You are conflating criminal law with civil law. It is ture in civil law all that is required is a proponderance of evidence. Parking violations are a civil matter so you are correct that the penalties of leaving the car in the allegedly unauthorized space does not require much in the way of evidence and the testimony of the enforcement agent that he or she witnessed the vehicle in place is sufficient. However the taking of the boot is a criminal law matter and the burden of proof is much higher and really is "beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt". In the state of Texas at lest those exact words are given in jury instructions for all criminal cases. Also, you incorrectly believe that traffic offenses are on part with parking offenses, traffic offenses are also under criminal law and require the same burden of proof. This is the reason why people who fight tickets in court often move for discovery of a whole plethora of documentation from the municipality including training and maintenence records for officers and equipment. This is why municipalities often dismiss traffic tickets rather than eat the expense of prosecuting a moving violation to the same burden of proof as a murder, which they are constitutionally required to do. Honestly, it is the "fairness" of our legal system that emboldens people like my husband. And one more thing, a search warrant had to be specific as to what the police are looking for and where they are to search. Police cannot "look for something else". The warrant the deputies arrived with was specifically for the location of my husband's vehicle and the house and the specific property named in the warrant was the parking enforcement device.Unfortunately the standard is only "beyond a reasonable doubt," not beyond a shadow of a doubt. For traffic and parking violations, a lot of deference is given to the officers, so a video of him cutting the boot is not necessary. If they executed a search warrant, they were most likely hoping to come across more than that. They also have no obligation to chase down unlikely alibis. That burden of proof - an affirmative defense - would be on your husband and probably require subpoenaing the alleged witness. Good luck with that.
Upvote
0