Wolfeboro Solid Waste vs Amatucci
 

Anyone know what happened at the Wolfeboro Solid Waste Facility?
Looks like whatever happened has gone to NH District Court.

Here it is:

Here ya go:

https://casetext.com/case/amatucci-v-obrien

Maybe she got arrested for failing to remove a large piece of white Styrofoam before placing that big refrigerator box onto the cardboard area? Contaminated cardboard is such a crime!

........ so, come on now Barney! ... tell me what 'zactly happened here, down at the town dump?

But ...... Andy ...... I tell ya ...... that big brown piece of cardboard had a large section of Styrofoam all attached to it ..... it was totally blatant .... I tell you, Andy!
........

Oh ok ...... that explains it ..... :emb: .... and another thing poeple want to get arrested for, is using Styrofoam without a capital S! ... :laugh:

Run Away Run Away...
 

I suggest this case IS NOT to be discussed here.

:eek:

She often takes the town to court for something.

I found this portion of the record interesting. Apparently the NH speeding laws are not based just on the numbers: 42 MPH in a posted 30 MPH zone, but found not guilty by the court.

"The court found that Amatucci had been travelling forty-two miles per hour in an area where the posted speed limit was thirty miles per hour. The court further found, however, that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Amatucci had been travelling at a speed that was "unreasonable and imprudent for the conditions existing," and that it had therefore failed to prove a violation of the state speeding statute, N.H. Rev."

I am NOT bringing up an OLD argument but I wonder if the speed limits on the water are written the same way? As long as your speed is reasonable and prudent................

I don't want to take the time to do the research but someone with a lot of free time could probably figure this out. Hello Less?.....Less?

Typical NH small town police department BS. She seems like no angel either...

I've found that if you sort properly and put everyyhing in the right bin than the Wolfeboro Solid Waste Facility attendants won't give you a hard time. They run a tight ship there and IMO that is how it should be run.

That case happened in 2016, the one I posted happened in 2019.

There have been many cases filed by her over the years.

It's the Judge that got it wrong
 

"The court found that Amatucci had been travelling forty-two miles per hour in an area where the posted speed limit was thirty miles per hour. The court further found, however, that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Amatucci had been travelling at a speed that was "unreasonable and imprudent for the conditions existing," and that it had therefore failed to prove a violation of the state speeding statute, N.H. Rev."

Traveling at a speed above the limit as posted by the appropriate traffic authority is per se "unreasonable and imprudent for the conditions existing." Speed limit signs are not advisory. The speed limit set for a given roadway expresses the upper legal limit of what is reasonable and prudent. The courts reasoning is completely wrong.

Reasonable and prudent versus Absolute
 

There are two types of speed limits....prima facie and absolute. In NH virtually all speed violations are prima facie, including roadways, waterways and ATV/Snowmobile trails. This requires the prosecution to prove (as cited in this case) that the speed recorded above the posted limit was also “unreasonable and imprudent”. There are a few exceptions to this rule in NH on some turnpikes, where the posted limit is “absolute” and the State only needs to prove you exceeded that limit.

Other States observe the “absolute” principal. In an “absolute” State, the posted limit is the absolute limit and the State only needs to prove that the limit was exceeded.

Being a “reasonable and prudent” State is one of a number of reasons most law enforcement officials give leeway up around 12 to 15 MPH, to help ensure a conviction.

Mea culpa: I see that now.

My post does give some detailed background for those such as myself who were unaware of this this seemingly ongoing theater of the absurd.

It would be interesting to see a test case. Some mid-week September morning, with no boats in sight, would 75 MPH in the middle of the Broads be "unreasonable and imprudent"?.

I suppose it depends upon the officer, and ultimately the court, to make that determination. I would think that would be tough to prosecute and get a conviction.