Unfortunate, but true. It makes me think about bogus speed traps and the like— governmental nickel and diming.A judge is not much different than the rest of us and will look to take the path of least resistance.
The judge has to continually work with law enforcement and the likeliness of you appealing a $192 fine is so low the outcome was almost pre determined.
Along with the risk of setting a precedence that may open up unrelated incidences as lawful you really had small chance of success.
They didn't leave me with the opportunity to appeal. It was like traffic court. My argument was not compelling enough to sway the judge's opinion.IMO the judge is wrong. I don't know if this is appealable or even if your up to committing more time and money to this but if able I believe you have a case. I'm a Canadian and rules are different here but I've been following this thread with interest.
Norb sorry to hear of your loss against peoples Republic of California.
I had a ranger politely inform me (he saw me getting ready to takeoff) that flying a drone would be a misdemeanor in this country park. I’m pretty sure he misunderstood the law and it’s only a misdemeanor if you interfere with firefighting or dropping contraband in the prison but either way it’s set a nasty precedents for me on 2nd flight.
Thank you for sharing. I thought it would be OK to launch outside of the park and fly in. Oh no.
During the hearing, he did tell me "this is a park issue, not an FAA issue." He pointed out that there are FAA exemptions to jurisdictional authority. At that point, I said that I believed I had done my due diligence by checking sectional charts and pre-planning my trip on AirMap. But I believe this only adds to the confusion about what local/regional agencies are able to do with regard to restricting airspace.I suspect that it was a jurisdictional issue. The information and case law from the FAA seemed good, the Judge probably ruled against you because he thinks you failed to prove that you were under FAA jurisdiction. As we are all innocent until proven guilty, the prosecution must have proven jurisdiction for their bylaws to apply.
Right...and at some point I think the rules and regs will be consistent and easy to access so there is no ambiguity.Bad deal. But we must keep in mind some laws are about what and where YOU are doing things, and not about what your drone is doing. So the FAA probably won’t have much influence on cases like this. Live and learn I guess.