Judge questions Waki’s pursuit of a motorist

Superior Court Associate Judge Juan T. Lizama commended Rep. Absalon Waki Jr. for reporting a traffic incident to the police, but questioned the propriety of his act in pursuing a motorist and demanding to see the driver’s license.

Lizama also questioned the Attorney General’s Office’s decision to charge the motorist, Xiao Jun Cao, with the serious offense of reckless driving.

“There was no accident and no witness to the event other than Rep. Waki, whose back was turned,” said the judge in his order issued Monday dismissing the traffic case against Cao.

According to the order, Waki had parked his car on the side of a street with his flashers on while he was picking up trash. Cao was driving his vehicle down the road and, as the congressman was getting something from the passenger’s side of his car, he allegedly felt Cao’s vehicle pass by at a high speed. Waki said he had the impression that he had almost been hit as he felt the wind from the passing car.

Cao stopped shortly afterward near a business establishment. He got out of the car, and Waki approached and asked to speak with him. Cao did not reply. When the defendant returned to his car, Waki again asked to speak with him. The motorist said he did not speak English and left.

Waki called 911 and followed the vehicle. When Cao stopped, Waki approached and asked to see his driver’s license. The defendant did so, but took it back before the congressman could get his name.

A responding police officer later apprehended Cao and cited him for reckless driving. No subsection of the statute was specified.

A bench trial was held on Oct. 4, 2006. Assistant attorney general John Aguon appeared on behalf of the government. Assistant Public Defender Imelda Antonio defended Cao.

The police officer who issued the citation ticket did not testify. Waki was the only witness who testified on behalf of the government.

In dismissing the case, Lizama said Cao’s conduct did not rise to the level of reckless driving. He said that Cao’s failure to exercise due care could have been more appropriately cited under the offense of “operators must exercise due care with regard to pedestrians.”

“However, it is not the role of the court to amend pleadings. The charge against defendant must be dismissed,” the judge said.