[ARCHIVED THREAD] - traffic ticket (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 4/18/2010 4:36:33 PM EDT
| hey yall im looking for advice on how to handle a traffic ticket i recieved for speeding. im going to court to fight it. not sure how to handle it and how the process works. can anyone help me out |
|
You show up, plead your case, and hope for the best.
If it's reckless you'll probably want an attorney. Many courts are coming down hard on reckless tickets, suspending licenses and sometimes giving jail to first time offenders. You may have success taking a driver improvement class before you go to court. Show the court the certificate and ask for leniency. BTW from what I've heard, most judges won't accept online DIP classes. Either way, a DIP program gives you good points on your license and will help negate the impact of the ticket on your insurance. Some schools are cheaper if your attendance is voluntary rather than court ordered. If your lucky and haven't had a ticket in a while, the judge will just put you on a six month probation and state will not prosecute you by entering what's known as a nul pross or nolle prosequi. |
|
ok thanks for the insite.
lets say the cop doesnt show up then its dismissed. but say the cop does show up. what should my case be can i ask him to prove that i was speeding by producing evidents?? how does that part work? do i have the right to a court appointed lawyer? |
|
How about a few more details? Sounds like you need to stop messing around and get a lawyer based on what you're saying. BTW, the cop will show. BTW, the judge has heard it all. Asking for leniency based on a good record might get the fine dropped, but probably not the points. You can get some leniency if you can prove the speedometer was off and you got it fixed, but that will cost and it won't explain gross speeding. |
|
40 in a 25 didnt see the sign. i saw the cop thought it was 35 mph so trying to maintain 35. no long own car so cant get speedo checked but it was prob ok.
not sure if i should just pay it or tack my chances. only speeding ticket i have ever got. i got a following too close years ago when i was in a accident. recored is clean. |
|
You won't get a court appointed attorney.
The questionable accuracy of a speedometer isn't really a defense unless you changed the size of tire on the car, the gearing, etc. Even in that case, it's usually only off my a mph or three. If the officer doesn't show, the court may grant a continuance to the prosecution or dismiss the case. However, it's incredibly rare for a cop to miss a court date. As for the cross examination of the officer and your own testimony, that's fact dependent and not something you should try to get into on your own without a lot of research. Even so, if you do it yourself, you run the risk of just looking like an idiot and worse, wasting the court's time. While it's best to have a lawyer in nearly every situation, sometimes it's best to just suck it up and ask the court to have mercy. After all, you just admitted to all of us that you were speeding. |
|
Quoted:
After all, you just admitted to all of us that you were speeding. yeah you got me on that lol i didnt amit to speeding during the stop. i had my gun seized by the assisiting officer during the stop. for the most part i excerised my right to remain silent. does the officer have to show the court proof that they got me on the radar doing 40? and how does the points system work |
|
I can tell you from my observations that asking the officer to show calibration on the radar equipment or vehicle they were using will piss most judges off and weight you towards the heavy end of the allowable punishments. Be polite, honest, and forward with the court. It goes a LONG way. One of the things Henrico judges love to ask about in traffic cases are about your behavior when dealing with the officer.
Good luck. Keep your chin up and your head on straight. Oh yeah ... DRESS AT LEAST BUSINESS CASUAL!! It shows a respect for the court. |
|
Take a look at http://www.dmv.state.va.us/webdoc/citizen/drivers/points_assess.asp
The officer standing before the court and saying "I caught him on radar doing 40 in a 25" is all it takes. Unless you have something to disprove the accuracy of the officer's testimony, you probably shouldn't say anything more than "I'm stupid and learned my lesson. I attended a driver improvement program and here's my certificate." You might also want to consider telling him you've been a good driver and have no other tickets (if that's true). Examples that would disprove or cast doubt upon the accuracy of the officer's testimony include: Another vehicle overtaking yours at the time your speed was measured. Inclement weather (if using radar or laser) Failure to keep the radar gun calibrated Lack of a posted speed limit You get the idea. But, if you ask these questions and receive an unfavorable answer, you may just be strengthening the case against you. As for the gun, I assume it was given back? What this really comes down to is your driving record, your attitude in the court room, and your attitude to the officer when he gave you the ticket. ETA: Dress like you're going on a job interview (in an office) i.e., wear a suit and tie if you have one. If not, aim for your Sunday best. |
|
^^^^^
i totally agree with the above two posts... i had a 91 in a 55 years ago, and took the driver improvement course on my own initive prior to the court date, and aside from the 7 points against my liscence i ended up only paying $186 due in part to a previously lean reord the driving course and my polite/professional attitude when dealing with both the officer and judge. the judge did inquire as to my behavior towards the officer during the trial... _______________________________________________________________________________________________ jmho, but since you are admitting you are guilty, why are you looking to make this compliated? ymmv but were i you, knew i was guilty(even if by honest mistake), and admitting that i did the crime, i'd just man up and pay the fine... absolutelly no harm in telling your side of the story admitting it was an honest mistake pointing out a previously clean record and asking for leniency though... in some courts it's cheaper and much easier to just pay the simple speeding fine and take a few points against your record. your alternative is take a day off work(espicially sucks if you don't get paid days off), sit in court for several hours listening to a bunch of people whine about how they aren't guilty and shouldn't be punished(becasue no one is ever responsible for their actions, and it's always someone elses' fault), then end up being found guilty and having to pay a fine and pay court costs... K. |
|
1) Pay it and move on.
2) Slow down. Localities are really hurting for revenue and using speed traps to offset losses from decreased sales and real property taxes. I had to drive from the WV panhandle to Dulles Airport last weekend and passed six cops running radar on the way down, and two on the way back. |
|
Quoted:
You just need to pay the ticket and stop messing around. You did it.... admit it and drive on. Are you really going to try and fight this? This. You are not going to get out of the ticket, and will end up paying the fine anyway. If you go to court and fight it, and lose, you'll paycourt costs on top of the fine. If you annoy the judge, or make him believe you are wasting his time with taking it to his courtroom, then the fine you receive will be higher than you have now. As was stated above, the days of officers not showing up for a court date are pretty much gone. It pisses off the judge, who then pisses off the chief, and shit rolls downhill. And, yes, the judge has heard it all...twice. Pay the ticket in advance and move along. |
|
I did not catch where your going to court. I know in ours (will be going in a few hours) the judge has been really easy. OURS (not all) has been throwing out driving improvement classes left and right. The judge even told the last one if he takes it himself it will count as points, but if the court orders it then it will not. I had three cases that the drivers took the class before coming to court and brought a copy of their DMV transcript and they got 6 months suspended sentence. He told them if they brought a transcript a week before the date set by the court (end of the six months) and it showed no tickets or violations then the case would be dismissed. There was two who tried to fight it and came up with some really weird defense (using Californian code as a defense as to the distance an officer must be after a speed reduction sign). The judge gave them a confused look, found them guilty and gave max penalty. They could have just walked away with defensive driving and been done with it. Don't even try the "the officer did not show me my speed" or ask for proof of the radar reading since it is not required. Officers rarely fail to show up. In my neck of the woods if they fail to show it usually means they have been fired or died (the judge will continue for a missing officer here).
The best advice has already been given. Show up dressed nice. Be polite and say yes sir/Ma'am, not yea or yep. That goes a long way. Great the judge and officer with good morning or afternoon. Kill them with politeness even if you don't mean it. Remember it is nothing personal, so don't make it such. Good luck and stay safe. On another note: I hear a lot of people talking about revenue, but that is not the case around here. The only thing our town gets is a portion of court costs and that does not cover the actual costs involve. The rest goes to the state and gets distributed as they see fit. I have not seen or heard of any town in this area running speed traps just for revenue. It is not very cost effective. |
|
Quoted:
I did not catch where your going to court. I know in ours (will be going in a few hours) the judge has been really easy. OURS (not all) has been throwing out driving improvement classes left and right. The judge even told the last one if he takes it himself it will count as points, but if the court orders it then it will not. I had three cases that the drivers took the class before coming to court and brought a copy of their DMV transcript and they got 6 months suspended sentence. He told them if they brought a transcript a week before the date set by the court (end of the six months) and it showed no tickets or violations then the case would be dismissed. There was two who tried to fight it and came up with some really weird defense (using Californian code as a defense as to the distance an officer must be after a speed reduction sign). The judge gave them a confused look, found them guilty and gave max penalty. They could have just walked away with defensive driving and been done with it. Don't even try the "the officer did not show me my speed" or ask for proof of the radar reading since it is not required. Officers rarely fail to show up. In my neck of the woods if they fail to show it usually means they have been fired or died (the judge will continue for a missing officer here). The best advice has already been given. Show up dressed nice. Be polite and say yes sir/Ma'am, not yea or yep. That goes a long way. Great the judge and officer with good morning or afternoon. Kill them with politeness even if you don't mean it. Remember it is nothing personal, so don't make it such. Good luck and stay safe. On another note: I hear a lot of people talking about revenue, but that is not the case around here. The only thing our town gets is a portion of court costs and that does not cover the actual costs involve. The rest goes to the state and gets distributed as they see fit. I have not seen or heard of any town in this area running speed traps just for revenue. It is not very cost effective. THIS, but no one will ever believe you, so its not worth it to try. |
|
I only have one experience fighting a traffic ticket in Fairfax County Court.
But they do the court cases in alphabetical order of the officers last name. My officers name started with a Z so I sat there listening to a lot of cases before I got up there. All of the above are pretty much right on. I do remember one guy claiming that he didn't think he was going that fast and that he didn't think the officer wasn't using his radar gun properly. The judge questioned the officer and after learning he had many years of patrol duty doubled the guys fine. The only person I saw get their fine and points dismissed was a good looking woman who claimed that she was driving fast because some men in a white van were chasing her. She made that statement to the cop when she pulled over for him and the cop testified that's what she said, but he did not see any white van that night following her. Judge gave her the benefit of the doubt and dismissed the charges. I think she was pretty slick. Anyhow it's 15 Mph over, I say pay the ticket, take the driver improvement class you insurance won't raise your premium on you. If you try to fight it you will take a whole day off of work, sit in the court house and if you are lucky you will save $50 of the fine. To me it's not worth it. |
|
Totally depends on the court. The judge around here routinely drops speeding to defective equipment (no points) if the prior record is clean.
Show up (in a tie), act respectful to the judge, don't be a dick to the officer, and move on. If you were speeding, admit it. The judge probbaly will look more kindly on you if you are willing to accept responsibility and ask for leniency than he will if you say 'I didn't do nuffin' and then the officer testifies and THEN you ask for leniency. The officer will show up. His records probably will be in order - notarized certification of tuning forks w/in 6 months, initial certification of radar box from mfg, was in uniform displaying badge of authority (statutory requirement), equipment checked before and after shift and found to be accurate. No requirement in VA to 'lock in' the speed, no requirement to 'show' the violator any speed (if it's not locked in, it won't show anyway). Good luck, remember he was doing his job - you were doing 15 over. |
|
In a country where all men are supposedly created equal, you will find that when in court, you are less equal than the officer. He will not have any evidence other than his word, and his word carries more weight than your word. I wish some judge somewhere had the backbone to say without any real evidence, all speeding tickets in his court are dismissed. In this day and time, there is no excuse to not have camera footage of your car, with the date and time, and speed, recorded and presented for evidence. Red light cameras exist now, and the same basic technology should be applied to police cars.
Pacing should have been thrown out long before now. |
|
Quoted:
In a country where all men are supposedly created equal, you will find that when in court, you are less equal than the officer. He will not have any evidence other than his word, and his word carries more weight than your word. I wish some judge somewhere had the backbone to say without any real evidence, all speeding tickets in his court are dismissed. In this day and time, there is no excuse to not have camera footage of your car, with the date and time, and speed, recorded and presented for evidence. Red light cameras exist now, and the same basic technology should be applied to police cars. Pacing should have been thrown out long before now. Wow. That's pretty good. Put it to some music and you will make millions. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
In a country where all men are supposedly created equal, you will find that when in court, you are less equal than the officer. He will not have any evidence other than his word, and his word carries more weight than your word. I wish some judge somewhere had the backbone to say without any real evidence, all speeding tickets in his court are dismissed. In this day and time, there is no excuse to not have camera footage of your car, with the date and time, and speed, recorded and presented for evidence. Red light cameras exist now, and the same basic technology should be applied to police cars. Pacing should have been thrown out long before now. Wow. That's pretty good. Put it to some music and you will make millions. Someone already did... "they see me rollin' They hatin' patrollin they try'n ta catch me ridin' dirty And/or Fight the Power Yawn... blahblahblah hate the man, blahblahblah... US Citizens gave the police the power we have, don't like it? take it back with your votes. If you cant seem to make that work then apparently the rest of the citizens are fine with the way things are. |
|
Quoted:
In a country where all men are supposedly created equal, you will find that when in court, you are less equal than the officer. He will not have any evidence other than his word, and his word carries more weight than your word. I wish some judge somewhere had the backbone to say without any real evidence, all speeding tickets in his court are dismissed. In this day and time, there is no excuse to not have camera footage of your car, with the date and time, and speed, recorded and presented for evidence. Red light cameras exist now, and the same basic technology should be applied to police cars. Pacing should have been thrown out long before now. My word should carry more weight in court than yours. I stand in front of the judge several times a month and the judge see's the guilty pleas and the people saying "the officer is correct your honor, that's how it happened". So why should he throw out the one Jackass' ticket who wants to argue some stupid point he learned when he googled "how to beat a speeding ticket". As for the video evidence the technology exists, but you would be creating a bigger problem. When I work traffic on Rt. 29 I can easily write 25 speeding tickets a day. lets say I only get motivated to do that 4 days a month and those are the only tickets I have for the following months traffic court. Out of those 100 tickets 30 people prepay prior to the day before court which shows up on the docket. Out of the 70 left 30 more prepay the night before court so while organizing my court papers I include them. I spend about 40 minutes just getting everything in order for a normal month of 40 tickets. If you throw in trying to organize video evidence for every offender on the docket into something that can be presented in court then multiple that time by 4 or 5. Then when I get to court 10 people actually show up with 3 pleading not guily. I've wasted my time and the court will back up just having to deal with those people's video evidence and they will still be found guilty. If you were speeding then own up and pay the fine. Don't come to court just because you want the officer to prove something for you or because you want to play lawyer. Red light cameras are operated by private companies and don't involve the police or court system so it's not the same. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
In a country where all men are supposedly created equal, you will find that when in court, you are less equal than the officer. He will not have any evidence other than his word, and his word carries more weight than your word. I wish some judge somewhere had the backbone to say without any real evidence, all speeding tickets in his court are dismissed. In this day and time, there is no excuse to not have camera footage of your car, with the date and time, and speed, recorded and presented for evidence. Red light cameras exist now, and the same basic technology should be applied to police cars. Pacing should have been thrown out long before now. My word should carry more weight in court than yours. I stand in front of the judge several times a month and the judge see's the guilty pleas and the people saying "the officer is correct your honor, that's how it happened". So why should he throw out the one Jackass' ticket who wants to argue some stupid point he learned when he googled "how to beat a speeding ticket". As for the video evidence the technology exists, but you would be creating a bigger problem. When I work traffic on Rt. 29 I can easily write 25 speeding tickets a day. lets say I only get motivated to do that 4 days a month and those are the only tickets I have for the following months traffic court. Out of those 100 tickets 30 people prepay prior to the day before court which shows up on the docket. Out of the 70 left 30 more prepay the night before court so while organizing my court papers I include them. I spend about 40 minutes just getting everything in order for a normal month of 40 tickets. If you throw in trying to organize video evidence for every offender on the docket into something that can be presented in court then multiple that time by 4 or 5. Then when I get to court 10 people actually show up with 3 pleading not guily. I've wasted my time and the court will back up just having to deal with those people's video evidence and they will still be found guilty. If you were speeding then own up and pay the fine. Don't come to court just because you want the officer to prove something for you or because you want to play lawyer. Red light cameras are operated by private companies and don't involve the police or court system so it's not the same. You're right in most of that but wrong right in the beginning. Our word carries more weight because we have been trusted with the responsibility to uphold the law, and the city council/mayor/police chief decided we were trustworthy enough for our job. The coucil/mayor/chief is allowed this level of responsibility by the citizens who allowed/voted them into power. If someone has a problem with the way that system works, then change the system or move out of the country as thats the way its always been in America. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
In a country where all men are supposedly created equal, you will find that when in court, you are less equal than the officer. He will not have any evidence other than his word, and his word carries more weight than your word. I wish some judge somewhere had the backbone to say without any real evidence, all speeding tickets in his court are dismissed. In this day and time, there is no excuse to not have camera footage of your car, with the date and time, and speed, recorded and presented for evidence. Red light cameras exist now, and the same basic technology should be applied to police cars. Pacing should have been thrown out long before now. My word should carry more weight in court than yours. I stand in front of the judge several times a month and the judge see's the guilty pleas and the people saying "the officer is correct your honor, that's how it happened". So why should he throw out the one Jackass' ticket who wants to argue some stupid point he learned when he googled "how to beat a speeding ticket". As for the video evidence the technology exists, but you would be creating a bigger problem. When I work traffic on Rt. 29 I can easily write 25 speeding tickets a day. lets say I only get motivated to do that 4 days a month and those are the only tickets I have for the following months traffic court. Out of those 100 tickets 30 people prepay prior to the day before court which shows up on the docket. Out of the 70 left 30 more prepay the night before court so while organizing my court papers I include them. I spend about 40 minutes just getting everything in order for a normal month of 40 tickets. If you throw in trying to organize video evidence for every offender on the docket into something that can be presented in court then multiple that time by 4 or 5. Then when I get to court 10 people actually show up with 3 pleading not guily. I've wasted my time and the court will back up just having to deal with those people's video evidence and they will still be found guilty. If you were speeding then own up and pay the fine. Don't come to court just because you want the officer to prove something for you or because you want to play lawyer. Red light cameras are operated by private companies and don't involve the police or court system so it's not the same. You're right in most of that but wrong right in the beginning. Our word carries more weight because we have been trusted with the responsibility to uphold the law, and the city council/mayor/police chief decided we were trustworthy enough for our job. The coucil/mayor/chief is allowed this level of responsibility by the citizens who allowed/voted them into power. If someone has a problem with the way that system works, then change the system or move out of the country as thats the way its always been in America. Both of you are right and wrong. My word is taken at face value by the judge, first because I applied, was scrutinized, taught 6 months of full-time training to get put on the road (what other job has 6 months in-house full time job training?) and found to be honorable at face value through background investigations, etc. After that, I've testified before the SAME JUDGE going on 4 years, at least once and as many as 5-6 times in the same month. I've held my head high and admitted when I've made mistakes, told the judge that I failed to check my radar after a shift and he should dismiss the person's ticket, even met him in his chambers ahead of court and told him I didn't feel comfortable following through with this charge or that, and would he consider dismissing it. He's watched as my cases are played out in front of him, either by people admitting 'yup that's exactly what happened', or hearing evidence, both mine and other corroborating witnesses, or from other witnesses whose credibility is later compromised (felony convictions for lying, cheating, or stealing, which when brought up in open court are used to impeach the witness or otherwise reduce their credibility) who tell a different story from me. The judge makes his own determination as to whether I'm interested in throwing away my entire career over lying about someone's simple traffic infraction. |
|
While you three might be upstanding officers, who can admit when they are wrong, the sad fact is that the ranks of police are no different than that of the general population. You have people on both sides that cannot admit mistakes, or will not speak up because they want to save face. You have people on both sides who are dishonest, and some who are just criminal. By percentages, I am sure that the bad apples among LEO is a much smaller percentage, but they do exist.
I know that the good guys who wear a badge have to put up with alot of bullshit everyday from the dregs of the earth. I know a number of LEO, and the vast majority are in the good guy camp. I have known a few though who wouldn't do the right thing and would save face instead. I have known two that wound up in prison on drugs charges, one who is still there today. Do those two paint all of you with the bad brush....no, but it does show that just because a man wears a badge, it does not mean he is perfect, or free from "sin". My point about my word/your word has nothing to do with how many times someone is in court over a year. I am sure that the majority of speeders are actually speeding. I am just saying that people can be wrong, even when well intentioned. I just wish that there was either some mechanism for some real evidence, or at least have the motorist back to the car to see your radar screen. While one little ticket might seem like no big deal to you, for the motorist to pay, it can be a big deal for some people. Most of us are strapped as it is, especially the last two years, and the ticket cost and insurance hike can really hurt. If it has to happen, then it should be on something more than someone's word. |
|
Quoted:
I have friends that work at the public defender's office. They're in court 3-5 times per week, sometimes nearly all day. Does that mean their word is better than yours? They're officers of the court after all... 
Lawyers don't testify. Big difference. VaFarmBoy you certainly have excellent points. Henry County Sheriff's office a few years ago was a perfect example. But, this is the way the system is built, and people have to trust that it will work. I can say without a doubt that a guilty man will walk in my county before an innocent man goes to jail. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have friends that work at the public defender's office. They're in court 3-5 times per week, sometimes nearly all day. Does that mean their word is better than yours? They're officers of the court after all...
Lawyers don't testify. Big difference. VaFarmBoy you certainly have excellent points. Henry County Sheriff's office a few years ago was a perfect example. But, this is the way the system is built, and people have to trust that it will work. I can say without a doubt that a guilty man will walk in my county before an innocent man goes to jail. They don't testify but they write everything submitted to the court including the complaint or bill of particulars, briefs, motions, and memorandums. They ask the leading questions on cross examination, which while subject objection, often have the functional equivalency of testimony. |
|
Taking them back to the car to view the radar will not prove anything if the officer's intention is to be dishonest (and that is what we are talking about right). All they would have to do is lock the speed onto a car and they could use it all day long. I agree with the video, that would really tie up the court room. It would be interesting if the radar had an option to take that quick photo and have an imprinted date and time with the vehicle, but I could only see this happening with LIDAR. A neat concept though. I could see this getting way out of hand.
As far as who's word is better, I leave that up to the court. They can decide whom to believe. I can only testify as to what I seen and what my actions were. As long as I was truthful and honest, then I can sleep peacefully at night. By the way I sleep really good at night.... Since when does a moving violation become a misdemeanor charge? Reckless driving maybe, but not simple speeding... |
|
Lawyers are not sworn in or under oath, so they don't have the same weight or value in court. As far as the paperwork and briefs go, that is usually handled by staff. If there is any errors they will be very quick to point this out to the courts. Very few draft their own.
|
|
Quoted:
Taking them back to the car to view the radar will not prove anything if the officer's intention is to be dishonest (and that is what we are talking about right). All they would have to do is lock the speed onto a car and they could use it all day long. I agree with the video, that would really tie up the court room. It would be interesting if the radar had an option to take that quick photo and have an imprinted date and time with the vehicle, but I could only see this happening with LIDAR. A neat concept though. I could see this getting way out of hand. As far as who's word is better, I leave that up to the court. They can decide whom to believe. I can only testify as to what I seen and what my actions were. As long as I was truthful and honest, then I can sleep peacefully at night. By the way I sleep really good at night.... Exactly, and furthermore, immediately after the decision to only used photos tagged with speeds, dates and times, there'll be at least 5 idiots claiming the officers TAMPERED WITH THE PHOTO! So the photos now have to be taken on tamper-proof film, sealed in a self-sealing casette, and shipped to the state lab where they will be developed and then hand delivered to the dept. evidence officer who will testify as to chain of custody in court! If you dont trust the police (and i'm not saying every one of us, i know there are assholes out there, i'm saying the institution) then just go live on top of a mountain and don't interact with society at all. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Taking them back to the car to view the radar will not prove anything if the officer's intention is to be dishonest (and that is what we are talking about right). All they would have to do is lock the speed onto a car and they could use it all day long. I agree with the video, that would really tie up the court room. It would be interesting if the radar had an option to take that quick photo and have an imprinted date and time with the vehicle, but I could only see this happening with LIDAR. A neat concept though. I could see this getting way out of hand. As far as who's word is better, I leave that up to the court. They can decide whom to believe. I can only testify as to what I seen and what my actions were. As long as I was truthful and honest, then I can sleep peacefully at night. By the way I sleep really good at night.... Exactly, and furthermore, immediately after the decision to only used photos tagged with speeds, dates and times, there'll be at least 5 idiots claiming the officers TAMPERED WITH THE PHOTO! So the photos now have to be taken on tamper-proof film, sealed in a self-sealing casette, and shipped to the state lab where they will be developed and then hand delivered to the dept. evidence officer who will testify as to chain of custody in court! If you dont trust the police (and i'm not saying every one of us, i know there are assholes out there, i'm saying the institution) then just go live on top of a mountain and don't interact with society at all. Don't forget about the guys who received tha photos, the guy who processed the photos, person who mailed them back, the person who calibrated the machine to make the photos, and a rep from the company who made the machine. They will all have to be summoned to testify as well... Wow now that is some serious court costs... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Taking them back to the car to view the radar will not prove anything if the officer's intention is to be dishonest (and that is what we are talking about right). All they would have to do is lock the speed onto a car and they could use it all day long. I agree with the video, that would really tie up the court room. It would be interesting if the radar had an option to take that quick photo and have an imprinted date and time with the vehicle, but I could only see this happening with LIDAR. A neat concept though. I could see this getting way out of hand. As far as who's word is better, I leave that up to the court. They can decide whom to believe. I can only testify as to what I seen and what my actions were. As long as I was truthful and honest, then I can sleep peacefully at night. By the way I sleep really good at night.... Exactly, and furthermore, immediately after the decision to only used photos tagged with speeds, dates and times, there'll be at least 5 idiots claiming the officers TAMPERED WITH THE PHOTO! So the photos now have to be taken on tamper-proof film, sealed in a self-sealing casette, and shipped to the state lab where they will be developed and then hand delivered to the dept. evidence officer who will testify as to chain of custody in court! If you dont trust the police (and i'm not saying every one of us, i know there are assholes out there, i'm saying the institution) then just go live on top of a mountain and don't interact with society at all. Don't forget about the guys who received tha photos, the guy who processed the photos, person who mailed them back, the person who calibrated the machine to make the photos, and a rep from the company who made the machine. They will all have to be summoned to testify as well... Wow now that is some serious court costs... ETA we better stop adding logic to the argument... not to mention the costs of outfitting every department in the land with the LIDARCAMS and hours of training to train an officer how to use them. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have friends that work at the public defender's office. They're in court 3-5 times per week, sometimes nearly all day. Does that mean their word is better than yours? They're officers of the court after all...
Lawyers don't testify. Big difference. VaFarmBoy you certainly have excellent points. Henry County Sheriff's office a few years ago was a perfect example. But, this is the way the system is built, and people have to trust that it will work. I can say without a doubt that a guilty man will walk in my county before an innocent man goes to jail. Your willingness to say that tells me that you are certainly in the good guy LEO camp. I am not bashing here, but just saying it like it is. Nobody is right all the time, and I am definitely not right all the time. As far as criminal cases in my county, I think that they are pretty fair here too. The traffic court here is probably pretty fair as well. The older judge that sits is pretty reasonable, but the problem around here is that the municipalities use the Interstate highway as a revenue source. The city and county take in between $4 and 5 million a year, and we are a small area too! Most of the tickets are to tourists, and our town appears on a number of websites for it. I won't tell you what town, but if I did and you travelled anywhere along the east coast, you have heard of us, and possibly gotten a ticket here! I guess getting a little older, I see things that I did not years ago. I have read about enough bad apples, seen a couple here at home, and then see what they are doing on the roads around here. I don't really blame the officers working selective out here. They are making overtime and doing their job. I do however question municipalities doing this. I personally think that this sort of thing does not help foster good feelings between people and police. I think it creates a cynacism in people, where they don't just view the police as keepers of the law, but as collectors for their towns. This is not good. Cities push for this because all they see is the windfall that it brings in, but do not see what it does to the goodwill that police have with the people. Lastly, back to what I first said. My word should be as good as anyone else's word. I am not a criminal, drug dealing scum of the earth. I work hard, treat others well, and just want to be treated fairly. What got me to really thinking about the my word/your word thing was a speeding ticket awhile back. The LEO was sitting out on the Interstate. I am a local, so I know EXACTLY where they all sit and clock cars. I am driving my mom's car and she is sitting in the passenger seat. I get onto the Interstate and I tell her that I am willing to bet her that an officer is sitting at this specific spot running radar. She asks am I speeding, and I tell her that I am running 67 in a 65. She looks over at the speedo to confirm. We pass the officer, right where I said he would be, and he pulls me, and proceeds to write me for 76 in a 65. It was a clear day, and there was not a car within a half mile of me. The Interstate traffic was fairly light that day, so I know he radared me. I had the car checked and the speedo was right. The only thing I could figure is that he flipflopped the 6 and the 7 when he looked at his screen. Since we are no longer asked to step back to the car with them, I will never know. His radar gun had been recently checked, because I looked into it. His mistake cost me money and time, and all based on his word. This may not be a regular occurance, but it did happen to me. It is why I say that there should be a little more evidence than just someone's word, no matter how long a person has done their job. People make mistakes. |
|
Oh, and for the record, I hate writing traffic tickets. I'd much rather be out finding criminals doing something wrong. Of course, that involves aggressive traffic enforcement, but I'd estimate that I write less than 10% of what I stop.
I have had one traffic ticket go to Circuit Court on an appeal, and the defendent requested a jury trial. For running a stop sign. When asked if he wanted to present any evidence, he declined. He just wanted to waste as much time and money as he could, and make it suck for the system. Just to be a dick. Like he was on the street, and like he was to the General District judge who convicted him after chewing him out. He got a PILE of court costs for that little stunt... running that stop sign cost him somewhere around $1200 when it was all done... I would like to say Here-here to the VAHTF for holding a police discussion that didn't degenerate into dog-shooting JBT, us-vs-them, thin blue line, typical ARFCOM police discussion. 
OP, sorry you got popped. It's an expensive mistake (although court costs make up most of the money, not the fine). I know, I've made it a few times myself. |
|
Quoted:
Oh, and for the record, I hate writing traffic tickets. I'd much rather be out finding criminals doing something wrong. Of course, that involves aggressive traffic enforcement, but I'd estimate that I write less than 10% of what I stop.. I love writing speeding tickets- not always for the speeding tickets, but in the past month I have written 20 tickets (I only work a few days a month- auxiliary you know), and of those 20 I have made three drug arrests. first arrest was 25 individually wrapped bags of MJ, second was 23 bags on MJ and one bag of crack. third was just a guy with a dime bag. I pull over speeders to get weed. I write speeders so when I go to court the judge sees me with a good history of speeding infractions and allows my stops. Plus I enjoy writing speeding tickets, I work in the city I live in. I want people to slow down: for my, my wife's and my kid's safety. Plus I like turning on my blue lights and sireeeen!! I only write in 25 and 35 zones. I do not pull for less than 13 mph over. |
|
Last one I got (61 in a 45, clean record), I went to my court date. The officer presented the case before the judge. The judge did ask the officer what my demeanor was during the stop, so make sure you treat the officer with respect at all times. I admitted that was true, however told the judge that my job (armored transport) requires me to keep a clean driving record and if there was anything she could do I'd appreciate it. I was required to take a Saturday and take the driver improvement class in exchange for the charges being dropped. I thanked her and went on my way. The class was long, but the teacher did a good job keeping it interesting.
I felt bad for all the people they caught in the highway safety corridor on 81 in our area. They were all getting community service tacked on! Bottom line is admit you were wrong, don't be a dick, ask for leniency if you want. You should come out OK. The worst they can say is no and then you're in the same situation that you'd be if you just paid the ticket anyhow. |
|
Correct me if I'm wrong (It's been quite some time since I've gotten a speeding ticket) but don't you pay "court costs" on your ticket anyway? You have nothing to lose by going to court. I've only gotten a handful of speeding tickets, but every time I've gotten one I go to court. Why? Because it's my right as an American to face my accuser in a court of law. Even if it's just to say "Your honor, I think my record reflects a good driver, but we all slip up sometimes. I freely admit I'm a moron, is there something I can do?" One of the (ok probably the ONLY) good things about living in Maryland was PBJ. You stand up, say "Your honor, I'm guilty, could I serve my community en lieu of points on my license?" and BAM. You're g2g. I wish VA had something like that. For the record, it's not the fine that bothers me...I broke the law I'll pay the fine. It's those gd points and the bump in my insurance... |
|
If you go to court and fight it, and lose, you'll paycourt costs on top of the fine.
Court costs are included in the ticket. You cannot be charged more for going to court to fight the ticket, as the US Park Police found out years ago on the GW Parkway. don't you pay "court costs" on your ticket anyway?
Correct. It is printed right on the back of the ticket were you plead guilty and pay the fine. Just by showing in court the judge CAN raise the fine, so there is the possibility of a worse outcome by giving the state another shot at you. It is only 15 over. Pay the fine and move on (maybe a little more slowly and with more attention to details). |
Most of the time if a person had a valid license, and weren't doing anything really dumb, they got a break from me. I got most of my tickets off of people with suspended OL's. I don't remember ever writing a ticket for less than 15 over, and generally didn't run much radar anyway. I was more into looking for criminal activities. 
|
|
Good luck, remember he was doing his job - you were doing 15 over.
I have to admit - I love this line.  FWIW - this is the attitude I had the last time I got pulled over (expired inspection sticker). No use bitchin' at the officer about it or bustin' his hump.
It reminds of the one I heard from a friend who claimed this is what transpired after a cop pulled him over out of a line of speeders (4 or 5 vehicles). Friend: "Why did you pull ME over and not the rest of them?" Officer: "You ever been fishing?" Friend: "Yes." Officer: "Did you catch ALL the fish?" Friend: 
|
|
Quoted:
Good luck, remember he was doing his job - you were doing 15 over.
I have to admit - I love this line. FWIW - this is the attitude I had the last time I got pulled over (expired inspection sticker). No use bitchin' at the officer about it or bustin' his hump.
It reminds of the one I heard from a friend who claimed this is what transpired after a cop pulled him over out of a line of speeders (4 or 5 vehicles). Friend: "Why did you pull ME over and not the rest of them?" Officer: "You ever been fishing?" Friend: "Yes." Officer: "Did you catch ALL the fish?" Friend: F'in scoflaw. You start with an expired inspection sticker and next thing we know you're in the news for pulling tags off of mattresses. I hate people like you! 
|