Skip to content
News
Link copied to clipboard

Evesham leads South Jersey in cellphone tickets

They lined up as Evesham Township Judge Karen Caplan called their names. First one row, all ticketed for using a cellphone while driving. Then a second, a third, and a fourth.

They lined up as Evesham Township Judge Karen Caplan called their names.

First one row, all ticketed for using a cellphone while driving. Then a second, a third, and a fourth.

The pack grew to nearly 40 people, all planning to plead guilty, when Caplan finished the list.

"Were you using a handheld cellphone while driving?" Caplan asked each person, eliciting the inevitable "yes" in response. First-time offenders received $200 fines, second-time violators had to pay $400, as state law mandates, and so on.

More than the amount of the fines, it was the size of the crowd he was in that surprised Dave DiMedio, 55, a lumber company owner from Medford.

"Ridiculous," said DiMedio, who had to pay $400. "It's amazing the amount of people that are caught just in this township."

The Evesham Police Department for years has ticketed more drivers for cellphone use than any department in South Jersey and is among the most prolific statewide. In a recent court year, which runs from July to June, Evesham (population 45,644) handed out more tickets than Jersey City, which is nearly six times larger and the state's second-largest city.

So far this court year, Evesham ranks sixth statewide in the number of tickets issued - 539 - according to Municipal Court case data. Among towns of comparable size or larger, it is second only to East Orange in tickets per number of residents.

And cellphone tickets now cost more than ever.

A bill Gov. Christie signed raised the fines in July from $100 to between $200 (the minimum for a first offense) and $600 (for a third). Drivers charged with talking or texting on a phone must also appear in court, even to plead guilty. Some doggedly and successfully challenge the citations.

Christopher Chew, the 42-year-old half-marathon runner who is Evesham's police chief, says his tough traffic enforcement saves lives - though even he expressed surprise at the township's number of cellphone cases.

"I am shocked that we are the highest," Chew said last week.

"I'm not surprised," said Lt. Stephen Riedener, police spokesman in neighboring Mount Laurel. "They have a very aggressive traffic enforcement program."

Even Evesham's township manager, Thomas Czerniecki, was once cited in town for talking while behind the wheel. "I was grateful for it," he said recently, saying it made him a more cautious driver.

Others debate whether the enforcement is a safety measure or a government cash cow.

In reality, it is both.

'Expectation,' not quota

Chew extends his arm toward the four flat screens in the police roll-call room, his finger zeroing in on a red swath on the bottom right TV highlighting Routes 70 and 73.

"It's the hub of our town," Chew says. The roads carry more than 100,000 cars per day. The volume equates to more lawbreakers, more accidents, and more enforcement, whether for drunken driving or texting.

Up to three marked patrol cars sit along Routes 70 and 73 at various times. The officers' sole job is to catch traffic violators; they don't respond to other calls. Officers in other local departments, including Cherry Hill and Mount Laurel, typically do both.

Evesham's recent peak for cellphone-ticket cases was 1,521 in 2012-13, when it outstripped Jersey City.

Chew expects each officer in the shaded area to find three violations per hour, though he is careful to call the number an "expectation," not a quota.

"We don't penalize" officers, he said. "But . . . we expect you to be busy."

With enforcement comes money; drivers paid a total of more than $70,000 in cellphone fines in Evesham between July and January, according to state judiciary records. The state Motor Vehicle Commission got half of it. Burlington County and Evesham split the rest.

Some are skeptical about the motives.

"It seems like it's just an open call for money," said William Vespe, 48, a road construction business owner from Cherry Hill who received a cellphone ticket in Evesham. "Of course, they'll tell you it's about safety."

Chew said the money matters little to him.

"I don't pay attention to that," he said. "I really don't, nor do I have any care.

"My No. 1 and only priority is the safety of our residents."

Stopping cellphone use by drivers became a big focus in 2010, Chew said, when the department began using a system called "Data-Driven Approaches to Crime and Traffic Safety." The system, which examined five years' worth of accidents, found most were caused by distracted driving or drivers passing on the shoulder.

Before adopting the system, Evesham had six traffic fatalities in five years. Since then, there have been zero. Accidents also have dropped, from 2,000 to 1,750, Chew said.

"They seem to be getting results," said Steve Carrellas of the National Motorists Association, an advocacy group. But he questioned why officers should have to find three violations an hour, saying that reduces discretion.

"Motorists should be concerned when there are numerical goals," Carrellas said.

Fighting the charge

Jae Hwang munched on Doritos from a vending machine as he waited in line to enter Room 107 - "Attorney/client Conference Room A" - where prosecutors negotiate deals with recipients of tickets.

Unlike most others, Hwang, a 45-year-old real estate agent from Eastampton, was there to fight.

Hwang said an Evesham officer cited him one night for using a cellphone after he took a few seconds to move when a light turned green on Route 70.

Hwang, with his 5-year-old son, Alexander, in the backseat, said he told the officer he had been looking down at a printed map to get to Bible study in Cherry Hill. Contest the ticket, the officer said.

Doing so requires two court appearances: the first to plead not guilty, the second to go to trial.

So there was Hwang, who had waited three hours as the clock struck noon.

Standing his ground

"I'm very frustrated," he said as he inched closer to Room 107. "I got a ticket for something I did not do."

At last, bargaining commenced between Hwang, who was wearing khakis and a Penn State sweatshirt, and prosecutor Ryan Friel, in a dark gray suit and maroon tie.

Friel told Hwang he was cited for two violations, including for not having his car inspected when he was pulled over. Friel said he would drop that charge if Hwang agreed to a deal. "Plead guilty to cellphone," Friel said.

Hwang: "I was going to Bible study and looking at the directions."

The two debated - Friel telling Hwang, "I'm trying to give you a break," before walking away.

"Why don't you think about it?" he said.

Hwang answered 10 minutes later: "Trial."

Then, a breakthrough: Friel offered to drop the cellphone charge in exchange for a guilty plea on the inspection. Hwang agreed and appeared before the judge.

Case closed.

"I'm so happy," he said outside the courtroom, smiling as he paid $139 for the inspection ticket but nothing more. "I didn't have to pay for something I did not do."

Victory aside, Hwang's case brings up an important point: When can an officer stop someone for using a cellphone?

Chew and other police say an officer must see the phone in a driver's hand - not just the driver looking down - to issue a ticket.

Catching drivers in the day is fairly easy, police say. "Nighttime it's very hard," said Sgt. Glenn Charney, who heads the traffic unit in Cherry Hill.

Chew said he hoped his officers were not writing tickets with any doubt about whether the driver was on a phone.

"You have to be able to testify in court to say exactly what you saw during that time," he said. "And you better be 100 percent confident in that and right."

INSIDE

How Evesham stacks up to other municipalities in cellphone ticketing.

Table, A14.

EndText