Like I said earlier bro...:thumbsup:
LYING COP hit me with a 90+ TICKET
- Thread starter Boost on This
- Start date
Are you an officer? Your answers sound vaguely familiar....
First off, many officers don't even know the full extent of the law. That's why so many break the rules on a constant basis. Citing the laws helps clear up any ambiguity and primes you for court if needed. Study the rules of the road; they will help you immensely. You also know your rights and can protect yourself TO WIT. Laws are decifered in court, not on the streets. Don't try to bargain with any police officer to get "off". Demand certificates on-spot; question the equipment, get clarification on ambiguity. Get off because you know you will win. Confidence is key.
Again, the word used is ESTIMATED. It's like saying they THINK you were going this fast. I think he was going closer to 65 in my opinon. It was the angle of the onramp that clouded my judgement. What was the traffic speed at this time? See? If the judge knows the certainty, then this will impact the decision. Additionally, you can't use one vehicle's speed as a crutch to determine another's. Pacing the cited, that's a different story.
I've seen all kinds of issues with equipment since the price of calibration and testing is costly and we all know just how efficient the government is. Your assumption is exactly why it should be questioned.
Just about EVERY state has rules on going with the flow of traffic and you MUST avoid accidents at all times, even if that means breaking rules to do so (provided it's "safe"). The judge can determine what's appropriate for the situation.We all know the law, but common sense can definitely win in court.
You are WRONG about passing. If everyone was going the speed limit on a 6 lane highway with passing lanes, who's going to pass? You are entitled to "pass" slower traffic, especially if higher speeds is required to pass a slow moving vehicle. It's the maintaining of high speeds...that's the important thing.
It all comes down to the judge....
I have discussed this with the dozen attorneys who are my clients and they all say the same thing; get an attorney (and no it's not because of the money, it's because it's a who-you-know profession).
Time to move this post to the Donut Shop!
sonic,
yup... I'm admitting guilt...but not at a guess estimation of 90+
yup... I'm admitting guilt...but not at a guess estimation of 90+
Here are your options according to my experience with this crap:
a.) You get a lawyer, you pay big money, you take off of work, go to court, waste time, get all worked up, and then youll get convicted anyway, or if not, your still out a lot of money.
b.) You pony up the dough and pay the fine. Yeah the cops exaggerated, but when it comes down to it, its your word against theirs, and the judge tends to believe them, especially when there are 2 of them that saw the same thing. Yeah they screwed you, yeah it hurts, but it happens.
I say, save yourself the tourment, swallow your pride, and just pay the fine. Your gonna have to pay your lawyer anyway, probably more than the ticket. Unless of course, your worried about points on your license or insurance.
Good Luck
a.) You get a lawyer, you pay big money, you take off of work, go to court, waste time, get all worked up, and then youll get convicted anyway, or if not, your still out a lot of money.
b.) You pony up the dough and pay the fine. Yeah the cops exaggerated, but when it comes down to it, its your word against theirs, and the judge tends to believe them, especially when there are 2 of them that saw the same thing. Yeah they screwed you, yeah it hurts, but it happens.
I say, save yourself the tourment, swallow your pride, and just pay the fine. Your gonna have to pay your lawyer anyway, probably more than the ticket. Unless of course, your worried about points on your license or insurance.
Good Luck
PlatinumCobra,
It was 1:50AM..empty freeway....only maybe 2 cars when I entered..and forced to exit the next off-ramp.
It was 1:50AM..empty freeway....only maybe 2 cars when I entered..and forced to exit the next off-ramp.
Never admit guilt to get a lesser ticket. Just my .02.
OK, so it was 1:50. Sounds like a speed trap to me. Why did the COPS not pull over the person going 80+ when they knew it was "unsafe"?? Could it be they were trying to get a bigger fish????
If I didn't do it and I could afford a lawyer I would fight it. No reason to swallow your pride if you're in the right. Unfortunately the govt has a lot more money than you do. It should only matter who's right, but the way the system works is who has the most money to hire the better lawyer wins.
Conspiracy anyone?
Actually, it's more of who you know than how much. Get the lawyer who's the best buddy of the judge and convince him/her you are a decent fellow.
OJ Simpson anyone?
He's the juice.
I think this topic is better for road side. Moving...
PM me, I went through this exact situation on the 101. I'll tell you the steps I went through to beat the ticket.
Joseph
Joseph
Road side? You mean Donut Shop????
The Donut shop mod is a mod in this forum too. If he wants to move it there he can. I don't think they'll care too much for the title of the thread in that forum, if you know what I mean.;-)Originally posted by PlatinumCobra
Road side? You mean Donut Shop????
Gotcha! Could be a spy in there somewhere ;-)
C'mon Dano, let's give it a shot...live a little
Cop lied.....of course:nonono:
Take responsibility for your own actions:nono:
Take responsibility for your own actions:nono:
I don't disagree, but I do think they didn't follow the rules. Here's why. Officers can't just speed along the freeway at 80 just because they feel like it. They have to justify their speed; case in point...pacing to determine another vehicle's speed.
So, without the vehicle they were pacing they wouldn't have a leg to stand on to pull over someone else who just entered the freeway using the pacing technique. Subtract the oncoming vehicle and the officer would have to admit they were going 80 by themselves for no legal reason.
This is a common tactic to trap speeders on open freeways. Follow a speeder and wait for a "faster" vehicle. However the whole point is to trap "faster" speeders and not enforce the law, which in this case would be to pull over the speeder they are already following (don't know of any place in the country where 80 MPH is not speeding). In the case where there is "traffic", the rules of engagement change since safe driving conditions also change.
You can also get the officers on this fact if they come up with the excuse that "they hadn't paced the vehicle long enough to determine the speed to pull them over". I suppose though that a split second of seeing someone passing the paced vehicle in a nice looking sports car was the exception here? Giving due process to the paced vehicle and not the vehicle entering the freeway?
Additionally, geometry of oncoming freeway ramps make it virtually impossible to gauge oncoming speeds by pacing (unless they are behind the vehicle on the onramp or can do Sines and Cosines in their head) because of the additional angles involved.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
