Pulled over for a random drunk-driving test, Lin Riley was instead ticketed by an unsympathetic officer for altering her seatbelt, which she did to alleviate the pain associated with breast cancer. The incident paints an ugly picture of how law enforcement can supercede common sense and even basic humanity.
“Not my problem” says officer
Lin Riley was pulled over for a random breathalyzer test. The 68-year-old woman rolled down her window to show her license to the officer and he noticed a one-inch binder clip attached to the seatbelt retractor above the woman’s right shoulder.
When the officer gave back Riley’s license, he asked, “What are you doing? What do you have on your seatbelt?” Riley told Australian news service News.com.au.
Three years ago, Riley learned she had cancer in her left breast, leading to a mastectomy. Last year, one of her implants ruptured and she suffered from significant swelling to her left side and discomfort with pressure and pain. To alleviate the pain, she placed a clip at the seatbelt retractor over her shoulder.
After explaining her situation to the officer, he said, “That’s not my problem.” He left her waiting for 35 minutes and then returned with a ticket saying, “I’ve done you a favor, and the ticket will only be for $360.” That’s in Australian dollars, about $260 in U.S. dollars.
Regulations too tough?
A frustrated Riley later broke down in tears. Not only did she suffer the humiliation of having to reveal private information to an unfeeling officer, but she was also made to feel like a criminal.
Riley admits she was not carrying a doctor’s certificate proving she had cancer, but she didn’t realize that altering the seatbelt would result in a fine. According to police, Riley had in fact broken the law because she didn’t have a medical certificate with her.
But there’s a much bigger problem here. Where is the compassion for another human being? I can’t help but wonder if it were the officer’s mother, wife or sister sitting in the car with an altered seatbelt he would not have been so callous.
“It’s just really unfortunate because the officers were so rude and not understanding of my situation,” said Riley. “When they said my health problems weren’t their problems … that really upset me, to be frank.’’
Was Lin Riley’s fine unfair? Or, was the police officer right to dole out a fine befitting an otherwise victimless crime. Perhaps he could have handled it better, with empathy. I think so.
What do you think?
-Katherine Marko
Compassion? We don’t need any stinking compassion. (The bandit chief from the Treasure of Sierra Madre).
Apparently the law is the law is the law, except when the boys in blue ride around without their seat belts on.
The cop was a complete ASSHOLE.
What is the reason seat belts are warn? What is the reason we have laws that say they are mandatory? Breast cancer could have kill her. Driving without a properly attached seat would have maybe too, in an accident. Do people even think logically anymore? Does anyone think long enough to examine, or use sound reasoning these days? Or do they just react based on arbitrary rules or emotion?
Well…..this country is slowly turning into a police state.
I agree with you. The way that police over-step reasonable authority, based on these arbitrary rules, is ridiculous. If these police revenue collectors had used some logic, or human emotion, the incident could have been much less costly and stressful.
Everyone is slamming the officer for doing his job, the police can’t win! Everyone is so quick to condemn them when they feel they’re not doing their jobs, but it appears they are just as quick to slam them for doing them also. I empathize with the woman because I am also a cancer survivor, and as a cancer survivor I can tell you the last thing I ever wanted was for anyone to treat me any different because of it. The bottom line here is she broke the law, she got caught and the officer did his job. The laws are a set of rules put in place to be enforced equally against anyone who would break them, you break the law, you suffer the consequences. The law is not unsympathetic, they allow for exceptions to the rules, people just need to do what they are supposed to, so they can garner the exceptions, she did not do what she was supposed to and she is using a previous cancer diagnosis to gain sympathy and possibly get herself out of a well deserved ticket.
Under the police state philosophy we must have a law to cover every possible contingency. It has nothing to do with common sense. It is taboo to think for yourself. Isn’t it a bit odd that we have one faction of government trying their best to keep us from getting hurt and to live longer, and another faction of the government trying to fight overpopulation by doing everything they can to keep us from getting too old? Right out of Nazi Germany, “Show me your papers!” The cop was just doing his job to keep from losing his job!
In the USA, there are so many laws on the books that even a lawyer with a photographic mind has to have a computer to search for whatever law they can find to make their case; but by damn, they can find one if they dig deep enough because there is a law covering almost everything, and Congress is still writing more laws at about 10000 per year. There are so many laws now that no one can tell you how many there are!
We hear it all the time, “We are a country of laws,” but when it comes to the actual law of the land, the Constitution, it is selectively ignored, reinterpreted, or superseded by some frivolous law that Congress has written or the president has generated through an executive order. If the government wants to nail you, there is a law somewhere that they can use against you. If they can’t find one, they will make one up and some neoliberal judge will go along with it, clear up to the Supreme Court. You can’t win without a shyster lawyer and a very deep pocket since we have the finest judges that money can buy. It’s all just a Socialist game they play called “Redistribution of Wealth!”
We can only think bad thoughts about that man. Like maybe he could get breast cancer and then he’d be a little more understanding. What a jerk. He should be on his knees apologising to that woman. Shame on him.
That’s too good a name for him!!
That is NOT what I would have called him!!!
I wonder if cops are like judges? When a judge issues a fine and it is paid the judge gets a percentage of that fine added to his/ her retirement. Isn’t that a cute means of padding one’s retirement?