• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

OT: legal advice about traffic violations

johnnyb

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
340
Location
St Helens, Oregon, USA
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 ;)
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
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 :lol: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
 

RedKnightt

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
336
Location
Herndon, Virginia, USA
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 :D

--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.”
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
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.
 

Caption Jack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
11
Location
, ,
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
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
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 pissing 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.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
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.
 

johnnyb

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
340
Location
St Helens, Oregon, USA
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?
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
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.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
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...:cool:
 

johnnyb

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
340
Location
St Helens, Oregon, USA
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...:cool:
the only thing i said to him was "no"
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
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. :)
 

johnnyb

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
340
Location
St Helens, Oregon, USA
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
 

FightingGlock19

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
583
Location
, Kentucky, USA
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.
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
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.
 

johnnyb

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
340
Location
St Helens, Oregon, USA
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.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
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...:cool:
the only thing i said to him was "no"
That was enough.
 
Top