Please re-read my posts, I have no intention of lying. I do not believe I was going 101 mph, and am trying to get my charge reduced to a sub-100 mph ticket.
Big CA ticket.
- Thread starter l8nightsvt
- Start date
- Status
Please re-read my posts, I have no intention of lying. I do not believe I was going 101 mph, and am trying to get my charge reduced to a sub-100 mph ticket.
FordSVTFan,
Thank you for your advice. From your experiences, do you believe I will have a good chance in getting the charge reduced to a 100 mph or less ticket (from 101 mph) by using radar accuracy error without a lawyer, or do you believe that my only significant chance is with a lawyer? Do you suggest using radar accuracy as my best approach or a different one? Thanks.
Thank you for your advice. From your experiences, do you believe I will have a good chance in getting the charge reduced to a 100 mph or less ticket (from 101 mph) by using radar accuracy error without a lawyer, or do you believe that my only significant chance is with a lawyer? Do you suggest using radar accuracy as my best approach or a different one? Thanks.
Are you sure your speedo is accurate?
I don't know about 15 tickets + misdemeanors, but his information is pretty accurate. If you want to get out of a ticket you extend the court date whenever possible. I know a guy who was ticketed, extended the date a few times, left the country for 2 months on business so he extended it again, 3 years later he shows up on his date and by that time the officer was in a different police department, never showed and the guy wasn't ticketed. Is it honest? no, but it generally works.
Thank you...sounds insane but let me clarify...15 tickets arent all speeding or moving violations there are alot of fix it tickets in there...reason I say that is because my more than usual experience in court so I watched and observed how they work!!! As for my misdeamenors I have a bad ass lawyer who got me out of them! :banana:
If the radar was calibrated properly there is an acceptable level of deviation and that wont get your ticket reduced. If it was not calibrated properly or the officer's operator cert. is expired the ticket should be tossed. However, that is unlikely but does occur. Sometimes officers dont bring their logs with them, yet CHP are pretty anal about it.
I have found honesty always works the best. Tell the judge you were speeding. Tell him you know how fast you were going and it was 90 and not 101. Ask for leniency. If you have no other recent infractions you stand a good chance of getting it reduced.
In other words, your first post is totally inaccurate and in no way represents the truth = :bs: :bs: :bs:
Just want to make sure, since the original poster is requesting assistance from someone he can trust to provide accurate information.
*removed by moderator*
Since the general consensus among officers seems to be that if a citizen's lips are moving they are lying, why make their case for them. I have had many encounters with officers in various jurisdictions and they all come out of the box with the opinion that anything said to them by anyone other than another LEO is false. This was while I was working on videos for the departments. I got to tag along to investigations, accident sites, training sessions, and listened to a lot of officer conversations.
Perhaps this is just a conditioned response?
Since we ALL KNOW that no motorist would ever say anything other than the absolute truth.
STG
Banned
I found this website with step-by-step advice written by an attorney: Speeding Tickets -- Your Rights
i recently(last week) went to court for a reckless speeding ticket here in VA, right now VA is generating revenue and i pretty much thought i was screwed. So i did the thing i thought best. I put a nice suit on and looked really presentable(this helps a lot) I then admitted guilty to the ticket very calmly. The judge thanked me for being polite and dressed properly and let me off with a $155 fine. the kid before me had the same ticket but 3mph less than me, he was not dressed well and wasnt very polite in speech. he got 12month suspension of license and $650 in fines. Just dress up nice and be polite, it does wonders.
CHP officers are required to take notes on all 215's issued so they can recall the stop later down the line. They are required to keep those green copies for a min. of 2 yrs. The notes will include the method of determining speed( if radar/Lidar) the office keeps all records so when the time comes the officer will have them available for court. As for traffic attorneys, they are a waste of money. They want the same thing as you would, the officer not showing up, next would be a plea bargin. I have only seen a few actually go to trial, and unless the officer was completely lost, they don't have a much better chance of getting you off. Go to court and maybe you will get lucky.
why would you not try to get out of it? you think he wrongfully gave you a ticket for going 101 because he was pissed. an LEO having a bad day is a drivers worst nightmare... fight it to the end!
The way I see it, saying I was not speeding at all would just seem absolutely ridiculous, and rightfully so, to the judge. It could lead to them fully charging me with the 100+ ticket, or worse. I will note the emotional state of the officer who ticketed me and let the judge decide how to handle it.
- submit a trial by declaration (through mail) and pay bail amount
- request 'discovery' from the issuing agency
[**]if you loose the trial by declaration request a live court date
[**]if the citing officer / deputy doesn't show up ask the court to throw out the case
[**]if the citing officer / deputy shows and you did not receive a reply to your discovery request - ask the judge for a continuance to allow you time to prepare your defense
[**]if you have received an answer to your discovery request call the court and request an extension - after that, get a lawyer and prepare a defense for yourself
[**] if you loose ask the judge for traffic school
That tactic is just increasing effort to convict you and can work.. I'm not an attorney but i've had & seen this work first hand...
Other than that you could just plead guilty.
Lastly, if you feel the officer acted unprofessionally or did not positively represent his agency you should submit a complaint..
Even if you did break the law officers should maintain a level of professionalism consistent with their code of conduct. Just make sure you are not being retaliatory. (I've seen an officer on judge judy sue 'and win' a case against a citizen that filed a wrongful complaint.) Also, it might be illegal if the complaint is illegitimate..
There is some good advice given here and also some very bad advice IMO.
You should follow the link that STG provided and study it (Speeding Tickets -- Time in Court)
I just quickly scanned through it for about 30 seconds and found this related to your alleged "loud exhaust": OBJECTION, NOT QUALIFIED It's similar to the previous objection, but in this instance the witness testifies to something that they have no expertise in. If the officer were to testify that your muffler was defective, he doesn't have the expertise to make that determination since he's not a muffler mechanic.
If you honestly believe that you were not speeding and if you can reasonably articulate to the judge the unstable emotional state of the officer, then you should fight the ticket.
You should follow the link that STG provided and study it (Speeding Tickets -- Time in Court)
I just quickly scanned through it for about 30 seconds and found this related to your alleged "loud exhaust": OBJECTION, NOT QUALIFIED It's similar to the previous objection, but in this instance the witness testifies to something that they have no expertise in. If the officer were to testify that your muffler was defective, he doesn't have the expertise to make that determination since he's not a muffler mechanic.
If you honestly believe that you were not speeding and if you can reasonably articulate to the judge the unstable emotional state of the officer, then you should fight the ticket.
That is funny. The officer is testifying based on his education, training, and experience and does not need direct training as a "muffler mechanic" to state whether it was too loud or not. Additionally, that type of testimony falls under the lay person exception in which lay person can testify to things within their general knowledge. This is why a person can testify to the estimated speed of a car without the use of radar.
STG
Banned
Oh, come on! You've never seen a civilian win in traffic court by questioning a police officer's expertise? It happens. I did it after being ticketed for speeding on the Antelope Valley Freeway at 3:00AM on a Sunday. The officer approached me and stated that one of my tail lights was out, then wrote me a speeding ticket.
In court, I questioned the officer and established that:
He was a trained observer
His partner was driving
His partner operated the radio
He (arresting officer) did nothing but observe my vehicle while his partner paced me for one full mile - he wasn't driving, working the radio or anything else - just keeping an eye on me
Then, I asked what was the first thing he said to me. He replied, "I told you your tail light was out."
"What did I say?"
"You asked which one."
"And?"
"I went to the back of your car to check."
"So, as a trained observer who just testified was doing nothing else but observing the back my car for a full mile or approximately one full minute without distraction, why couldn't you remember which one of my tail lights was out 15 seconds after you stopped me?"
"I don't know."
I opined to the judge that a trained professional observer who couldn't remember if my right or left tail light was out 15 seconds after staring at it for an uninterrupted one full minute may in fact be neither trained or professional. The judge dismissed the case.
A police officer's training, experience or otherwise qualifications do not make him infallible or even correct.
As to the case of loud exhaust, just what training do you or any sworn officer have in sound measurement BY EAR? I know that The Cody Police, Park County Sheriff, Wyoming Highway Patrol, LAPD, L A County Sheriff and a whole slew of southern California police departments offer absolutely no training in sound measurement by ear. (Yes, I know the academy instructors.)
None. Zero, Zip. Nada.
What is loud? What makes one sound louder than another? How do sound waves behave in different environments when bouncing off objects like buildings, cars, etc. How does the doppler effect affect the perception of sound? Does the officer have a calibrated ear?
The pitch and frequency of sound can sometimes affect the percieved volume. In other words, a high pitched sound can sometimes be percieved as louder than a low pitched sound by the human ear even though a decible meter will show otherwise. As an example, I can tell you that when measured from the same stationary location an MD 500E helicopter taking off seems much louder than a F86 Sabre taxiing, but a db meter says otherwise. I know. I measured it myself.
Play around with a cheap Radio Shack db meter and some different sounds. After a while, you'll be able to pair up sounds that seem louder to the human ear with sounds that seem to have a lower volume to the ear, but are actually louder on the db meter.
Record and play these sounds in court for the trained, experienced officer and ask him which is louder. Then hand the judge the db meter and play the sounds.
If the prosecutor objects that the meter hasn't been officially calibrated, remind him the officers ears are not calibrated, either and offer to adjourn until the prosecutor can have the police officer bring in an officially calibrated unit. (I will bet they don't have one. If they do, it will just verify your Radio Shack unit - rember we're talking about relative, not absolute measurements.
It worked for me on a CHP ticket in South Bay Municipal Court in Torrance, California back when I was a high school senior. But, what the heck do I know?
The expertise, knowledge, training, experience and background of police officers is unfortunately subject to the human weaknesses of each individual officer. It is up to every traffic court defendant to exploit those weaknesses.
Additionally, I've never been in any traffic court where the judge didn't bend over backwards in allowing a non-lawyer defendant a whole bunch of latitude in presenting his case.
Last edited:
That isnt what I said! I said you can't disqualify the officer's testimony by stating he is not qualified as a "muffler mechanic." Beating the officer on cross exam is a different story, however, that is not the story I was responding to.
But thanks for sharing your experience.
- Status
Users who are viewing this thread
