[Music] Welcome to facts or frauds. Fred Mcgru. Mr. Mcgru, go ahead and come forward, sir. Mr. Mcgru, I apologize. I just want to make sure I could hear you hear you clearly. You are Fred Eddie Mcgru III. Yes. Okay. Thank you, sir. Good morning to you. Now I can hear you. Yeah. Uh before we proceed with this matter, can I state some for the record, please? Uh yes. If it's factual about what happened and what led to the issuance of the infraction, I would need to swear you in first. But if it doesn't have to do with the facts surrounding the infraction, you can you can absolutely uh say whatever. Tell me whatever you would like. Well, I want to preserve my rights under UCCc1-308. Okay. Without prejudice, okay? And uh I want you to know that this was an unlawful stop that led to an unlawful detainment. And if you look at my uh ticket, he never gave me a driving infraction for anything. It was just a no insurance ticket. So that made the stop unlawful. So I'm asking you to dismiss this ticket without prejudice. Okay, I I got you. So I understand the legal defense that you're raising. So it sounds like you want to proceed with the contested hearing challenging the infraction. Okay. Yes. So, let me go ahead and and call this case for the record. This is case 5A 0273665. Uh, Mr. McGru has issued an infraction for operating motor vehicle without proof of liability insurance on April 19th, 20125. He has responded to the issuance of that infraction by requesting a contested hearing. Uh, Mr. McGregor, the next thing I'm going to do is I'm going to read the officer's report to get their version of what happened. You've already told me a little bit about what happened, but I'm going to swear you in and have you kind of tell me the the complete story from your perspective, and then the court will make a decision. Okay. Right. So, the court's going to go ahead and take a look at the report of the issuing officer. Okay. And the court has reviewed the report of the issuing officer. uh signed under penalty of perjury on April 19th, 2025. And Mr. McCru, I'm going to go ahead and swear you in. I'm going to have you raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm that any testimony I'll offer will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Thank you. So, Mr. McGre, you've already kind of told me some of what happened. You can put your hand down. You've already told me a little bit of of kind of what your legal basis is to the challenge of the issuance of this infraction. Is there anything else you would like the court to consider in determining whether or not to find this infraction committed or not committed? Yes, because I was test driving a car on that day. They never had any probable cause to pull me over. I didn't commit any traffic violation. He pulled me over. His reason for not giving me the traffic violation was he doing me a favor when the only thing he gave me was a no insurance because he knew that it was an unlawful stop and they still follow me 5 minutes up the street after he pulled me over. So he never had probable cause for the stop. I didn't commit any traffic violations, speeding, no running lights, not using blinkers. He just pulled me over. So, he had to get me something. And like I said, I was test driving the car. The car is not even mine. So, I had to pay money already for the insurance on the car. And I don't even have the car. It was a test drive. Okay. Okay. So, this wasn't your car? No, it wasn't my car. But, however, I had to pay to get insurance because I thought I could I didn't know they was going to push out the court date two months back. So, I had to get it. But, I don't I don't have the car. The car didn't even belong to me. And I told him that. Okay. Do you have do you have a car right now? Even if it's not this car? Yeah, I have a car. Do you have insurance on that vehicle? Yes. Do you have proof of insurance? Yeah, it's in the car. Okay. Uh is it is it here? Yes. Okay. Would you be able to bring that proof of insurance in so I could take a look at it? Yeah, right now. Okay. I could go get it. Yep. That's fine. And Mr. McGru, while you're doing that, I'm going to call another case, but then as soon as you come back, we'll go back to your case. Okay. Mr. McGr, we are back on the record at this time with uh City of Lakewood versus Fred Eddie Mcgru III. And Mr. McGru, I got a question for you. This car right here, right, I got insurance for you, but why is this car is the topic of the matter? when we when I got pulled over in a BMW 2007 and as you can see on the ticket it was never no traffic or moving violation. So without that is no insurance ticket to be written. So it was an unlawful stop. But I do have the insurance for my recent car. But I'm just not understanding why I got to present that when it's about the BMW. You don't have to present it. I want to be clear. you you because I gave it I I bring it to you because it should be dismissed without prejudice, right? Because without the unlawful stop, then there's no insurance. He got to establish some kind of probable cause where it's a traffic violation or something and he never done that. Yeah. So, I got insurance for the BMW the day after even though it wasn't my car. Okay. So, I already paid money for an unlawful stop that led to an unlawful detainment. So, that's why I'm asking the courts to dismiss it without prejudice. Yeah, I I get it, Mr. McGru. Um, let me ask you at this point because I just want to keep procedurally. I've reviewed the officer's report. I've heard your testimony. Is there any other testimony, any other factual statement about what happened at the time that this infraction was issued that you would like to tell the court before the court makes a decision? No, it just it wasn't never no probable cause to pull over the car. Yeah. It wasn't no traffic violation being committed. And if you look at the ticket, he only gave me a no insurance ticket. He didn't give me a speeding violation. He didn't give me running a red light, not using my signals, nothing. So without that is no insurance. So he didn't establish probable cause to even pull me over. All right, Mr. Thank you. I appreciate that. So, uh, couple things. Court has reviewed the report of the issuing officer. It looks like the issuing officer, uh, initially conducted the traffic stop after having observed the vehicle being driven by Mr. Mcgru. Uh, it appears that the officer and his partner, Officer Cooper, observed that the vehicle that was being driven by Mr. grew on South Dakota away had a dark license plate cover obscuring the license plate. License plate cover was visible, your honors, is broad daylight. So that was just his probable cause to pull over to see if he smelled something or establish an investigation on the stop. Yeah. But it was never it was visible. It was broad daylight. It was like 2:00. So the court does know understands what Mr. Mur is arguing. However, the legislature has recently uh enacted legislation saying that license plate covers are prohibited under Washington law. And so, when an officer sees a vehicle on a public roadway with a license plate cover, that is a basis for them to conduct a traffic stop. Now, Mr. Mcgru has argued that he doesn't believe the officer had probable cause, but it's worth noting that under Washington law, an officer does not have to have probable cause to issue a traffic stop. Officer has to have reasonable suspicion to believe that there is either been a moving violation or some equipment violation, which is what a license plate cover would be. And if the officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that there is something about the vehicle that is contrary to Washington law, they do have a legal authority at that point in time to exercise their or activate their emergency equipment and facilitate a lawful traffic stop, which allows them to contact the driver and request a driver's license, proof of insurance, and vehicle registration. Now under Washington law, every time an individual is operating a motor vehicle on a public roadway, upon demand of a officer, they are obligated to produce proof that there is liability insurance either for that driver and or that vehicle. That is what is required under the Washington statutes. When an individual can't produce proof either in paper form or on their phone that the vehicle that is being driven by that driver is properly insured as required by law. It is a basis for the officer to issue an infraction. And so, Mr. McGru, what I'm looking at here is a situation where it does appear you were properly cited for this infraction. The reason that I asked you about the insurance and took a break in the proceedings to so you had an opportunity to get that is I'm sympathetic to the argument that you're making which is it wasn't your car you were taking it for a test drive and so my question about whether or not you had insurance on a vehicle that you presently own is because if you do then even though I think technically under the law you did commit this infraction the court is inclined to mitigate the infraction because you've already paid paid to have insurance on your vehicle. Operating a motor vehicle without insurance is a very expensive ticket. It's $559. And so, one of the reasons that I ask people whether or not they have insurance currently is because even if they did commit the infraction, I will often mitigate the infraction amount or reduce it um usually to right around somewhere between $250 and $150. And so in this particular case, based upon the testimony that you have offered the court, uh that is my inclination. I do believe the officer had a legal basis to stop you. I do believe the officer properly cited you for failure to provide proof of liability insurance, but I also believe you when you tell me that you have insurance on the vehicle. And I do have insurance for both of them. Yep. And I believe you. So, I I'm going to go ahead and find that the infraction was committed because I believe it was. Uh, but I am going to mitigate the fine amount. I'm going to reduce it from $559 to $150. Okay. Can I ask you how many people would come up in here with a a license plates infraction? That mean everybody will be in court every week cuz nowadays everybody got a license plates covered. I I got to tell you, Mr. through. I have seen in the last several months, I have seen more than I can count. People coming in and I and and I feel bad for them. They're coming in because a lot of times the license plate cover that's on the vehicle, sometimes it's totally clear. The the license plate cover that is on their vehicle was on the vehicle when they bought it, right? And so it was there when they purchased it from the dealer. and the legislature changed the law during the 2024 legislative session making that illegal and it hasn't really been highly publicized. And so a lot of people are driving around with no idea that the license plate cover because a lot of police they won't pull you over for that cover. It got to be one of them police that you know looking for investigation to start. And everybody know Lakewood police, they love pulling you over for any little thing to create their own investigation to open up something else. And that's why I said it was an unlawful stop. So the play was just probable cause because it wasn't no traffic violation being committed. So now you're saying it was pretextual. Yeah. They use that as an excuse. Racial profiling, racial discrimination. And Mr. Mcgru, I'm not saying you're wrong. All I'm saying is is that based on the information that I have in front of me, there's no evidence of that. I all I can look at is is there a legal basis for the officer to conduct the traffic stop? And here I concluded that there was. All right. Okay. So, I'm going to go ahead and reduce that fine amount. Mr. McGru, that has to be paid to the court by October 5th. You can pay it all at once or in payments, whatever's easiest for you. All right. and I'm going to have you come forward, sir, and we'll get you a copy of that. Thank you for being here today. Hi. Well, that's just about it. So, sell. Thanks for watching and we'll see you again real soon. And thanks for hanging out with us on Facture Frauds. Make sure you hit the thumbs up button, you're subscribed, and ring that bell. Also, leave a comment in the comment section. Tell me what you think. Fact. Fact. Actually, I wish you could see the studio floor right now. There's nowhere more fascinating after a show. Everyone's so busy like like bees or white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. And a huge thank you to all of our Fax or Frauds channel members. If you'd like to become a member, click on the link in the description or click join right next to subscribe. There's electricitionricians all rolling up their cables. Oops. Sorry, guys. And there's the sound technicians unplugging all the microphones. Okay, if I keep mine on for a minute, Na'vi, stand up. Now, if you're still hanging out, thank you. I appreciate you all. Why not hit the thumbs up button, make sure you subscribed, ring the bell, and leave a comment in the comment section. and tell them what you think. Until next time, I'll see you soon. [Music] And of course, there's lots of the producers friends all excited, waiting to meet the stars, and generally getting in everybody's way, just like our producer. Oh, we don't mind. Oh, and not forgetting the prop guys. They're busy striking the set. That's an interesting little point there. Striking. That's a word we all use in the biz for dismantling the set, taking it apart, unscrewing things, releasing safety catches, that sort of thing.