okay. And as well, you're at least suggesting by your testimony that this was a dedicated turn lane. >> Yes, your honor. Uh there's signage um actually once you if you're southbound on Koolage, once you pass Edwards, uh there's signage letting you know that the lanes are separating um so that you can either make a left turn from the far left lane, continue straight from the center lane, or the right lane. Uh, it's got arrows and it's also has uh two signs letting you know you need to make the right hand turn. >> Okay. >> Is there anything further? >> Nothing further, your honor. >> Thank you, Miss Williams. It's your turn. What would you like the court to know? >> Um, well, I uh >> Well, first of all, how do I put this delicately, judge? Um, the officer is a damn liar. >> Um, I did also had the view the um, what do you call it? the video >> video. Um, and >> I do not I did not cross like this ticket says. I continued straight through from the right turn lane and I did not do that. >> The traffic opened up. I got in the left lane and continued and went straight through in that lane. And if you is looking at the dash cam video, um there was so much distance when the you know from the offer between the officer and me. It's possible that it could have looked like I went straight through but I didn't. So I do have the video available. >> Let me just say right here. This is why you always want to record your actions. I hate it guys. I hate it that my advice to you is the only way you can cover yourself is to record your every movement front-facing, rearfacing, sidefacing dash cam so that you can cover yourself. It is basically your digital insurance policy against these lying cops. If she had that, if she had that and if the judge was willing to admit that the camera does not lie, but the cops do, she could have got out of this. But now it's going to fall to her word versus his word because what he's saying he witnessed wasn't recorded by his dash cam. Even though she's going to show an example of the dash cam. And just hold on to your seats, guys, because the violation he commits in order to give her this petty little bitty citation for her quote unquote violation. It's ridiculous. Okay. >> And that was why we adjourned because I wasn't able to figure out how to to show it to share it. >> But you're ready today. I have it today. >> Great. >> Yes. So, >> you may share your screen. >> Okay. Are you able to see it? >> Not yet. >> Can you see it now? >> Yes. >> First thing I would have done if I was going to go into this proceeding right here is to find out if this law enforcement officer was on the Brady list. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Watch this. Watch this cop. Okay. We are looking at the dash cam video footage of this officer who's trying to pin a traffic violation on this woman. Watch all of his traffic violations. He's in the turning lane right now. This vehicle ahead of him is going to take a right-hand turn. He's going to proceed straight. He's in the turning lane. He's supposed to be slowing down and turning. Guess what he's not going to do? They got the green light. He's clearly over that double white line in the bike lane. In the bike lane. If you did the same thing, you would get a ticket by this guy. Still in the bike lane. Still in the bike lane. Still in the bike lane. Now he's actually in the lane of travel. But oh, what did he just do? He just crossed. It's It's a solid yellow line on his side. And he's not doing it so he can turn to the left. He's doing it so he can pass traffic. You're not supposed to. He's violating crazy amounts of traffic law right here. So he can catch up to her. And how many cars did he just pass? He just passed like four or five cars. >> This is insane to me. And if I was the judge, if the judge cared one iota about any kind of justice or any kind of consistency or any kind of traffic law, he would say, "Now, officer, do you realize how many violations you committed in your attempt to catch up to somebody you say violated a lesser traffic law?" unfreet and >> unbelievable. >> That's their audio that's muffling. >> All right. Could you back that up to where you began it? >> Yes, please do. Please do. >> Back it up. >> Back it up to where it started. Yes. >> Okay. All right. Wait. There you go. >> Oh, she didn't back it up to where he began. Let's see. >> Back it up. >> Back it up to where it started. Yes, >> that's not where it started. >> Yeah, there we go. Okay, now just watch this. Okay, so he's going to he's going to go Actually, he doesn't even have the green light. He's got a yellow and that's not a problem. But he was in a turn lane, but he did not turn. He just kept on going straight. And now he's clearly on the white line he's not supposed to be on and in the bike lane that he's not supposed to be in. So he passed that one car on the left already. So that's one car. >> Okay. >> Gets in the center turn lane against the double the solid yellow on his side. He's going to pass the second car. Passes the third car. I wonder wonder what his speed is. Fourth car, fifth car, sixth car. >> She's seven cars ahead of where he claims to have seen her go across the white fog line. Seven car lengths ahead. And then he he commits all of this dangerous these this dangerous maneuvering on this little street right here. No doubt exceeding the speed limit. I wish we had some kind of speed limit uh odometer thing on here, but I don't see it. It's not in here. And the judge is going to be silent on this whole thing. >> Is there anything else you want the court to know, Miss Williams? >> Um ju just that. >> Oh, yes. I would just like to ask a question, judge. How is it legal for him to break all of these traffic laws and pretend that I committed a traffic violation? I That's my question. Um, I have lived here on this street. I live on Koolage. I've lived here for 13 years. I am not a traffic violator. My record is completely clean. And I that's that's it. That's all. Um, you know, I did not do what I was accused of doing. Now, the white line, um, I didn't see that. And you know, I mean, there was nothing. There was no even mention of why I had been pulled over. >> Yeah. >> See, if she had recorded this on her dash cam and had maybe a 360 camera rolling or just just your cell phone camera and when he approached the vehicle and then he tells her what she violated, if he truly didn't mention to her like she just said he didn't, she'd have this all on video. You got to cover yourself. You've got to be your own advocate. You've got to record every move by law enforcement. And you can never assume that law enforcement is there for your safety or anybody's safety. >> I mean, I I'm a responsible person. >> I believe it. >> And having lived over, you know, on the street, I know, you know, traffic that wasn't a speeding violation. You know, I just I just think this is a a bit much and that it is conceivable that that was not witnessed properly. You know, it wasn't witness clarity is what I'm saying. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> It wasn't She should have been really really forthright and forward in her language instead of it wasn't witnessed like he was saying it. It didn't happen. Judge, I did not do that. I don't do that. I'm a safe driver. But you can clearly see from the officer's dash cam that he's a very unsafe driver and he's willing to put the public at risk to make something up about me. And I'm infuriated about it. And this kind of thing happens all the time. Now, she would have all the weight on her side if she had a dash cam or she recorded all of this somehow. Uh it's almost like you have to be you have to have a a 360 camera on the front and on the back so you can record all the action. That completes your testimony. The court turns back to Sergeant Smith for any rebuttal. Your >> Okay. Um, the court has a question for you, Sergeant Smith, and presumably there's no difference between the dash cam video that Miss Williams has today, and what you possessed, which I believe you already testified, does not actually capture um the infraction that you witnessed. Is that a fair statement? >> You know what's a fair statement is what I says right here. Yeah. no proof of her violation, but we have ample proof of the cop's violation. Not just one violation, but multiple violations. Speeding, putting people at risk, not turning when you're in the turning lane, proceeding in the bike lane, passing both white lines, passing a solid yellow line. We got a ton of video evidence of his violation and not one shred of video evidence of her supposed violation. But the cop is going to take the cop the I mean the judge is going to take the cop's side and then slam her and economically terrorize her. What do you see the amount that he's going to charge her? >> That's correct, your honor. Because the distance it took me to catch up to Miss Williams. Uh the camera activates only so far back. So, uh it actually missed the violation. >> Michigan civil infractions use a lower burden of proof than criminal cases. The judge only has to decide whether the violation is more likely than not based on the evidence presented. You know, I don't even buy this. I don't buy this. You got to question everything. Why didn't the judge recognize and call out all the violations of the law enfor >> What if he What if he hit a biker? Would that would that matter? What if he t-boned a car when somebody expected him to turn in that turning lane, but he kept on going straight? Would he have been held responsible or accountable for any of his actions? Any of them >> important, but it does not have to capture the violation itself. Here, the judge had to weigh Williams denial against the officer's testimony about what he said he saw before the recording began. >> Yeah. Well, if if the officer's testimony was in Okay, let me just put it let let me put it this way. If the officer's testimony was in concert with the violation of some kind of vehicle code, that's still petty because did she run into anybody? Did she jeopardize anybody's life? Did she put anybody in fear for their life? Did she hit a pedestrian? Did she sideswipe a car? Answer is no. Well, then you're petty to continue on with this citation. But the bottom line is we don't just have no evidence, zero evidence that she did anything wrong. We got abundant evidence that he did everything wrong. It's almost like he broke every traffic law he possibly could have in that little stretch of road as he's passing seven vehicles to catch up to her to give her a citation. >> Okay. So, is it a fair statement based on your recollection and perception that the infraction you witnessed occurred before the commencement of the exhibit that the court just watched three times? >> It happened just before that. That >> Okay. All right. >> And that testimony right there from a law enforcement officer, you know, is trained to lie. That's all the judge needed to make that the Bible gospel truth. very much. Um, unless you have anything further, Sergeant, the court has heard the testimony of both parties and people versus Dion Lynn Williams. Uh, the court first notes that the burden of proof in a civil infraction matter is a mere prepoundonderance of the evidence, which is referred to as the featherweight test by uh legal scholars. It is not a criminal matter. It does not require a showing of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. >> It doesn't matter if this is criminal or civil. We're talking about justice here. If there's no proof that she did it, then it's likely that she didn't do it because judge the judge should know that cops lie as as as a routine practice. Um secondly, um the [clears throat] court wishes to note that it wants to believe after 40 years in and out of the courts in the state of Michigan that um folks are always coming to the court in good faith based upon their best recollection of the events in question. The court notes a couple different features and the first of which is video is a helpful tool. It can on occasion be dispositive. However, it is not required. Um, the court would note that um the very first alcohol enforcement motor vehicle action in history happened in 1893 in London, England. That was a year before they invented the concept of film. Um, for at least half this court's career in the defense industry, um, there was no such thing as video period. Um, so it is not required. Uh although it is a very helpful tool in >> that is just the dumbest thing to say because they didn't have video back in 1893 on the first traffic stop that where there was a DUI. Um it's not required. That's the one of the dumbest things that you could say. Basically what this judge is going to say and he's going to continue digging his hole. He's going to continue to say that I don't care what Miss Williams driving record is. I don't care what Miss Williams says. This court is here to serve the words and uh accentuate the words and believe the words and completely rest the entire case on the words of a known liar. >> Any context? Lastly, um the court historically does not review any driving record um prior to undertaking the case. Um, Miss Williams did reference her driving record during her testimony, and for that reason, the court was able to confirm that in absolute point of fact, um, >> she does not have any prior infractions. >> Wait, they actually looked up her driving record and verified that she has no driving. She has a perfectly clean record. So, it's likely that as as many years as Miss Williams has been driving, it's likely that she doesn't commit traffic violations. So that weight of evidence is on her side too after being investigated by the court. Interesting. Continue. Please proceed, Mr. Judge. >> Court did not consider that when reviewing the evidence before it. The court simply looks at the evidence before it as presented both in verbal testimony and any display testimony. Um, doubling back to that issue of the burden of proof. Uh, the court believes that burden of proof has been met. The court's going to assess a fine of $175. That is >> Wait, wait. The the burden of proof that Miss Williams violated a traffic code based on what the all they had was what the law enforcement agent said. And the law, by the way, the law enforcement agent is incentivized to lie because if he lies, that increases the coffers of the injustice system. And basically this judge indirectly benefits because the system that he gets his paycheck from gets another $175 richer based on the word the testimony of a known lying copable through the pay portal on the 44th District Court website. Or Miss Williams, you can walk a cash checker charge into this court at 400 East 11 Mile Road Monday through Friday between 8:30 and 4:30. That is due within 7 days. You may also of course appeal the court's ruling by posting a cash bond of 175. Within seven matter gets placed on the formal hearing docket and the city of Berkeley would be represented by its city prosecutor, Miss Hamama. >> This is why the Marvin Hayyers of the world go to metal shops and weld metal on the outside of a D6 bulldozer. This right here is exactly why. This is the injustice system working against the people it's supposed to be serving, extracting just a little bit more juice from them. Let's see how much we can squeeze out of them. That $175 represents time and labor. Your time and laboring energies have just been in extracted by the injustice system based solely on the words of a lying cop who does not have the video evidence to support the assertion that he's launched against Miss Williams. If that doesn't make you want to pull your hair out, I don't know what will. >> So 175 is a bond or a fine within seven and that does complete your hearing. Good luck to you. Michigan courts have handled similar evidence questions before. In people versus cross, the court explained that civil responsibility turns on which evidence is more convincing. In people versus ferency, [laughter] which there was ample evidence, the cop, if anybody was going to get a ticket, if we were ever for some universal traffic law scenario, the only person who should have gotten the ticket was not Miss Williams. It should have been the law enforcement officer who accused Miss Williams of a traffic violation. He clearly committed gross violations that every time they commit a viol if it's going to be that we get traffic citations and we have to pay $175, $250 for a seat belt ticket, $535 for towing. I got I got charged f the ticket was I was leaving California and I had a Penske truck with a trailer on the back and the trailer was hauling a car and I was doing 63 miles per hour and you're only you can't exceed 55 miles per hour on the five when you're hauling a trailer. I was doing 63, which is 8 miles an hour over. For that 8 miles an hour over, which is not even an unsafe speed at all, I got a $535 ticket. So, if we're going to live in a world where I can get a 30 $535 ticket for going 8 miles an hour of the speed limit, Miss Williams can get an $175 ticket for going over a white line only based on the words of the law enforcer. Then that law enforcer should have got multiple tickets for speeding, for reckless driving, for putting people in danger, for crossing the white line and the yellow line and driving in the bike lane, and it should come out of his pocket, not it should not be taxpayer funded. >> Upheld that lower civil burden for traffic infractions. And in Cole versus Exein, the court recognized that a witness's own observation can be weighed when the court can evaluate how well they were able to see what happened. Together, they show why video is important, but not the only evidence a judge can consider. >> Well, can you tell me where what is the address for this? >> Oh, God. >> Where' you say I'm supposed to pay this? >> 400 East. >> I would It would be so hilarious if she goes, "Yes, Massa. I'll be up there. I'll be up there. Please don't whip me. Please don't whip me. You're treating me like a slave. You know that, right? You're taking the word of a law enforcer who's incentivized to give me that ticket. And you're incentivized to make sure that this ticket gets paid. >> 11 Mile Road >> 400 East 11 Mile. And so is this considered um is this in a fraction with points? Is it just the >> the court doesn't assign the points? The court just keeps in uh the disposition. So, you've been you've been found responsible uh of improper lane usage and um what if any points that may be assigned by the Secretary of State are up to them. Uh the court is aware that um Secretary of State Benson's office is running some form of a an amnesty or forgiveness uh program with respect to first time infractions, but [snorts] uh the court does not uh have too much detail on that. Improper lane usage is a appears to be a two-point violation, but again the court doesn't assign those points. That completes your hearing. Miss Williams, thank you for your professionalism. Good luck to you. And now what happens and and the law enforcement knows this and the judge knows this. You get two points on your driving record, the insurance company's not going to look too kindly. So this isn't going to be just a $175 ding coming out of her checkbook. This is going to be a recurring thing because when the insurance company sees this, guess what happens to her premiums? They go up. Oh, you're an unsafe driver. Well, you might hit somebody on the side of the road. Did you go off into the bike lane? You're you're a risky driver. So, there's this domino effect and they know it and they got they know they have you over a barrel. I want to hear what you have to say. Did did I say anything that was unfair in this? Do you think that uh do do you believe the law enforcement officer or do you believe Miss Williams? Should the law enforcement officer with all of the she he passed seven vehicles exceeding the speed limit, reckless driving, didn't turn when he was in the turn lane, went over many many solid lines. the very thing that she only went over one according to him. Do you think any of this was fair? Do you think the judge is incentivized to make a ruling against an individual in the community and just believe just take what the law enforcement officer said? Let me know what you guys have to say about that. If you think that I'm being unfair about this, please let me know. >> [bell]