Neal Pinkston is an elected state prosecutor and an important man, slugging it out in Hamilton County courts to defend the state of Tennessee. It personally is the victim of every burglary, theft, assault, domestically violent act, school bus crash and murder and so is vigilant to defend its interests.
Mr. Pinkston is called Gen. Pinkston because he serves attorney general Herbert Slatery III.
By David Tulis / 92.7 NoogaRadio
Mr. Pinkston’s law practice, a troupe of state-funded lawyers, is so big that he may not have had time to review the transportation statutes that he’ll be using to prosecute at least 15 of the roughly 45 people arrested in one recent weekend and put into the county jail in a nearby building downtown.
Mr. Pinkston, I propose, make use of my faithful notice regarding statutes and court rulings relevant to transportation and travel. I go his office Monday and give one of his employees, receptionist Daphne Haskett, a copy of transportation administrative notice.
I tell her I will email a digital copy to Melydia Clewell, the spokeswoman, for Mr. Pinkston’s convenience.
I have been doing some tedious legal research, I say through Mrs. Haskett’s protective glass; it might be good for Mr. Pinkston to have the summary of it. He draws from the state’s transportation law provisions under which he criminally prosecutes men and women (some of them actual criminals) who have the misfortune of coming to his attention.
Mr. Pinkston might enjoy a reduction in his workload if he were to more closely follow the statutes pursuant to administrative notice, each line of which has been created apart from taxpayer expense.
Protecting the officer
Transportation administrative notice seeks to notify and protect the most visible and heavily armed of state agents — the officer who makes arrests of citizens under Tenn. Code Ann. 55, the transportation code.
The law grants this state actor power to arrest/stop/seize people under transportation provisions for violation of said provisions if that person is under transportation provisions. Since most arrestees are private travelers and not operators, drivers or transporters, it appears that many may not be legally under these provisions.
Tennessee courts support and uphold what appears to be an abusive practice against the rights of the free people of Tennessee. Officers are exposed and vulnerable, torn between obeying policy and custom on one hand (backed by those in black robes) and, on the other, claims by abused citizens whose rights have been violated by those very customs that operate as if the citizen lost a constitutional right under the driver license law in 1938.
I argue the statute is constitutional and should be recognized as so BECAUSE it causes no offense against free travelers.
The question is: Will administration let notice filter down to the ranks, so that cops, troopers and deputies will be aware of the rights of the people and the travel-transportation distinction? I fear that if the officer knows “officially” but not personally, he’s subject to a tort action against his person.