Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 55

Thread: OT: legal advice about traffic violations

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St Helens, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    340

    Post imported post

    The reason i ask is because i know there are a lot of people here who are very knowledgable about law(s)...

    i was riding my bike and got a speeding ticket, the conversation was recorded by the officer and i did not admit guilt.

    1. he got my speed using radar, its my understanding that radar cannot be pointed directly at a certain point, so theoretically he could've radar'd the car behind me or the car in front of him, or the car next to me.

    2. he was going the opposite direction and caught up to me at least 2 miles down the road while i was stopped at a gas station.

    I had heard before that if he did not get my license plate, and that it is not on his camera that i have an argument that it could have not been me who he saw speeding since he lost sight of me before he was initiating a stop.

    I have also heard that because i was on private property when he came up and turned his lights on that i may have some type of defense there. because i was not offically "pulled over" until i was on private property.



    I'm not really clear on some of these arguments, and some or all may be more of the urban legend type of crap but i would appreciate any help.

    the ticket is only $70 but i would rather not pay $70 more in tax.

    i do not want to hire a lawyer either, i'd rather represent myself (as long as i knew the arguments the laywer would use in my defense)

    thanks

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post


  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682

    Post imported post

    johnnyb wrote:
    i do not want to hire a lawyer either, i'd rather represent myself (as long as i knew the arguments the laywer would use in my defense)

    thanks
    "Your Honor, my client is guilty, but with an explanation. He hired himself to defend himself, thus proving he is stupid. We cite Rich v. Bruce http://www.law.emory.edu/4circuit/nov97/967619.p.htmlfor explanation as to why he should thus be let go without conviction or penalty."

    I'm not sure this tactic would work, but the case itself will certainly being a and then a :what:to everyone.

    Best of luck trying to beat your ticket. Please remember to bring a new toothbrush, still inthe wrapper, with you to your hearing.

    stay safe.

    skidmark
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Herndon, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    336

    Post imported post

    I think you have many options. Here's two that come to mind:

    A.) If you were actually speeding, you could accept responsibility rather than trying to find some loophole that allows you to get away with it, and just pay the $70.

    B.) If you weren't speeding, go to court. The officer may not show up (unlikely, but possible) and you can ask for dismissal. If that doesn't happen, you could argue to the judge that you were not speeding, and the radar may have gotten a reading on a car in front of/behind you due to the distance. The judge hears this all the time, however, and may not give it any weight. If you have no previous violations, you could always speak to whoever is representing the state before the hearing about dropping the charges due to your clean record. It has been known to happen.

    Of course, this legal advice is worth exactly what you paid for it

    --RedKnightt--

    Zombie Squad has it right: “We hold fast to the belief that if you are prepared for a scenario where the walking corpses of your family and neighbors are trying to eat you alive, you will be prepared for almost anything.”

  5. #5
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    Can the police officer prove you were the driver of the car when the alleged violation occurred?

    Pumping gas on private property after an incident is not prima facia evidence that you were the operator when the alleged violation occurred. If the police officer's testimonydoes not have an element of identification during the offense then make a motion to strike as soon as the officer's testimony is complete.

    If your motion is denied you can still make an issue out of ID when cross examining the police officer.

    good luck.


    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitableand let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come . PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    11

    Post imported post

    First question comes tomind, were youspeeding? As for being followed onto private property,if a crime commitedin there JD, yes they can follow you. You could have legallyask the officer to see the radar gun entry. IF, you weren't speeding ,then by all means plead your case to the judge.

    Issad, thatsmall town & some LEO chose toset up speed traps. One case in point... a city PD dept, waslocated nearinterstate, they sit up rader to catch the speeders that travel the interstateand wrote several tickets each day. Business was good until they wrote a ticket to some-one that new the law, &thier legal rights. They took the PD officer to court and the Judge through the case OUT and told that PD dept & officerto stay away from the interstate, thatthey had no JDoutside there city limilts

    Good Luck, Jack

  7. #7
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    When I got a ticket for improper lane use, which I wasn't guilty of, I spent at leat 60 hours researching every little thing I could do to help me. I prepared my case by talking to cops, psychologist friends who had ideas on the best words to use, and countless others, including on this forum. I can say without a doubt that I prepared my case better than a lawyer would have for any reasonable amount of money. If you do it right, being your own lawyer in a meager ******* contest such as this one can work very well, especially if you are inncoent.

    The first thing you need to do is Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request all relivant evidence that the PD has on this ticket, to include video, audio, and all notation. Write a formal memo to the department, and you'll probably need to hand it to te secretary. If for any reason they don't give that information to you in full, that is grounds for a mistrial since you have a right to examine the evidence against you. This will let you know what they will know, and possibly alter your defense strategy. Also be sure that you don't bring up that you have the notes in the hearing unless it becomes neccessary, because if you luck out like I did, and the cop is an idiot, you can use his own notes or other evidence to contradict him. That right there would be another way you could request the charges get dropped, because that's obviously not a fair trial if the cop lies under oath.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855

    Post imported post

    A police radar, regardless of the band--most being K or Ka, returns the best target. If my corvette is next to a semi, it will return the semi speed. The band width goes out very rapidly in these microwave frequencies--we're talking 30ghz, at 1000' it is 30'+ wide, so any target in that cone which has the greatest radar cross section will be what is read. That includes a car going the other way. There is also cosign error, side lobes, multipath and a bunch of other factors that question accuracy of the cheap crap guns the highway bandits use. Bikes have very low cross sections. If there were other larger vehicles near you, you have a makeable case that it wasn't you he picked up. Then, you can ask discovery as to the radar gun being properly maintained and tuned before the cop went on shift, his training, certifications, etc. (Before the trial date.) Also, if he attempts to read from notes in court, object for hearsay. If overruled, request that all written documents the cop has or is using be given to you for review. Any statements he makes after consulting his notes, object again and claim he is not using independent recall--if they don't give you the notes, which they must under the rules of evidence, btw. If he says anything that has not been introduced as a fact, object "facts not in evidence." If he goes off subject object "irrelevant or immaterial."

    Doing all this, if you flew fighter planes and therefor are an expert in radar, and have a law degree, will get you off. Failing the above, you will probably annoy the judge. These are the cold hard facts of traffic court. That's why hiring a lawyer for a serious offense is the way to go. For 70 bucks, give it a shot. And hope the cop doesn't show. BTW, I'm 4-2 in traffic court, and the 2 I lost were reduced to 5 over and the lowest fine. (All simple speeding, by the way and this goes back to when I was a kid.) So, the odds aren't good failing the credentials I mentioned above. Oh, if you really were speeding, pay the fine. Good luck.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St Helens, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    340

    Post imported post

    thanks for the adice everyone, im not sure if its worth fighting for 70 some odd dollars. but its just another 70 dollars i have to pay in tax.

    if the officer asked me if i had an excuse for speeding and i said no does that mean i admitted guilt?

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    johnnyb wrote:
    thanks for the adice everyone, im not sure if its worth fighting for 70 some odd dollars. but its just another 70 dollars i have to pay in tax.

    if the officer asked me if i had an excuse for speeding and i said no does that mean i admitted guilt?
    It may not be as clear as, "I was speeding because my bike is just too cool for the speed limit"; but I think it will weigh against you if presented.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855

    Post imported post

    johnnyb wrote:
    thanks for the adice everyone, im not sure if its worth fighting for 70 some odd dollars. but its just another 70 dollars i have to pay in tax.

    if the officer asked me if i had an excuse for speeding and i said no does that mean i admitted guilt?
    "That I was speeding is your opinion. The court's opinion is the only one that counts." Or "I drive a Corvette, so am exempt from suggested speed limits." Or "how about a doughnut, officer?" NEVER say anything that he can use in court. Direct statements are not hearsay and you just shot yourself in the foot...seems appropriate for a gun forum...
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St Helens, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    340

    Post imported post

    Gunslinger wrote:
    johnnyb wrote:
    thanks for the adice everyone, im not sure if its worth fighting for 70 some odd dollars. but its just another 70 dollars i have to pay in tax.

    if the officer asked me if i had an excuse for speeding and i said no does that mean i admitted guilt?
    "That I was speeding is your opinion. The court's opinion is the only one that counts." Or "I drive a Corvette, so am exempt from suggested speed limits." Or "how about a doughnut, officer?" NEVER say anything that he can use in court. Direct statements are not hearsay and you just shot yourself in the foot...seems appropriate for a gun forum...
    the only thing i said to him was "no"

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    If I was on the jury and your testimony was what is in you original post I would find you guilty an about two minutes. :? I was on the jury in a case similar to yours and while we were deliberating one person said, "Did he ever actually say he wasn't speeding?". After that we were out if there in about five minutes.

    First of all your BS that you are proposing probably isn't going to do much good before a judge, he has heard all that before. You can ask for a jury trial and try to BS them into believing that you are innocent and the LEO was just having a bad day. You can hire a lawyer but I have seen that backfireby picking the wrong jury.

    Pay the dang $70 fine and be glad it wasn't $700 like it is in some places. If you want to protest and have your day in court then by all means do it as it is your right. But do come up with a better defense than you have so far. If you weren't speeding then say you weren't. If you were then I have no sympathy for you.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St Helens, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    340

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    If I was on the jury and your testimony was what is in you original post I would find you guilty an about two minutes. :? I was on the jury in a case similar to yours and while we were deliberating one person said, "Did he ever actually say he wasn't speeding?". After that we were out if there in about five minutes.

    First of all your BS that you are proposing probably isn't going to do much good before a judge, he has heard all that before. You can ask for a jury trial and try to BS them into believing that you are innocent and the LEO was just having a bad day. You can hire a lawyer but I have seen that backfireby picking the wrong jury.

    Pay the dang $70 fine and be glad it wasn't $700 like it is in some places. If you want to protest and have your day in court then by all means do it as it is your right. But do come up with a better defense than you have so far. If you weren't speeding then say you weren't. If you were then I have no sympathy for you.
    whose side are you on? do you really think its nessecary or right to make people pay extra tax because they were 5 over the "speed limit"

    i never said anything about the cop having a bad day, you're jumping to ridiculous conclusions.

    i think ANYTIME ANYONE can get out of any type of non felony, even some felony charges i would support them guilty or not. because something is "against the law" doesn't mean its "wrong"

    your solution that "be glad its not more tax slave" is disturbing. you must be a LEO or work for the government



  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    , Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    johnnyb wrote:
    PT111 wrote:
    If I was on the jury and your testimony was what is in you original post I would find you guilty an about two minutes. :? I was on the jury in a case similar to yours and while we were deliberating one person said, "Did he ever actually say he wasn't speeding?". After that we were out if there in about five minutes.

    First of all your BS that you are proposing probably isn't going to do much good before a judge, he has heard all that before. You can ask for a jury trial and try to BS them into believing that you are innocent and the LEO was just having a bad day. You can hire a lawyer but I have seen that backfireby picking the wrong jury.

    Pay the dang $70 fine and be glad it wasn't $700 like it is in some places. If you want to protest and have your day in court then by all means do it as it is your right. But do come up with a better defense than you have so far. If you weren't speeding then say you weren't. If you were then I have no sympathy for you.
    whose side are you on? do you really think its nessecary or right to make people pay extra tax because they were 5 over the "speed limit"

    i never said anything about the cop having a bad day, you're jumping to ridiculous conclusions.

    i think ANYTIME ANYONE can get out of any type of non felony, even some felony charges i would support them guilty or not. because something is "against the law" doesn't mean its "wrong"

    your solution that "be glad its not more tax slave" is disturbing. you must be a LEO or work for the government

    going 5 over a "speed limit" is still speeding. Sounds like a lack of personal responsability, to me.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    johnnyb wrote:
    PT111 wrote:
    If I was on the jury and your testimony was what is in you original post I would find you guilty an about two minutes. :? I was on the jury in a case similar to yours and while we were deliberating one person said, "Did he ever actually say he wasn't speeding?". After that we were out if there in about five minutes.

    First of all your BS that you are proposing probably isn't going to do much good before a judge, he has heard all that before. You can ask for a jury trial and try to BS them into believing that you are innocent and the LEO was just having a bad day. You can hire a lawyer but I have seen that backfireby picking the wrong jury.

    Pay the dang $70 fine and be glad it wasn't $700 like it is in some places. If you want to protest and have your day in court then by all means do it as it is your right. But do come up with a better defense than you have so far. If you weren't speeding then say you weren't. If you were then I have no sympathy for you.
    whose side are you on? do you really think its nessecary or right to make people pay extra tax because they were 5 over the "speed limit"

    i never said anything about the cop having a bad day, you're jumping to ridiculous conclusions.

    i think ANYTIME ANYONE can get out of any type of non felony, even some felony charges i would support them guilty or not. because something is "against the law" doesn't mean its "wrong"

    your solution that "be glad its not more tax slave" is disturbing. you must be a LEO or work for the government

    I'm not on anyones side, just telling you how it is. If the speed limit is 60 then it is 60 and 65 is speeding and you are guilty of speeding. I think that from your posts that you must have been speeding so why should I support you trying to break the law. I tkae it you would support Charles Manson or Jeffery Dalhmer breaking the law. Yours may not be as serious but you broke the law at least in most states.

    You can try to get out of it and I hyave no objections to that but don't come on here wanting to know which side I am on because I don't care. Sounds to me like you broke the law and now are trying deny it because you think it is a bad law. If you want to drive without speed limits then either travel to Germany and try the Autobaun or build you own private road but I have no reason to be on your side any more than anyone elses.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    678

    Post imported post

    Where I live, if you do the 'speed limit' you are going to get run off the road or yelled at.

    Again, just because it is 'breaking the law' doesn't mean it is wrong or bad.

  18. #18
    Regular Member MetalChris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SW Ohio
    Posts
    1,215

    Post imported post

    JDriver1.8t wrote:
    just because it is 'breaking the law' doesn't mean it is wrong or bad.
    +1

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St Helens, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    340

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    johnnyb wrote:
    PT111 wrote:
    If I was on the jury and your testimony was what is in you original post I would find you guilty an about two minutes. :? I was on the jury in a case similar to yours and while we were deliberating one person said, "Did he ever actually say he wasn't speeding?". After that we were out if there in about five minutes.

    First of all your BS that you are proposing probably isn't going to do much good before a judge, he has heard all that before. You can ask for a jury trial and try to BS them into believing that you are innocent and the LEO was just having a bad day. You can hire a lawyer but I have seen that backfireby picking the wrong jury.

    Pay the dang $70 fine and be glad it wasn't $700 like it is in some places. If you want to protest and have your day in court then by all means do it as it is your right. But do come up with a better defense than you have so far. If you weren't speeding then say you weren't. If you were then I have no sympathy for you.
    whose side are you on? do you really think its nessecary or right to make people pay extra tax because they were 5 over the "speed limit"

    i never said anything about the cop having a bad day, you're jumping to ridiculous conclusions.

    i think ANYTIME ANYONE can get out of any type of non felony, even some felony charges i would support them guilty or not. because something is "against the law" doesn't mean its "wrong"

    your solution that "be glad its not more tax slave" is disturbing. you must be a LEO or work for the government

    I'm not on anyones side, just telling you how it is. If the speed limit is 60 then it is 60 and 65 is speeding and you are guilty of speeding. I think that from your posts that you must have been speeding so why should I support you trying to break the law. I tkae it you would support Charles Manson or Jeffery Dalhmer breaking the law. Yours may not be as serious but you broke the law at least in most states.

    You can try to get out of it and I hyave no objections to that but don't come on here wanting to know which side I am on because I don't care. Sounds to me like you broke the law and now are trying deny it because you think it is a bad law. If you want to drive without speed limits then either travel to Germany and try the Autobaun or build you own private road but I have no reason to be on your side any more than anyone elses.
    google map 'vernonia oregon" and tell me if going 5 over i the middle of ******* nowhere means i should pay more tax.

    i don't know if i was "speeding" or not because i was not looking at my speedo

    you should be on my side, because the sheer amount of laws or "violations" we have in this country is completely ludicrious. no matter how hard you try, you will break at least one everyday. these are used as taxes, not for anyone's protect, or to make people safe, or to do anything else... besides raise money.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Gunslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Free, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,855

    Post imported post

    johnnyb wrote:
    Gunslinger wrote:
    johnnyb wrote:
    thanks for the adice everyone, im not sure if its worth fighting for 70 some odd dollars. but its just another 70 dollars i have to pay in tax.

    if the officer asked me if i had an excuse for speeding and i said no does that mean i admitted guilt?
    "That I was speeding is your opinion. The court's opinion is the only one that counts." Or "I drive a Corvette, so am exempt from suggested speed limits." Or "how about a doughnut, officer?" NEVER say anything that he can use in court. Direct statements are not hearsay and you just shot yourself in the foot...seems appropriate for a gun forum...
    the only thing i said to him was "no"
    That was enough.
    "For any man who sheds his blood with me this day shall be my brother...And gentlemen now abed shall think themselves accursed, they were not here, and hold their manhoods cheap whilst any speaks who fought with us on Crispin's day." Henry V

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    You can call it a tax or whatever you want to but I was trying to give you a little advice but you don't seem to care for it. If you go before the judge and start arguing that breaking the law is no big deal then you might as well stay home and mail in the $70. That is unless Oregon has the law about speeding that it is not an enforced limit but a suggested limit and exceeding it can be justified. Many years ago that was the case in SC that if you could show that you were not exceeding a safe speed then you could exceed the posted speed limit. That has been changed.

    If you claim that the officer made a mistake and you were not the one speeding and state that you were not speeding then you may have a case. However if you go in just to try and claim that technically you can't be charged since someone else could have been riding you bike or that the officer got the wrong bike etc. you have a tough row to how.

    I don't care how wrong the speed limit is it is still the legal speed limit and if you exceeded it and admit it then your only option is jury nullification. It's like running a stop sign in the middle of nowhere. You can argue all day that it is wrong to put it there and doesn't do any good but it still says stop.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St Helens, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    340

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    You can call it a tax or whatever you want to but I was trying to give you a little advice but you don't seem to care for it. If you go before the judge and start arguing that breaking the law is no big deal then you might as well stay home and mail in the $70. That is unless Oregon has the law about speeding that it is not an enforced limit but a suggested limit and exceeding it can be justified. Many years ago that was the case in SC that if you could show that you were not exceeding a safe speed then you could exceed the posted speed limit. That has been changed.

    If you claim that the officer made a mistake and you were not the one speeding and state that you were not speeding then you may have a case. However if you go in just to try and claim that technically you can't be charged since someone else could have been riding you bike or that the officer got the wrong bike etc. you have a tough row to how.

    I don't care how wrong the speed limit is it is still the legal speed limit and if you exceeded it and admit it then your only option is jury nullification. It's like running a stop sign in the middle of nowhere. You can argue all day that it is wrong to put it there and doesn't do any good but it still says stop.
    i was asking advice, and i am accepting yours. but i dont appreciate the condescending post you initially made.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    QFT


    Hey, I got this weird rash... if I post pics, can someone help me out? I kind of slept with a crackwhore over the weekend, but I don't want to hire a doctor...

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    St Helens, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    340

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    QFT


    Hey, I got this weird rash... if I post pics, can someone help me out? I kind of slept with a crackwhore over the weekend, but I don't want to hire a doctor...
    loser.

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    778

    Post imported post

    pay the $70.

    if you are worried about the ticket on your record, most states will allow you to go to a bogus traffic school (extra cost) and for a fee that generally exceeds the fine, take the ticket off your record.

    if you go to court there is about a 99% chance that you will not only pay the fine but be assessed court costs, on top of losing one or more days of wages.

    it does not matter much if you were really speeding or not. the court will accept the cop's statement that you were, and pretty much ignore anything you say about it in your 20 second trial.

    one possibility is to look for gross errors on the ticket. once in a blue moon a cop will fill in the blanks wrong.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •