Speeding Ticket Trouble

[Raggit]

Hail, o great and wise AGSers, I come to you seeking your council in matters impending before me.

So anyway, I was on my way home from school yesterday and I was pulled over for speeding.  Allegedly, I was going 50 in a 30.  Now, I'm not sure if this is true for a number of reasons.  1, I wasn't looking at my speedometer, I was watching the road.  2, If I WAS going 50 and everybody else was doing 30, I think I would've been tailgating a bunch of people ahead.  I raised that point to the officer, and the first time he ignored it, and the second time he said he was done "explaining."  Hmm, explaning what?  He never answered my question.

So the ticket is $145, and I have the option of either mailing the payment in, or going to the set court date to contest it.  I really feel like the speed was exaggerated, or everybody else was speeding too, and he just picked me. 

I can shrug it off and pay the fine, but I really don't feel like doing that.  I at least want a chance to question the officer.  For one thing, was I going EXACTLY 50 mph, or did he round it up or down? 

Also, and here's a big one, I noticed today that from the spot that he pulled from his parked position onto the road to pull me over, the speed changes from 30 to 45 to the point to where I actually stopped, the speed zone there is actually 45 MPH, not 30.  That means I was so close the change in speed zone that I may be able to argue that it was frivilous/incorrect to fine me for 50 in a 30 when the speed changes visibly, I might add, as the sign is viewable from the road where he was parked.

So what WOULD you do?  Go to court and plead the case and question to officer?  Or just mail in the fine (with money I really can't afford at the moment) 

If I WAS speeding, I would be inclined to just mail the payment in, but I didn't know I was speeding, or WHAT speed I was doing.

[Grundislav]

Go to court. 

More than likely the officer won't even show up and then you'll be clear.

[Darth Mandarb]

As much as I hate to say this ...

The only chance you have of not paying the ticket (or not getting the points on your license) if you go to court is if the cop doesn't show up.  It's a crap shoot really.

No matter your excuse, no matter your "evidence", no matter your opinion on the matter and how unjustified the ticket might have been ... if the cop shows up, you lose.

I almost got arrested one time because I went to court with my friend (I was in the car with her) and the cop gave her a ticket for running a red light which she ABSOLUTELY did not.  I explained to the judge and he couldn't grasp the concept of seeing the light change so I asked him if he understood the principle of light "glowing".  He didn't like that.

She ended up getting the points and having to pay the ticket.  If the cop shows up, it doesn't matter.

[Layabout]

Did the police officer show you his speed recording device proving you were over the speed limit? Was the speed recording device in question calibrated the morning of the day of the offence??? If the officer did not show you his evidence that you were over the limit, how are you or the courts to know he wasn't simply trying to rack-up offences to make up his quota for the month???

If his speed gun wasn't calibrated, how do you or anyone else know that the gun would give an accurate reading?

There are many ways to beat these kind of offences, especially if the officer doesn't follow protocol.

You don't mention that you were provided with an accurate speed reading from a speed recording device, so I would contest it. But i don't know what the laws are like in your country (guessing america from your sig), but the officer will have to provide evidence that you were speeding. Be it a reading from the gun or what not. But he should have shown it to you. If they have that, ask for the calibration records for the gun in question to be checked over to see if it was operating correctly on the day in question. They should (if your country isn't ruled by evil dictators...) have to prove the device was correct. Which is difficult. Cause an officer who can't be bothered to show you the reding from his machine probably can't be arsed to calibrate it.

My 2 cents...

[monkey0506]

The problem is that any time you have an official of the law (i.e., a judge) attempting to determine the validity of two statements, one provided by another official of the law (i.e., a police officer), and the other provided by a citizen, the first official (judge) is biased toward the opinion of the second (officer). You could provide a very compelling argument, but without some form of definitive proof, you're really not likely to win out against this bias.

I find it somewhat ironic that I've never gotten a speeding ticket as I speed all the time. Every single day in fact. I've passed cops before who apparently just couldn't be bothered, and I was quite happy at that fact. But somehow even knowing I could be forced to pay ridiculous fines doesn't deter me from speeding. The speed limit is 65 mph...my speedometer pegs out at 85...let's see if we can peg it out and then make the RPMs jump another 500! I don't imagine it's good for my gas mileage, but I like to drive fast. I love to pass people. This is of course off the topic here though.

Of course, they can't raise the fine simply because you contested the ticket...so if you think you could appeal to the judge's human side...you can't win if you don't even try.

[shbaz]

Darth is right.  You'll be going to a Kangaroo court, almost no matter what.

I've done this before too, same situation, in a little speed trap town right in front of the 45 mph speed limit sign, except in Oklahoma the speed must increment in 10's or the signs are not legal, so it was from 35 - 45 and I was going 50.

First thing to do is look at the ticket, it says which law you broke.  Google Kansas state statutes and read the law to see what the specifics are.  Some states do say that the speed change is in effect once you see the sign, in Oklahoma the speed change is in effect immediately (physically) after you pass the sign.

These laws vary by state and not every state (I'll bet most don't) requires you to see the radar reading.

You should read up on how radar works, if there was heavy traffic and the cars around you were bigger there's NO way he could know the reading came from you.  His only defense is that he could see how fast you were going relative to the other cars, and if he got a high reading from the nearby cars and your car appeared to be going the same/similar speed then you're done.  You can bring this up in court.  The radar unit picks up the strongest signal.  The best way to bring this up isn't to say it, because you're not an expert, but ask the police officer how the radar specifically reacts to those situations.  If he doesn't know, then question his competence later in the process, but NOT during the questioning.  FYI, I had a rookie cop who had 8 hours of "training" from the police chief, neither of whom had ever had any official schooling for radar use, neither of whom read the damn manual, and the rookie wasn't aware of many common properties of radar units and I STILL WAS DECLARED GUILTY.

If he was parked at an angle to you his reading is inaccurate, it would be less than you were actually going.  It will never read higher (if the reading is coming from you).  They will bring this up if they were parked at an angle and the radar isn't self-correcting.

So basically, you've probably already googled this but here's what happens:
You go to an initial hearing, they'll explain their version of how the law works, which is that if you're guilty, plead and pay the fine.  If you're absolutely not guilty, plead and come back at a later date for your trial.  If you're guilty and you have an excuse (mitigating circumstances) ask to mitigate.  In reality, pleading innocent just means you're going to make them prove you're guilty and if you choose to mitigate it isn't a guilty plea, you're just trying to negotiate a deal without going to trial.  If you fail to reach an agreement you're satisfied with, then you simply plead innocent and go to trial anyway.

If you go to trial, the city/county lawyer will question the police officer.  He'll ask him to identify you, and identify your vehicle and how fast you were going.  Often, right after this, they'll try to show him the ticket, but you should object because that colors his testimony by proving he can't recall all of the events on his own.  They'll ask some other standard questions which vary, like whether or not they tested the radar unit with a tuning fork or not.

Remember one thing, the police officer can and will lie.  If you're going to try to question him and get what you feel is the truth out of him, it had better be pretty fucking clever because you can't expect him to just let you go.  Would you go to court over something and just give up?

Also, he's going to show up.  Expecting him not to is stupid, they get paid to do it and they nearly always show up.

Basically, if I had to do it over again I would have tried to mitigate.  Most of the time they'll drop the fine a notch or two.  If you want to go through the trial, realize it's an intimidating process and if you aren't much of a public speaker GOOD LUCK.

[Stupot]

The cop will have to prove you were speeding. If he can you're done.  And even if he can't the fact that you didn't look at your speedometer is not really much of an excuse.  Good luck though.

[Gregjazz]

Go to court. 

More than likely the officer won't even show up and then you'll be clear.

Exactly.

In the future it's probably best not even to try to reason with an officer. They're not going to change their mind. But this is something you could stand a chance in court, and yes, many times the officer won't even show up.

[Tuomas]

I really don't think there's an excuse to speeding. I don't like people creating dangerous situations just because others around are doing it too. And if that is true, then you should pay the bill in my opinion. I really don't like the habit of going to court over these either. Taking it to higher authorities here would mean more expenses to you, and I think that is just a good thing. Knowing he can be challenged, the policeman could even be weary enough to let it pass, but he didn't.

Another thing is if you were sure you've been mistreated. But if it really is so, that everyone was speeding, well, one policeman can't stop all of them. I'm sorry to sound rude, but perhaps take a bus next time.

[jetxl]

Tuomas, sometimes cops got it wrong.

[woodz]

I very much doubt dragging it out will do very much good, the police will have camera evidence which will have your speed and the pursuing vehicle's speed
maybe 3 or 4 miles over you'd have a case but 20mph? I ride motorbikes and i have my moments : and I'd expect to get hammered if i was caught being a naughty boy, but honestly i can tell when I'm going a few miles over the limit,, i don't need to look.. I guess you need to be more aware on a bike a 20mph over feckup really hurts!
You also need to be careful how you plead your case, you could be done for driving without due care and attention.. which is how its looking.. sorry but its true m8

[Da_Elf]

ive won a case against a cop before since the evidence i provided obviously was in my favor. i have to goto court again this april for a speeding ticket. down here they are usually about 200-300usd

[tube]

I really don't think there's an excuse to speeding.

Hear, hear. We have speed limits for a good reason. Not that I haven't ever driven too fast myself, but I've seen enough of what it can cause to never do it on purpose.

[Nikolas]

I'm pretty sure that once CJ sees that I posted, he will follow lead.

Anyways, speeding is speeding. If you have doubts, just go to court. Either way tickets and speeding tickets and cameras are all moronic ways of controling traffic. (HA!) If the above mentioned that without the cop present you win the case, stands true, then you might have a case. Trying to reason with police idiocy is 90% a lost case either way.

BTW, in Greece, it used to be that if you knew somebody you could "erase" the ticket. I've done that in the past. Pretty nifty huh?

[Tuomas]

Pretty fucked up actually

[Pumaman]

I'm pretty sure that once CJ sees that I posted, he will follow lead.

Here I am, right on cue!!

Regardless of what you think of speed limits and automated enforcement, there's no doubt that when you get pulled over by a cop for a simple case of "exceeding the speed limit" it's basically pot luck whether they'll give you a ticket or not. Some of the factors you can control (eg. if you're rude you're more likely to get a ticket than if you're polite), but most of the factors are to do with them -- eg. if they've had a bad day, or need to up their "detected crimes" quota for the month.

And then if you take it to court, you only get a magistrates court and the system is basically set up to find you guilty. They're not interested in whether you were driving safely or not, all they're interested in is whether they can quickly get you to admit your guilt and pay the fine. As others have said, going to court might be worth a try in the hope that the cop doesn't show up or that he can't produce any evidence; but usually if you take it to court and are found guilty they'll give you a higher fine than what you would have paid otherwise.

It's sad really that road safety has been reduced to a game of the public trying to see what they can get away with and the police trying to notch up as many fines as they can, but I guess that reflects the society we live in today.

[Raggit]

Okay, so I've read my state statutes, and really the only thing I can find is this: 

"A person shall not operate a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual hazards than existing." This is called the "basic speed law." 

The conditions were clear that day, with no slick or wet spots, and clear visibility.  Other than that, I can't find any statutes that actually refer to whether or not the speed limit is in effect once you see the sign or after you've passed it.  I want to find out, however. 

I never asked to see a radar readout (didn't even know I had the option at the time.)  I'm not sure whether to try and contact the officer and discuss these issues, or just lay low until the court date.

[Radiant]

I'm pretty sure that once CJ sees that I posted, he will follow lead.

Here I am, right on cue!!

What is this, Kibo?

Some of the factors you can control (eg. if you're rude you're more likely to get a ticket than if you're polite),

Yep. A friend of mine got a E20 fee for driving a bicycle that had no functioning headlight, plus a E50 fee for calling the officer names... plus I think the former is a misdemeanor and the latter is a felony, so that was NOT such a bright idea.

[Stupot]

Thing is, if you were speeding then you should really just take the punishment.
I won't lie, I creep over the limit on the odd occasion.  It's easy to do.  I realise, though, that the laws are there for a reason and if I did get caught I would take responsibility, take the points and the fine and maybe learn my lesson.

[Obi]

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit.