“No Parking Anytime - Does It Work Both Ways?”

I was wondering about the following. If a police officer is sitting in his car at the the side of the road, motor not running, observing traffic or an intersection, OR if he is out of his cruiser, handling a radar gun in a speed trap and his car is PARKED ILLEGALLY under a "no parking sign", can that be used against him in court? What makes him "above the law"? How do you think a JP would view this action?

Just curious ....

Thanks

Jay wrote:I was wondering about the following. If a police officer is sitting in his car at the the side of the road, motor not running, observing traffic or an intersection, OR if he is out of his cruiser, handling a radar gun in a speed trap and his car is PARKED ILLEGALLY under a "no parking sign", can that be used against him in court?

In a word: No.

Jay wrote:How do you think a JP would view this action?

JP's most likely response would be something along the lines of: "Uh... okay, so how does that make you not guilty of (insert alleged offence here)"? Trying to fault the officer for doing something "illegal," unless it was something like falsifying evidence or something that would get him/her charged under the Police Services Act, will not help a case. An alleged parking infraction is not one of those instances.

But shouldn't an officer be held to the same standard as everyone else? If I were sitting in my car watching traffic and an officer saw my car parked in a "no parking zone", would I not be guilty of being illegally parked? In most circumstances, I'm sure the officer would come up to me and warn me to "move along" and I wouldn't put up a fight about it. But if the shoe was on the other foot, I would probably be told to mind my own business. I find it ironic that they are told to enforce the laws as they are written (i.e "No parking anytime"), but, in appearence, do as they please. I have no problem with an officer setting up a speed trap or sitting in his vehicle observing the traffic, but why park illegally? He's just as guilty as a speeder to committing an offense (to a lesser degree).

A weak argument (that I'm sure wouldn't work) is "if he/she can do it (i.e. not follow simple signage), why shouldn't I be able to it? I'm just doing what he was doing ...."

Poor excuse, I know, but it doesn't seem fair ....

But, then again, what is fair?