Maserati Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Got a speeding ticket for 90 in a 60 on I-35. Good thing the DART (!) officer didn't have a radar gun (she marked the ticket unsafe speed 90 in a 60) because she could've gotten me going, hypothetically of course, 140.

Thanks in advance! :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
681 Posts
Yes, send me an e-mail and I will reply with the contact info, I don't have it on hand but can have it to by Tuesday.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
513 Posts
im Confused

BlondeSicilian said:
Got a speeding ticket for 90 in a 60 on I-35. Good thing the DART (!) officer didn't have a radar gun (she marked the ticket unsafe speed 90 in a 60) because she could've gotten me going, hypothetically of course, 140.

Thanks in advance! :cool:
Do you need a lawyer cause you think you were going less than 60??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I was definitely going less than 60 MPS (Miles Per Second). I also need a lawyer so I don't lose my license! 30 over in Texas is not a good thing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
726 Posts
A good lawyer should be able to help you out here. Also, be patient as it might take a few appeals, but be sure to play the "outlast" game...the lack of radar or other mechanical measuring device should help immensely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
leadfoot_mf said:
how did she clock you?
She didn't. She was on the access road and saw me fly by and get on the freeway and pulled me over. She said I was 'travelling at a high rate of speed and was giving me a ticket for 90 in a 60'.

I didn't say a word and just took the ticket.

I'm assuming since I was hypothetically going so fast she felt she had to do something!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
191 Posts
Traffic lawyer might be a good idea; also, I successfully fought a ticket (not speeding though) using the trial by written statement technique. I have heard that since cops are paid overtime to show up to court, they almost always do, but they aren't paid to write reports for a written challenge, so a lot of times they skip it. When I did it, it was during the Fall, so I asked for a delay of trial, and by the time I filed my statement, it was during the Christmas-New Year week and months after the event; I figured the cop, even if they were going to write a report, wouldn't be able to remember much of the circumstances whereas me and my wife remembered them with crystal clarity, especially since I wrote notes down at home that evening. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
BlondeSicilian said:
She didn't. She was on the access road and saw me fly by and get on the freeway and pulled me over. She said I was 'travelling at a high rate of speed and was giving me a ticket for 90 in a 60'.

I didn't say a word and just took the ticket.

I'm assuming since I was hypothetically going so fast she felt she had to do something!
From what I know about the law (at least in Florida), that's a case you should easily win. If the officer cannot document your speed by some objective means, her testimony should be easy to tear up on cross examination. You sure she didn't tail you for long enough to clock you?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
191 Posts
The Trident said:
From what I know about the law (at least in Florida), that's a case you should easily win. If the officer cannot document your speed by some objective means, her testimony should be easy to tear up on cross examination. You sure she didn't tail you for long enough to clock you?
Really? From what I've heard, in most states, the cop's testimony is weighed far more heavily than the accused. In fact, experienced traffic cops have demonstrated the ability to reliably estimate a car's speed within 5 mph just by watching it drive by. They have testified in court on vehicular speed by pacing, radar/laser, and just by visual observation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
defending tickets

Well, as my name suggests...I am a defense attorney and do a fair amount of traffic tickets in Chicago. Alot of what everyone says is true depending on a number of factors. First, is the charge a misdemeanor or a petty offense. This varies from state to state. If it is a misdemeanor, they need to prove the speed "beyond a reasonable doubt" and must be accurate such that the speed charged was believed to be the true speed. If the charge is a petty offense then the charge need only be proved by "preponderance of the evidence." In lay terms, more likely than not. Furthermore, petty offenses generally need not be proved by exact terms. Obviously, it is much easier for the state to prove a petty offense.

As for objective v subjective evidence. The officers are generally believed to be subjective....and less reliable, however, the determination is being made by a judge. Some judges believe everything an officer says....others do not.

It would seem with your case the problem will depend on how you are charged. I doubt you can take the stand and honestly say you were traveling less than 60 miles an hour. Therefore, you have to rely on the judge believing the officer is wrong or lying. Lying is tough to get, judges don't like calling cops liars. So, my advice...get a good lawyer, one who knows the prosecutors and ask to have the charge amended down to a lower speed or a not so serious offense.

My 2 cents....no charge!

06 VW Phaeton Black/Tan
Shopping for a coupe
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I think the officer's testimony would be weak if, as BlondeSicilian says, the cop saw the car speed by from an access road and could only report that it was "travelling at a high rate of speed" and she "was giving me a ticket for 90 in a 60," which, IMHO, sounds like she had no actual idea of just how fast BlondeSicilian was actually travelling (as BlondeSicilian said: "Good thing the DART (!) officer didn't have a radar gun (she marked the ticket unsafe speed 90 in a 60) because she could've gotten me going, hypothetically of course, 140." I presume the real rate of travel was a bit above 90 and that the officer was clueless, except that she knew it was faster than 60. I don't believe testimony that "I don't know how fast, but it was too fast" is sufficient. Of course, the officer could lie and say that she observed and determined the speed to be 90. Nonetheless, if the penalties are severe, I'd contest it.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top