Submitted by Guest12098743456y (not verified) on Mon, 10/22/2012 - 11:29pm.
I was a juror in this case, and there was no question why the vehicle was stopped. There was no 'tip-off' as a previous comment said - the vehicle was stopped because it was traveling 78 mph in a 60 mph zone, and passed (on the right-hand side) a State Highway Patrol officer. There was no reason for Mr. Cox to remove the badge - secured in place on the window post - ABSOLUTELY NO REASON. Mr. Cox said himself that he had removed the badge. The law in this case stated that to impersonate a LEO, the defendant had to make a false representation to a reasonable person of being a LEO by the DISPLAY OF ANY BADGE. I personally do not feel that Mr. Cox is a bad person who meant to do this, but by his split-second bad judgment in removing the badge, he did impersonate a LEO (by the elements of the law); therefore, he was guilty.
I was a juror in this case,
I was a juror in this case, and there was no question why the vehicle was stopped. There was no 'tip-off' as a previous comment said - the vehicle was stopped because it was traveling 78 mph in a 60 mph zone, and passed (on the right-hand side) a State Highway Patrol officer. There was no reason for Mr. Cox to remove the badge - secured in place on the window post - ABSOLUTELY NO REASON. Mr. Cox said himself that he had removed the badge. The law in this case stated that to impersonate a LEO, the defendant had to make a false representation to a reasonable person of being a LEO by the DISPLAY OF ANY BADGE. I personally do not feel that Mr. Cox is a bad person who meant to do this, but by his split-second bad judgment in removing the badge, he did impersonate a LEO (by the elements of the law); therefore, he was guilty.