Need Advice on Going to Court for a Traffic Offence That I Did Not Do

Lmirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 17:22
Last edited 16/09/2023 - 00:21 by 1 other user

Hi OzBargain community please advise. I was pulled over by a highway patrol car and fined for something I did not do.

When I was pulled over, I stated I made a mistake without hearing the charge under the impression I am being fined for crossing unbroken line near intersection. At the time I was informed by the officer there is evidence on the car camera and he has switched on the body cam. I requested to view the evidence and have been provided with access to the body cam only (not the car footage) on body cam officer walking to the car said I did a U-turn and I did not hear the charge while seated inside the car.

Picture

I have not had any driving offence in the last 15 years and my review has been rejected, is it worth going to court? I feel gutted knowing i am being penalised for something I did not do, easier to accept if I was at fault.

Fine is $283 with 2 demerit points. Lawyer will charge me more and not sure what my chances are as it seems I am admitting my mistake.

Thank you each one of you appreciate your valuable advice
I have now paid the fine and off my mind. it is not worth waiting for the court date and then preparing for court. minimum 2 days 1. for not guilty plea and 1 for trial
I have 11 points left and some lessons learned

  1. Only provide name and address when copper stops anything else can get you in trouble
  2. There is GIPA if anyone needs access to any camera footage
  3. Keep away from police and lawyer's there are some bad ones

OZbargain community is priceless !!!

Happy weekend everyone

Poll Options expired

  • 22
    Yes take it to court
  • 21
    No not worth going to court
Automotive

Comments

  • DashCam AKA Rolts on 15/09/2023 - 17:23
    +9

    Need Advise on Going to Court for a Traffic offience that I Did Not Do

    *advice

  • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 17:25

    corrected thank you

  • Tee Rex Arms on 15/09/2023 - 17:27

    You’re good for it. The end.

  • dcep on 15/09/2023 - 17:34

    When i was pulled over i stated i made a mistake without hearing the charge under the impression i am being fined for crossing unborken line near intersection….
    … not sure what my chances are as it seems i am admitting my mistake

    Are you saying the officer read out the charges and you admitted to the mistake verbally right then and there ?

    You don't need a lawyer to go to court. You can represent yourself if you don't have difficulties on talking.

    And I guess no chance you had a dashcam running in your car back then ?

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 17:37
      +1

      As soon as i saw him i said know i made a mistake thinking i crossed an unbroken line. I guess panicked for being pulled over. unfortunately no dashcam. and i have never needed to go court

      • AustriaBargain on 15/09/2023 - 19:28
        +2

        Is there a risk that if you admit in court to crossing the unbroken line you'll be charged for that as well?

        • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:28

          it wasn't unbroken so i can't be fined for that.
          i have come to realise its best to say i dont know why i was pulled and i panicked and started blabering under duress

          • gyrex on 16/09/2023 - 13:16
            -5

            @mirali5: What "duress"? He simply pulled you over and asked you questions.

            • bondy28 on 16/09/2023 - 16:41

              @gyrex: Were you there?

              • tessel on 16/09/2023 - 18:51
                +6

                @bondy28: Yes, gyrex was in the boot.

                • gyrex on 17/09/2023 - 11:33
                  +3

                  @tessel: It was a spacious and comfortable boot but I did suffer a few knocks after the op's u-turn.

            • spacemannn on 17/09/2023 - 18:09
              +1

              @gyrex: Some people feel pressure & get nervous when dealing with police. They don't exactly give off a "serve & protect" vibe

  • Aussiebargainer on 15/09/2023 - 17:35
    +3

    So did you do a u-turn?
    Depending on your state but u-turns are not allowed in NSW unless permitted with a u-turn sign.
    If the fine is for an illegal u-turn and you are certain that you didn't do a u-turn then take it to court. The video cannot show it if you are certain you didn't do it.

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 17:39

      what about me blurting i am sorry its my mistake admissaibility factor
      no i did not do a uturn one one my co-workers got booked for uturn so I am aware unless it says u turn allowed you cannot do a uturn

      • Aussiebargainer on 15/09/2023 - 17:46

        So what does your fine say? What is listed as the infringement?

        I have looked at your picture and my view is that once you are in that right turn lane, you must turn right. However best to check the road rule book for right lane turns

        • pegaxs on 15/09/2023 - 18:38
          +1

          You can move out of that turning lane if the line on the road is a broken line between the lanes. Some turning lanes will have an unbroken section at the end of the lane, I cannot tell from the Google Maps, as it is dates Nov 2021, and road markings may have changed since then.

  • hasher22 on 15/09/2023 - 17:38

    The first mistake is admitting guilt before the cop said anything.

    If the cop car camera shows that you weren't in the wrong, assuming they would let you see it in court, I don't know if you can see it before court(?).

    If you truly didn't do anything wrong, the first mistake was admitting guilt when you didn't understand the charge.

    But if you're confident after the charge and the Officer clearly explained it to you and you're so sure you're clear, take it to court

    Though, paying it and lesson learnt is the easy route to take.

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 17:42

      I requested access to evidence under GIPA went to the police station to view both the footage. only body cam access provided which makes me it look like i am admitting. I agree paying is easy way out but its hard when you know you dint do it in first place

      • hasher22 on 15/09/2023 - 17:44
        +2

        Yeah it sucks, alot of people get into the paying trap when they're innocent cause it's the easy route and going through court a headache and they make it difficult for this reason.

        If you can, ask for the car camera footage again, I don't know the legalities of them showing it to you, someone can answer but I assume if they can't show you this car footage, they're either hiding something or you're innocent.

        • Protractor on 15/09/2023 - 17:52
          +2

          "they're either hiding something or you're innocent" or they don't want to or they don't have to?
          Not sure plod wants to create a precedent when they can just rely on the lazy pay up option.

          • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:24

            @Protractor: yes they relying on lazy pay option. as per the law they have to provide viewing access to you and your legal rep. pursuant to below

            Section 59(1)(b)
            The NSWPF Standard Operating Procedures for ICV footage allow a person or their legal representative to view the footage free of charge. Therefore, pursuant to section 59(1)(b), I have decided that the ICV footage you requested is available to you by other means. If you would like to view the footage, please contact

      • Sinnerator on 16/09/2023 - 08:28
        -6

        the police deliberately did this, the have quotas, why be an ethical police officer when you can be a meet your KPI police officer

        • gyrex on 16/09/2023 - 13:20
          +1

          Police don't have quotas so stop pushing this tin foil hat conspiracy nonsense.

          • Assburg on 16/09/2023 - 15:44
            +1

            @gyrex: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-13/nsw-police-strip-sear…

            If you think they thought "let's just have one kind of quota" and stop there, you're dreamin'

          • lonewolf on 17/09/2023 - 12:36
            +2

            @gyrex: Police do have quotas, I have had friends who were cops who have told me this, albeit it was about 10 years ago So i cant say if anything has changed recently. But I know at least 10 years ago Cops did have quotas. And they were talking about traffic / driving offences.

            • Wayne7497 on 18/09/2023 - 01:08
              +2

              @lonewolf: Spent 37yrs as a Police Officer heard the quota myth a 1000 times, lol its just that a myth never saw it never did it or was told to do, however if they had of flipped me 10% for every fine i would designed a fake kangaroo put speed camera inside. Im kidding of course no quotas full stop (i was in WA) All i expected my troops to do was stop cars couldn't care less if they wrote an infringement or gave a warning. Not 1 cent of money from infringements went to police all went straight into government coughers. And yes I was in traffic, highway patrol in east.

            • Euphemistic on 18/09/2023 - 13:38
              -1

              @lonewolf: those cops are probably just spreading the myth to scare you. Just like when I worked on council all the council workers never had to pay rates. RMS workers don’t have to pay rego.

          • itsme56 on 17/09/2023 - 23:16
            +1

            @gyrex: Highway patrol do have quotas. General duties do not.

    • Montyjpm on 16/09/2023 - 09:48
      +1

      His first three words should be "Better Call Saul" to the copper.

  • Protractor on 15/09/2023 - 17:43
    +3

    You should soo the polise

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 17:44

      i will be settle with not having to pay and lose points for something i did not do

      • Protractor on 15/09/2023 - 17:50
        -3

        Scales of justice dude. They lean heavily away from …..justice.
        Look at it as a donation by way of all the other times you did and will do something worthy of a fine or demerits. Nobody's perfect. You're just paying in advance

        • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 17:56

          thats what i am coming down to for inner peace :)

    • Hangryuman on 18/09/2023 - 17:16

      polise don't do that - Shirley you must be joking

      • Protractor on 18/09/2023 - 17:45
        -1

        no weigh, vary sirius .
        Get a sir lissiter and soo thair as's

  • Euphemistic on 15/09/2023 - 17:53
    +5

    What was the fine for? Maybe I can’t read well, but your OP doesn’t seem to clearly identify what your offence was. What are the actual words on the fine?

    If it’s for crossing an unbroken line, there is no unbroken line on the overhead view, but perhaps there is on the road. If it’s for doing a I-turn and you didn’t do it, take it to court.

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 17:58

      u turn that i did not take hence no offence. i presumed i got pulled for unbroken line and started blabbering i made a mistake

      • blitz on 15/09/2023 - 19:14
        +9

        u turn that i did not take hence no offence

        OP, What are the actual words on the fine?

      • Euphemistic on 15/09/2023 - 21:18

        What does that even mean? Where were you when you didn’t do a u turn, where did you go from there?

  • GordonD on 15/09/2023 - 17:58
    +13

    You have a good chance of confusing a magistrate into acquitting you.

    Because you confused the police by admitting to something before they told you that what they were accusing you of was something else.

    And you confused me. But I think I've figured it out. The evidence the police have is you admitting on the police body camera that you did it to the police officer who came to your car. But they didn't have any car camera footage of you actually doing what they charged you with, which you now say you didn't do.

    Unfortunately police are considered judges of fact. If they say you did it, it is considered a fact by a court that you did do it, unless you can prove you didn't. They don't have to prove it by having it on police car camera.

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 18:02

      thats pretty much what happened. As i have never been to court i would be clueless and i dont wnat to come out with more issues

      • GordonD on 15/09/2023 - 18:12
        +1

        The risk you take going to court is that if you can't prove you are innocent the penalty may be increased from what's on the infringement notice. You won't end up with more points, but the court-imposed fine may be higher, and/or you'll be hit with court costs. You are betting that, against being able to convince the judge you're innocent, or at least if not innocent your traffic record is good enough that you should be let off as a first offender who won't do it again.

        • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 18:23

          Court cost is $80 on top of your fine. To be Honest if i was the judge they way i admitted on bodycam i would find myself guilty.
          FYI i had 2 kids in the car with my wife at the time. i may have been talking znd dint hear the charges announced which is my fault to begin with

          • pegaxs on 15/09/2023 - 18:51
            +1

            @mirali5: Wife in the car… Well, there is at least another witness to what you actually did.

            • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:22

              @pegaxs: yes witness and i am yet to be given access to

              Section 59(1)(b)
              The NSWPF Standard Operating Procedures for ICV footage allow a person or their legal representative to view the footage free of charge. Therefore, pursuant to section 59(1)(b), I have decided that the ICV footage you requested is available to you by other means. If you would like to view the footage

              things you go to prove you are innocent

              • Quotasdontexist on 16/09/2023 - 20:35
                +2

                @mirali5: Mate they aren't hiding anything or trying to trick you. GIPA does not apply to ICV. Viewing the video is as easy as making an appointment, you don't need to jump through hoops with GIPA or a subpoena (which would be the right way) to get the video of whatever you "did not do".

                That aside Body worn and In Car Video serve very different purposes. In the ideal world turning one on should activate the other but it doesn't. The actual driving incident that was illegal will be on in car video but the conversation you had will be on both.

                You weren't charged with anything you were given a ticket. You might not have thought what you did was not a breach of a road rule but the fact you requested a review and the penalty was confirmed means you did. The system doesn't rely on "lazy pay" people it relies on people knowing they did the wrong thing and take responsibility for their own actions.

                There is a big difference between some states let alone countries with what road rule apply. If you are new into New South Wales it can be tricky to break the habit you might of had driving elsewhere.

                Also despite the armchair experts admissions are only admissible after being cautioned that what you say may be used in court.

                I will do a AMA at some point in the near future to clear up al the misinformation that is thrown around on here. Good luck with it hopefully you go another 15 years without getting caught.

          • ozbjunkie on 16/09/2023 - 08:14

            @mirali5: Your response was actually very understandable and probably something cops see all the time. Which is people eager to please, apologies, and indicate they are not combative. Arguing with the cops is generally fruitless anyway.

            Given your language here, if I guess you're a second language (but fluent) speaker, I'm guessing you might have some personal or cultural ideas about not talking back to police. You may also have been flustered, stressed etc, as anyone who performed a maneuver and then was pulled over would be.

            Being apologetic and contrite is not clearly an admission of anything (I did it? - yeah, did what, would say any cop in the world).

        • sumyungguy on 15/09/2023 - 21:01

          As you're not going to exceed your demerits. totally not worth going to court over $283. Police are always hard to defeat.

        • Thrawn on 16/09/2023 - 02:07
          +1

          You don’t have to prove you are innocent, they have to prove you are guilty. If you can show in the body cam footage that they did not state U-Turn before you admitted guilty, they can not show that you admitted guilt to U-Turn.

          Now the police have to prove guilt some other way, easiest way is to pull the police dashcam footage and show you pulled the U-turn. Your problem is if the footage is missing for some reason (eg, not pointed the right way) and if the police testifies you did it even if he was mistaken (confused for some one else), you are screwed still.

        • SpicyStew on 16/09/2023 - 14:51
          +1

          it's presumption of innocence, innocence does not have to be proved, the burden is on the accuser

          and if there is no hard evidence then it's proved beyond reasonable doubt

          https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/human-rights-an…

    • MS Paint on 15/09/2023 - 18:11

      Finally. Something in this thread that makes sense. Cheers.

    • mbck on 15/09/2023 - 18:17

      I sure hope our police officers know their laws.

      https://youtu.be/IDhi6zqao9o?si=N6rmEPYQn7M04fky

      These cops blatantly said they don't know what the law is…in court…(granted USA)

      • quog on 15/09/2023 - 18:38
        +4

        remember half of the population is of below average intelligence, and the main criteria to enter police is fitness.

        • PeterSnoot on 19/09/2023 - 22:06

          It is amazing how many people are surprised by this, almost to the point of disagreeing. Note, that I normally say "about half" because introducing the term "median" often causes more confusion.

    • JimmyF on 15/09/2023 - 19:41
      +1

      Because you confused the police by admitting to something before they told you that what they were accusing you of was something else.

      While I'm sure that makes sense to you, the police don't randomly pull people over and try to toss a charge at them to see if they'll accept it.

      Unfortunately police are considered judges of fact. If they say you did it, it is considered a fact by a court that you did do it, unless you can prove you didn't.

      Correct, if the police pulled the OP over, then they believed the OP did a illegal U-turn. So either the OP did a u turn and 'forgot' or the police confused the OP car with another car that did a u-turn.

      • [Deactivated] on 15/09/2023 - 19:54

        I'd like a witness statement from OP's wife to corroborate or not

        • JimmyF on 15/09/2023 - 20:05
          +2

          Why? Police statement still trumps OP or OP wife.

          I mean who wouldn't be shocked that the OP wife would say the same as the OP…….

          • [Deactivated] on 15/09/2023 - 20:10

            @JimmyF: I wanna know whether:

            OP did a u turn and 'forgot' or the police confused the OP car with another car that did a u-turn.

            • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:18

              @[Deactivated]: No i did not do a U turn. my req for review was for the officer to see if he confused another car for my car. interstingly i am not being provided with the in car footage to review even after GIPA decision to allow me access (Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009)

              • [Deactivated] on 15/09/2023 - 20:23

                @mirali5: Why was your request for the police footage denied if there is provision within the Act to provide it?

                • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:31

                  @[Deactivated]: interesting converstaion with the copper. when i called him he was rude said if you dint do the u turn go to court and i will submit the videos in court. so i emailed gipa adv i did not receive the req and they sent email to him and he was nicer the second time around

                  • [Deactivated] on 15/09/2023 - 20:35

                    @mirali5: Do you have the police footage or not?

                    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:38

                      @[Deactivated]: they dont give it to you. you have to go to the police station to watch it. i was shown the body cam and not the in car video (ICV) which will prove i did not do the u turn

                    • Protractor on 15/09/2023 - 20:48
                      -1

                      @[Deactivated]: The real questions are 'will you get the footage' and 'will you report back to the tribe' as the episode proceeds and closes.
                      I pick no is what the obvious answers are going to be. But that's my schtick

                      • [Deactivated] on 15/09/2023 - 20:56
                        +3

                        @Protractor: My patience was waning with the roundabout answers

      • lonewolf on 17/09/2023 - 12:40

        While on average i would say they wouldnt randomly pull over people trying to find issues. I have also personally been in the car where they have just done that (I wasnt driving). So it wouldnt be common but i can see it happening.

        • JimmyF on 17/09/2023 - 13:51

          While on average i would say they wouldnt randomly pull over people trying to find issues

          Generally 'random' pull overs are for stereo typed cars/people or just purely random as in meeting a KPI.

          So sure they will randomly pull someone over and look for issues as in checking the car over for bald tyres etc. But randomly pulling someone over to see if they'll admit to doing an illegal U-Turn, yeah nah.

          I have also personally been in the car where they have just done that

          So what did they claim your car did?

    • ar7ist on 16/09/2023 - 20:21
      +1

      Genuine question here, isnt the law innocent until proven guilty? So wouldn't the police have to show the evidence that OP is guilty?

      • Euphemistic on 17/09/2023 - 06:17
        +2

        Traffic infringements are separate from criminal prosecution. There is no innocent til proven guilty, there are no charges, there is no arrest etc. cop sees you do something wrong and gives you a ticket. Simple.

  • Baysew on 15/09/2023 - 18:32
    +2

    Use the - "I shot the sheriff, but I did not shoot the deputy" defence.

    • pegaxs on 15/09/2023 - 18:49
      +1

      You wouldn't use the Chewbacca defence?

      • Gunnar on 16/09/2023 - 13:54
        +1

        I have a fool proof strategy: surprise witnesses. Each one more surprising than the last. The judge won't know what hit him!

  • pegaxs on 15/09/2023 - 18:48

    What did you say when you blabbed to the copper? Did you admit to crossing over the line (which from your photo is not illegal anyway) or did the copper pull you over and just deliver the usual line of "Do you know what I pulled you over for?" and you just started singing like a canary?

    It would depend on what was said and what questions he asked you and then what he told you was the offence. The fine will have an offence code on it like #100907 and a description. That would go a lot to helping you work out what you are even charged with for a start.

    If you were saying sorry for the crossing over the line and it is clear in the video that you say "crossing over the unbroken line" then you may have a case, but if it's just you saying "OMG, sorry, I did it. I did ALL of it…" That may be a bit harder.

    In court, you will have two options, plead guilty and offer a reason for what you did, or plead not guilty and it will then be set aside for trial. At that point, you are best to contact a lawyer and get an actual legal opinion.

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:07

      Yes looks like i am admitting to anything he was charging me for. spoke to a lawyer who said if you not losing lic just pay and get done with not worth the hassle. if i plead guilty it will be against me as when asking for review i said i did not do it.

      no video of u turn or crossing unbroken line. Its his word and my admitance on body cam

      • Protractor on 15/09/2023 - 20:50

        Stand down then

        • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:55

          only if i ws more composed i would have seen it thru

  • AndyC1 on 15/09/2023 - 19:53
    +1

    Never ever admit or give any information to the police if you know you are in the wrong or you suspect they are trying to gather evidence against you. They are NOT interrogating / asking questions to help you if you are in the wrong or are suspected to have done something wrong.

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:01

      lesson learned

      • AndyC1 on 15/09/2023 - 20:05
        +1

        Unfortunately is a hard lesson and I have also learnt it the hard way.

    • star-ggg on 15/09/2023 - 21:27

      Regardless of the situation, as soon as you have been pulled up by the police, their job is to look for evidence to prove your guilt not your innocence. As far as they are concerned, your innocence is up to the courts to decide.

      • Euphemistic on 15/09/2023 - 21:47
        +3

        Vast majority of the times the police pull someone over the ‘evidence’ has already been collected. That is, they saw you break a rule. The ‘discussion’ isn’t for evidence gathering, it’s just a part of the fine transaction.

        • star-ggg on 16/09/2023 - 09:38

          When police pull you over, they already have enough evidence to put together a case against you. That doesn't mean it's done and dusted. The more you talk, the more opportunities you give them to make the case stronger.

          • Euphemistic on 16/09/2023 - 09:55
            +1

            @star-ggg: Traffic fines don’t have a ‘case’ in the typical sense. It’s not a criminal matter. That’s not to say your attitude doesn’t affect the outcome. Attitude largely affects wether you get a fine or a thorough inspection of the vehicle looking for defects as well as the fine. Very occasionally you might get a warning.

            You either ran a red light or you didn’t. You did an illegal u turn or you didn’t. Not much talking will affect what the officer saw you do.

        • quog on 16/09/2023 - 12:17
          -1

          and then they beat you up for being 5km from home.

          any goodwill, police destroyed.

          also, they can accuse you of anything and their testimony has a much higher weight than yours. the scales are imbalanced. as evidenced by this OP.

      • dcep on 15/09/2023 - 23:24

        Now they can confiscate your lambos without evidence. You just have to prove it in the court.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebr7igGE76Y

      • AndyC1 on 16/09/2023 - 08:14

        You have never been to court as this is not how courts really work.

        • star-ggg on 16/09/2023 - 09:47

          I've done my jury duty. Accused had 4 charges against him. We unanimously voted against 1 because he made no mention of it in their police statement so the balance of probabilities was it didn't occur. 2 would have been most probably went the same way if he had not given his version of events, which due to inconsistencies meant the balance of probabilities went against him. All 3 charges happened in a private setting so there were no other witnesses.

          So it could have been 1 guilty charge vs 2 if he didn't talk at all. All the evidence matters.

          • Thrawn on 16/09/2023 - 13:12
            +3

            @star-ggg: scary you're in a jury and you were thinking in terms of 'balance of probabilities'.. it's supposed to be 'beyond reasonable doubt'. If what the accused 'excuse' was reasonably possible even though unlikely, you're supposed to say not guilty

            • nigel deborah on 17/09/2023 - 15:54

              @Thrawn: Not great, @star-ggg applying civil standards of proof against some poor bugger up on a criminal offence. Convincted based on a few 'inconsistencies'? Oof… not exactly beyond reasonable doubt.

              • star-ggg on 17/09/2023 - 21:09

                @nigel deborah: It was 12 jurors uninamous. You can discredit me as much as you want but obviously the evidence was enough for a that many people to convict.

            • star-ggg on 17/09/2023 - 21:12

              @Thrawn: "reasonable" still ultimately comes to down probability? How can you be reasonably believe something unless you believe it was probable.

  • Bargainitis on 15/09/2023 - 19:54
    +7

    f#$k man, reading your post was a real struggle. Maybe consider learning how to articulate your sentences / point better.

    Anyway, not a huge fine so consider paying it and moving on. If not, just go to court, explain the situation and ask for leniency given no prior offences for the last 15 years. Some courts will allow it and put you on good behaviour bond for 12 months which means if you don't commit any offences, the fine and points go away. You just have to sign a doc that binds you to a bond - which you may have to pay if you are found to reoffend within 12 months. The hassle is going to court (you could video conference in which makes it easier)

    Either case, I wouldn't lose any sleep on it.

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:10

      Hastily written as last day to pay the fine or opt for court. finding information is a hectic process

  • thatonethere on 15/09/2023 - 20:20

    Going to court with representation is pretty scary. You dont know all the moves in fact oretty much none. If you are keen get a lawyer.

    If you do indeed have a good record maybe the judge will let you off. Seen plenty get off with lawyers. However you lose and get costs plus sentence.

    • mirali5 on 15/09/2023 - 20:25

      very unlikely there will be a sentence. the most that can happen is the fine stays. and yes going to court is scary

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join