Some laws seem unreasonable - this one does not. Why should a court accept hundreds of dollars in loose change? First, it would all have to be counted by an employee, meaning they wouldn't be doing what they're paid to do. Second, this individual could just as easily take the change to a bank and have it converted to paper money - the only reason he didn't was his desire to thumb his nose at the govt. What a loser, if this is the best he can do. The real issue here is the law, and this individual broke it - several times. It's too bad that he was given a free forum to air his views on television. He does not deserve the air time that he got when MOST people do obey the law and go about the business of living.

I agree. He's not looking for justice, he's looking for a loophole to get out of paying his fines.

This is a dilemma. Guy gets ticket. Guy gets mouthy with cops and gets more tickets. My opinion, arguing with cops during a traffic stop is not a great idea.
The guy is not a rocket scientist. However he has a point.

I believe that if he wants to pay a 700.00 fine in change, he should be able to do so UNLESS Snohomish Co. Courts have a payment policy already in place that would prohibit use of change after a certain dollar amount.

If Snohomish Co. had a policy like that in place, that policy would have been part of the news story. I doubt such a policy exits.

If Snohomish Co. does not have a payment policy in place, they should accept his change, count it and thank him for paying his ticket like any lawful citizen.

Too often, law enforcement and the court system bully people in our society who are not smart enough (or rich enough) to fight back. Telling someone they won’t accept payment because it would be to much work to count it just doesn’t cut it with me.

Hey Snohomish County, SUCK IT UP. Do YOUR job!
Accept MR. King’s payment. Then quietly put a payment policy in place that would prevent this from ever happening again.

Wow, doesn't anyone know anymore that the States are required by the Constitution to make only gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debt? Look it up. Article I, Section 10. That means, to pay government debts, the government is only supposed to use gold and silver. So of course, they should only ACCEPT gold and silver. And that, dear poster Suzanne, shows you why a court SHOULD NOT accept paper money. If the "real issue here is the LAW," Suzanne, then it is the courts that are breaking it. I would venture to say that you've probably never actually READ a law in your life. How about the constitution? Don't blather about what the law is until you've read it and understood it, and until you've come to the realization that it is government and courts that break the law, all day, every day in this fine country of ours. Please learn! Please wake up.

The States are all violating the Constitution and obeying the legal tender laws, which laws make it illegal not to accept Federal Reserve Notes ("cash", actually bank notes that have no intrinsic value at all). An argument could be made that it is MORE LAWFUL to pay in metal change (although it isn't gold & silver) than in those paper notes. And given those same legal tender laws of this country, it is illegal for the court not to accept his change, or to have a policy which forbids accepting such change.

As for you, Rick, what do you mean about looking for a loophole? You think that laws which fine people for traffic infractions -- where no crime is committed, where no one is hurt -- are a good thing? Such laws are actually a type of tax, and the traffic police nothing but revenuers. In America, these are the new highwaymen, robbing the people rather than protecting them. It is too bad that people are so brainwashed they can't see what this really is. Why should you or anyone else pay fines for behavior which actually hurts no one? Why should mouthing off to a cop gain a person more tickets? The only reason it does so is because this is a POLICE STATE, and police don't abide by the laws or any sense of justice, they just do what they want.

Doesn't anyone have any idea what the principles of law really are? I urge the posters on this thread to learn some fundamental concepts -- you seem altogether concerned only about the inconvenience of the court or the policy the court has, or how to avoid cops ticketing you, rather than the fundamental injustice of the whole system, of which this is just one minor example.

Jwalsh, I mean that there is a law in this state that says you will not speed. You say no crime was committed but I say that there is a rule and it was broken. And, yes, I think that most of these laws are a good thing. We live under a social contract wherein we, as a society, set rules to live by. We also designate the police as the enforcers of those rules. Therefore, refusing to show your license, as Mr. King did, is intentionally being disruptive to the law process. I would say that you, Jwalsh, have a grudge against the people of Washington State for having decided on the rules that we live by.