I have been a California driver since I was 16 and have gotten exactly 2 moving violations in that time. One in 1998 — a bogus carpool lane violation when the CHP officer could not see the third person in my car until she had already pulled me over, so wrote a ticket for an illegal lane change that did not happen. I fought that in court and it was one of the worst experiences ever, as the judge refused to even consider that she was lying, then refused to allow me traffic school after finding me guilty. He was also ridiculously callous to the circumstances of everyone before him, and everyone else working in the courtroom was just freakin’ surly. Welcome to Oakland.

Which is why, when I was pulled over and ticketed once again in a situation in which I could legitimately plea, “Not guilty,” I was a bit daunted by the prospect of going to court.

And yet, I could not get myself to simply request traffic school and pay the exorbitant fine (for those who don’t know, moving violations in California cost 3-10 times what they do in other states — one man in the courtroom this morning was fined $490 for running a red light, and that was the base charge, not with any warrants or other violations added.)

So I decided to give it a shot and see how the system works 21 years later and in a different jurisdiction.

The day started with finding a parking space on the street that was free for the whole day and happened to be next to a Bird scooter sitting on the sidewalk. Whee! I am totally addicted to using app-based scooters to get around, and what would have been a 10-15 minute walk turned into a 3-minute (fun!) ride.

Although that was a good start, the process itself was incredibly confusing — almost intentionally so. When you request a court date, it turns out that all you’re getting is an arraignment date, for which you have to come to court to plead Guilty, Not Guilty or No Contest (the same as Guilty, but without an admission of guilt that can be used against you in a civil case.)

Once you plead, if it’s Guilty or No Contest, you can ask the judge for traffic school, leniency, fine reduction, more time to pay, community service or any combo of those. If you plead Not Guilty, you get another court date you have to come back for. Many people didn’t realize this and were quite disgruntled at having to come back on another day, especially if they’d already taken off work.

But before all the pleading started, the bailiff, Sheriff Lashley, went through all of the rules and protocols, and he was WONDERFUL! He was funny and kind and very respectful of everyone in the room. He gave some instructions in Spanish, offered translators for many other languages, and just put us at ease about the process. Also, he told us that the appointed judge of that court had been promoted several months ago and we would be heard by a lawyer who was sworn in that day to serve as a judge pro-tem — voluntarily and without compensation. We could request a real judge or stick with the lawyer, and since it was only an arraignment for me, I stuck with that courtroom, and am very happy I did.

We got a man named Frank Kaplan and he was SO NICE! The arraignments were first, so we each stepped up, plead, then had to go in the hall and wait for our paperwork. After that, I had an hour to kill before having to leave for an event in Burbank, so without time to go home in between (home was the opposite direction), I went back into the courtroom and sat down to watch.

It was fascinating! I first caught the end of a case in which an older man was told that since his ticket was more than 10 years old, the officer could not be located, and so “in the interest of justice,” it was being dismissed, along with all of the “Failure to Appear” citations on the claim. That man was elated. He practically danced out of the courtroom.

There were 9-10 cases left on the docket, so I sat and watched them all. It was so interesting to see the judge pro-tem carefully adjudicate each case on its own merits and treat each person with such humanity. The cops were also pretty great. One had notes on everything and was very sure of himself, but the second admitted in two of his cases that the defendant’s claims were true. In one case, it made no difference, as the person who ran a red light claimed that there was another car that ran the light, too. The cop did not deny it, and the judge explained that it didn’t matter, running a red light is too dangerous to play with (the cop said two full seconds went by before the guy entered the intersection and the guy did not deny that), and gave him no reduction in fine.

Then, the next case, the woman was caught speeding by a lot (63 in a 35), but the cop and judge said that the critical speed on that road was 48 (meaning the average speed at which traffic moves), and she explained that she was terrified that day, being dangerously tailgated by a man trying to get past the trailer truck to her left and felt she had to speed up to get away from both of them. Also, it was downhill on a narrow, gravelly road in horse country (yes, we have an equestrian part of town here in the second largest city in America) and she was afraid of hitting her brakes and skidding out of control. She was incredibly credible, and the cop actually admitted that her story might be true, saying, “if she’s telling the truth, and I have no reason to believe she isn’t,” and the judge said he couldn’t dismiss the case, but he substantially reduced her fine to the lowest one charged that day. That was still $162, plus the $60 fee for traffic school, plus the price of traffic school when she takes it — so remind yourself, drive carefully in Cali!!

I watched this lawyer respectfully rule on people who were clearly lying, who had stories that didn’t make a difference in their cases, and one young man who grilled the cop on his radar training, only to be told by the judge that he appreciated the effort and preparation he put in. But on this day, that kid was still guilty. Then, the judge pro-tem still reduced his fine and offered him traffic school! Seriously, these folks were all so DECENT!

At the end of the session, I went up and spoke to them, just to tell them how impressed I was and to thank them for treating everyone in the courtroom like human beings, deserving of respect. Everyone pointed to Officer Lashley and basically said it was because of him, and that he’s the best, and I have to agree. I said in my Happiness Newsletter last week that I would be happy with the experience, no matter the outcome, but I had no idea it would make me this happy. Care was given to everyone, with no added benefit for those in charge except for less strife in the world.

So, I’ll be going back in August. Likely I’ll be seeing Officer Lashley, but probably not the same judge pro-tem. I hope the one I get is as careful with humanity as Mr. Kaplan.

I have a saying, “Never give a small person a little power.” I think that’s what was happening in that horrible courtroom I had to go to in Oakland more than two decades ago. Now, I have a new thought as well. Let’s try to find a way to give big people (as in big-hearted, big-decency, big-humanity) a LOT of power. I spent a whole morning watching four of them wield it with grace and care, and that gives me a whole lot more hope in systems many of us have grown to despise and mistrust.