2aHawaii
General Topics => Off Topic => Topic started by: monster796 on January 02, 2016, 09:23:41 AM
-
Hey guys,
So I received a ticket for Reckless driving and racing on a highway. All bogus. I record with a dash cam whenever I drive and had that as proof. I consulted an attorney and he agreed the charges were completely bogus and we fought it and WON! Both Counts.
Also, the cop pulled over another guy and gave him the same charges. Also caught on my dash cam. He had one dismissed and he has another court date for the other charge.
When I consulted my lawyer, I was told after being found not guilty, I could go after the state. I emailed my lawyer and am waiting on a response.
Have you folks ever heard of anything like this? Bogus tickets and taking action against the state.
Also, how can I get in touch with the other driver? And should I? I have his license plate number and name. That's it.
Thanks guys!
-
Also, how can I get in touch with the other driver? And should I? I have his license plate number and name. That's it.
The mean, the other driver you were not racing?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
-
I would totally get in touch with the other driver. You have evidence that exonerates him; I would consider it your duty to provide that evidence to him. As far as going after the state, I would pursue the matter with an eye towards getting that crooked cop off the streets.
-
I would love to contact him but I have no idea how. Any suggestions?
-
The mean, the other driver you were not racing?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
I just came from the beach, shirtless with my wife and infant in the car, the last thing I would do, especially after the beach is "race" anyone or drive "reckless". The other guy wasn't even "racing or driving reckless" the only thing the other guy could have been guilty of is speeding. I was doing 65 exactly and had my GPS to back it up. Cop is crooked. Even my lawyer was outraged and felt he shouldn't even be on the force...
-
I just came from the beach, shirtless with my wife and infant in the car, the last thing I would do, especially after the beach is "race" anyone or drive "reckless". The other guy wasn't even "racing or driving reckless" the only thing the other guy could have been guilty of is speeding. I was doing 65 exactly and had my GPS to back it up. Cop is crooked. Even my lawyer was outraged and felt he shouldn't even be on the force...
I guess you need to know if the Cop did this to both drivers intentionally, or if he made an honest mistake. I know if you both accelerated rapidly from a stop, it could give the impression of racing regardless of the speed you finally reached.
Since the other guy was maybe speeding and you were not, the other guy won? (J/K!!) :rofl:
-
I would love to contact him but I have no idea how. Any suggestions?
I think maybe your attorney can help you out with that, you made up my mind about getting 1 of those dash cams. :thumbsup:
-
A dash cam is definitely worth it. But, I told the cop I had my dash cam and could show him I didn't do what he said I did, and he said "tell it to the judge".
-
You have his name. Did you try looking in the phone book? If that fails, try typing it into the Internet.
-
A dash cam is definitely worth it. But, I told the cop I had my dash cam and could show him I didn't do what he said I did, and he said "tell it to the judge".
what a Dick.if I was a cop just out of curiosity I would take a look.follow threw with your case and get that cop
-
My 2 cents. Unfortunate incident but forget going after the cop.
Unless you can prove intentional fraud or intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Like was berating you unprofessionally.
He made a bad judgement call and you were vindicated in a court of law.
Happens all the time and the cop who made a bad arrest or citation doesn't get disciplined.
It's why we have a court system.
At least the judge made a good call.
Racing and reckless driving would have screwed you up pretty good.
You could probably get fees and costs though.
Not a sheeple response, just a real world one.
Your attorney knows better than me though.
As far as finding the other guy, you could try court records.
Or ask MauiD for assistance through PM.
His Google Fu is strong and I'm pretty sure he'd help you out.
-
I just came from the beach, shirtless with my wife and infant in the car, the last thing I would do, especially after the beach is "race" anyone or drive "reckless". The other guy wasn't even "racing or driving reckless" the only thing the other guy could have been guilty of is speeding. I was doing 65 exactly and had my GPS to back it up. Cop is crooked. Even my lawyer was outraged and felt he shouldn't even be on the force...
Was this the end of last month?
If so, probably quota.
If you can,-go after the state and get that guy off the force.
-
choose your battles wisely. :p
-
.
-
You can make a complaint to the police commission or internal adfairs which might get the officer disciplined but it wont get u any money.
To get money you need to show the officer or state was either negligent or wilfully meaning to do wrong. Without that an officer is generally protected by the good faith rules.
Keeps in mind, racing does not need to involve high speeds. It is all going to come down to context and what the dash cameras can show. If it caught some incriminating conversation then you might have a good chance. Also, I dont think you would stand to gain much. Maybe the amount of money from a missed day of work, court costs, and a little more.
-
As far as finding the other guy, you could try court records.
Or ask MauiD for assistance through PM.
His Google Fu is strong and I'm pretty sure he'd help you out.
I found the other driver in the traffic court records. He plead guilty to the Racing charge in exchange for dismissing the Reckless Driving charge.
Plea deal is set to be entered on Monday, 1/11/16, 08:30, Ewa District Court.
I suggested Monster contact the Oahu office of the State Public Defender's to get the lawyer's info handling the case (I gave Monster the case number).
Since he has legal representation, it would be best to offer the video evidence to the lawyer, I think. Up to Monster what he wants to do.
:thumbsup:
-
Wow. Thanks MD!
Is that set in stone, or can he still use the evidence to help him out?
-
Thanks for helping a braddah out MauiD !
I knew you were the man for the job ! :shaka:
Like MauiD said. Just contact the guys attorney and let him know you have the video.
Unfortunately, public defender may not not to work that hard. He should discuss it with his client though.
-
Wow. Thanks MD!
Is that set in stone, or can he still use the evidence to help him out?
Give the lawyer a copy of the video as well as the outcome of your case. Since the plea deal hasn't been officially entered, it'll give the lawyer time to contact the prosecutor to retract the plea if that's what they decide to do.
Since I don't know your real name, I couldn't see if both cases have the same judge.
If the same judge that dismissed your case happens to be the one presiding in the other guy's case, the lawyer would have a slam-dunk for dismissal since it's the same Cop, same facts, and same evidence.
-
I would love to help this guy out but, is there any reprisal from the state, cop, ect if I do send him or his attorney the video?
-
I would love to help this guy out but, is there any reprisal from the state, cop, ect if I do send him or his attorney the video?
Nope. Evidence is evidence. If there is any attempt to harass or otherwise single you out for anything, you should keep your lawyers card handy and a video recorder running!
-
I would love to help this guy out but, is there any reprisal from the state, cop, ect if I do send him or his attorney the video?
Not at all. Evidence is evidence regardless of who it supports. The cop might not like you is all.
Maybe you should post the video here! What are the circumstances? Do you want to share the officers name?
-
Call me paranoid but, I can see some reprisal like them trying my case over and raping me all because the state lost both cases. Is it possible that can happen? If not I'm helping the man out as soon the PD office opens.
-
Call me paranoid but, I can see some reprisal like them trying my case over and raping me all because the state lost both cases. Is it possible that can happen? If not I'm helping the man out as soon the PD office opens.
Look up your case online or look at the paperwork you received after court.
Look for the words "Dismissed with Prejudice".
That means they can never retry those charges in that case.
A dismissal with prejudice is dismissal of a case on merits after adjudication.
The plaintiff is barred from bringing an action on the same claim. Dismissal with
prejudice is a final judgment and the case becomes res judicata on the claims
that were or could have been brought in it.
-
Awesome. It does infact say "Dismissed with Prejudice" on both charges. I will definitly mail them the evidence asap. I appreciate the help MD!
-
Awesome. It does infact say "Dismissed with Prejudice" on both charges. I will definitly mail them the evidence asap. I appreciate the help MD!
No problem. I hope the other guy benefits from the video, and he appreciates your willingness to help!
:shaka:
-
Hell of an argument for dashcams right there.
-
I called the PD office and they claim he has an appointment in March, and had no contact info for him. He does not have an attorney assigned yet.
-
Fortunately we live in the great USA where giving YOUR evidence to someone else is legal.
-
Hey guys,
So I received a ticket for Reckless driving and racing on a highway. All bogus. I record with a dash cam whenever I drive and had that as proof. I consulted an attorney and he agreed the charges were completely bogus and we fought it and WON! Both Counts.
Also, the cop pulled over another guy and gave him the same charges. Also caught on my dash cam. He had one dismissed and he has another court date for the other charge.
When I consulted my lawyer, I was told after being found not guilty, I could go after the state. I emailed my lawyer and am waiting on a response.
Have you folks ever heard of anything like this? Bogus tickets and taking action against the state.
Also, how can I get in touch with the other driver? And should I? I have his license plate number and name. That's it.
Thanks guys!
Heard about BS ticketing...........all the time. Some intentional, some not.
Going after the State..........unless a Sheriff, DLNR, or other LEO pulled you over you're talking about going after the County. KPD, HPD, MPD, etc are all County LEOs.
The other driver, I'd try Court Connect. If the guy has a ticket before he is probably in the system. Might get you their name, but you'd have to do a good old fashion search of the phone book, Facebook, etc to see if it's the same person.
-
I called the PD office and they claim he has an appointment in March, and had no contact info for him. He does not have an attorney assigned yet.
It's quite possible the court rescheduled the case for later, but the change isn't in the online record, yet.
It might show up later. The clerk of the court would have the official court dates, i you want to try them.
First Circuit Court, Ewa Division: (808) 534-6900
(http://i.imgur.com/i1yg5um.jpg)
-
I just called 1st ds court. The next date is 8:30am on the 11th.
-
I just called 1st ds court. The next date is 8:30am on the 11th.
That agrees with the online record.
Sounds like the Public Defender's office has their collective head up their buttocks!
Try calling again, and tell them one of their defenders is about to accept a plea deal for a client you can exonerate if you can get the evidence to the right person.
If they can't figure out how to help, tell them you have no choice but to contact the prosecutor's office. At that point, they will probably wake up and actually help.
Try asking for a supervisor. Many of these offices have temps and low-paid paralegals manning the phones. If you aren't a court officer calling to assign the PD a new case, they probably don't know what to do.
-
So I called the PD office and got in touch with the Supervisor, the Attorney for the guy was in court. They will pass my contact info along, just in case that doesn't happen, I also have the lawyers name. I appreciate the help guys!
-
.
-
I just came from the beach, shirtless with my wife and infant in the car, the last thing I would do, especially after the beach is "race" anyone or drive "reckless". The other guy wasn't even "racing or driving reckless" the only thing the other guy could have been guilty of is speeding. I was doing 65 exactly and had my GPS to back it up. Cop is crooked. Even my lawyer was outraged and felt he shouldn't even be on the force...
I won't weigh in on whether i think you're guilty of the offenses or not, but it's probably not a good thing that you admit to traveling above the speed limit. Although speeding is not in and of itself determinative of recklessness, it is certainly a factor to be considered.
The main issue in all reckless cases is the mens rea of "reckless." as with all criminal cases, the mens rea is usually one of the most difficult things for a prosecutor to prove. here, the statute looks at whether the driver was operating a vehicle "recklessly in disregard of the safety of persons or property." Since this is a judgment call on the officer's part, it would be very difficult for you to go after the HPD on this issue.
what really sucks is that, because 291-2 is a petty misdemeanor, it was probably recommended that you retained counsel. I'm not sure what the rates are anymore, but i think that it used to be around $1,500 to $2,000 to retain counsel for a case like this. I'd hate to be out that kind of cash simply because the officer, in his opinion, believed you to be driving recklessly.
in regards to the other issue that you brought up, the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct places certain greater responsibilities on prosecutors. the model rules were substantively adopted by Hawaii, but Hawaii uses a slightly older and slightly modified version of these rules. Specifically Rule 3.8 requires a prosector to disclose evidence that tends to exonerate or exculpate a defendant.
if you feel like sharing your video with the prosecutor's office, you might be able to help the other guy out. at the same time, if there is incriminating evidence on there related to your case, it is possible that there are negative consequences for you too.
-
I won't weigh in on whether i think you're guilty of the offenses or not, but it's probably not a good thing that you admit to traveling above the speed limit. Although speeding is not in and of itself determinative of recklessness, it is certainly a factor to be considered.
The main issue in all reckless cases is the mens rea of "reckless." as with all criminal cases, the mens rea is usually one of the most difficult things for a prosecutor to prove. here, the statute looks at whether the driver was operating a vehicle "recklessly in disregard of the safety of persons or property." Since this is a judgment call on the officer's part, it would be very difficult for you to go after the HPD on this issue.
what really sucks is that, because 291-2 is a petty misdemeanor, it was probably recommended that you retained counsel. I'm not sure what the rates are anymore, but i think that it used to be around $1,500 to $2,000 to retain counsel for a case like this. I'd hate to be out that kind of cash simply because the officer, in his opinion, believed you to be driving recklessly.
in regards to the other issue that you brought up, the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct places certain greater responsibilities on prosecutors. the model rules were substantively adopted by Hawaii, but Hawaii uses a slightly older and slightly modified version of these rules. Specifically Rule 3.8 requires a prosector to disclose evidence that tends to exonerate or exculpate a defendant.
if you feel like sharing your video with the prosecutor's office, you might be able to help the other guy out. at the same time, if there is incriminating evidence on there related to your case, it is possible that there are negative consequences for you too.
I doubt that, since his charges in the case were dismissed with prejudice.
-
Asinapple, I was on the 65mph highway ( I forget the name) going 65... The 65mph highway from or to kapolei.
-
Asinapple, I was on the 65mph highway ( I forget the name) going 65...
you mean the Waianae Autobahn?
-
you mean the Waianae Autobahn?
Lol, if that's what they call it. But, I was doing the speed limit exactly, I remember double checking.
-
my apologies for not knowing that the speed limit on the H1 was 65 mph. I was under the impression that the highest limit on the h1 was 60 mph.
-
Asinapple, I was on the 65mph highway ( I forget the name) going 65... The 65mph highway from or to kapolei.
you mean the Waianae Autobahn?
Lol, if that's what they call it. But, I was doing the speed limit exactly, I remember double checking.
No more 65 mph. The speed limit west of Kunia/Ft. Weaver Rd. is 60 mph until around the Campbell Industrial exit going Diamond Head is opposite.
The 60 mile per hour zone mentioned above and the 60 mph zone on the H3 are the fastest posted speed limits on Oahu.
-
No more 65 mph. The speed limit west of Kunia/Ft. Weaver Rd. is 60 mph until around the Campbell Industrial exit going Diamond Head is opposite.
The 60 mile per hour zone mentioned above and the 60 mph zone on the H3 are the fastest posted speed limits on Oahu.
Neither driver was cited for speeding. Even if he admits to doing 65 in a 60, the case was dismissed with prejudice. The court is barred from retrying that case.
-
Neither driver was cited for speeding. Even if he admits to doing 65 in a 60, the case was dismissed with prejudice. The court is barred from retrying that case.
Although it might be true that the court can't retry him for reckless and racing, there may be other charges that could stem from the same set of facts. No offense, but a dismissal with prejudice isn't as absolute as you make it seem.
although an entirely different charge on the same set of facts might be legally possible, whether a prosecutor will actually pursue this in reality is an entirely different question. regardless, i would err on the side of conservative on this one.
-
The speed limit was 65 before I left, when did it change? Well, whatever the speedlimit was at the time I was doing that, I set my cruise control.
As far as other sorcery, police always say that they cannot charge unless they personally whitnessed the crime taking place. That is exactly what they say. A woman was applying makeup and driving, and almost hit me months ago, I showed the cop the video and he said they cannot be charged unless they witnesses it taking place, some law I believe he said...
-
The speed limit was 65 before I left, when did it change? Well, whatever the speedlimit was at the time I was doing that, I set my cruise control.
I think your mistaken the speed limit has not been 65 mph in that area or any other on Oahu.
-
The speed limit was 65 before I left, when did it change? Well, whatever the speedlimit was at the time I was doing that, I set my cruise control.
As far as other sorcery, police always say that they cannot charge unless they personally whitnessed the crime taking place. That is exactly what they say. A woman was applying makeup and driving, and almost hit me months ago, I showed the cop the video and he said they cannot be charged unless they witnesses it taking place, some law I believe he said...
Well I don't want to argue with you. I'm only here to help.
Logically your assertion about police personally witnessing a crime as a prerequisite for a criminal charge does not really work. It would be an interesting world if that were the case, but murderers rarely kill others in the presence of the police. Obviously there is a big difference between murder and traffic crimes/infractions, but the homicide example is exaggeration to prove a point.
My guess is that the police officer that you showed the video to couldn't establish the requisite reasonable suspicion or probable cause to take action--either that or he was just being lazy.
As a side note, I don't think I've ever seen the "cruise control" argument work. If I were the prosecution, I'd argue that deliberately setting your cruise control above the speed limit is, in some sense, worse. It would be a much better argument to say that you normally drive below the posted limit and your foot unknowingly pressed the pedal a little harder causing you to go above the limit for a brief moment.
Anyway, I don't want this post to come across as argumentative. I would rather you err on the side of caution instead of possibly putting yourself in a predicament that you might eventually regret. Just remember that, as it stands, you're off the hook. Your case was dismissed and will probably not be retried. You're in a good place and I sincerely hope that it remains that way.
-
I got the same tickets before and I wasn't racing no one. I fought it also. Cops lied in court like a bunch of clowns. I was driving a stock 67 VW bug. And the cop said when the light turned green he saw so much smoke from my tires he could not see the car. And then said my car moved so fast that he had to go down the street 100 mph to catch me. He was so dramatic. Luckily the judge knew me and the car. After the trial was almost done the judge pulled the cop in front of the bench and told him if he ever lied in his court again he would be reprimanded. I was laughing.
-
Wow. I am surprised the cop kept his job.
-
the old speeding grants
make enough tickets, win federal grant money. :geekdanc:
-
Well I don't want to argue with you. I'm only here to help.
Logically your assertion about police personally witnessing a crime as a prerequisite for a criminal charge does not really work. It would be an interesting world if that were the case, but murderers rarely kill others in the presence of the police. Obviously there is a big difference between murder and traffic crimes/infractions, but the homicide example is exaggeration to prove a point.
My guess is that the police officer that you showed the video to couldn't establish the requisite reasonable suspicion or probable cause to take action--either that or he was just being lazy.
As a side note, I don't think I've ever seen the "cruise control" argument work. If I were the prosecution, I'd argue that deliberately setting your cruise control above the speed limit is, in some sense, worse. It would be a much better argument to say that you normally drive below the posted limit and your foot unknowingly pressed the pedal a little harder causing you to go above the limit for a brief moment.
Anyway, I don't want this post to come across as argumentative. I would rather you err on the side of caution instead of possibly putting yourself in a predicament that you might eventually regret. Just remember that, as it stands, you're off the hook. Your case was dismissed and will probably not be retried. You're in a good place and I sincerely hope that it remains that way.
I set my cruise control at the flow of the traffic around me. Sometimes driving slower than the prevailing traffic can lead to more dangerous situations.
Also be aware that speed on you car is typically based off the drive wheels. Sometimes the overall dimensions of the wheels differ from oem and you can have a several mph difference from oem equipment or even tires of the same size, but different manufacturers.
-
I set my cruise control at the flow of the traffic around me. Sometimes driving slower than the prevailing traffic can lead to more dangerous situations.
Also be aware that speed on you car is typically based off the drive wheels. Sometimes the overall dimensions of the wheels differ from oem and you can have a several mph difference from oem equipment or even tires of the same size, but different manufacturers.
While it is true that driving slower than traffic can lead to more dangerous situations, it is still a violation to drive above the speed limit. I've definitely heard motorists make this version of the cruise control argument in court and i haven't seen it work. HRS 291C-102 is pretty clear and unambiguous and leaves no room for a "keeping up with traffic" affirmative defense.
also keep in mind that using that argument is an affirmative defense, which means that you're admitting to being in violation. I'm not sure if that's a good idea, especially if you're trying to argue that you weren't speeding.
-
.
-
Regardless 65 or 60 that's only 5 over. most cops speed by me while going 5 over. If I were to get ticketed for 5 over on the freeway I'd probably laugh. I think it's awesome you are going out of your way to help.
Most courts will dismiss any ticket that is only 5 miles or less over the limit. There's at least a 3 MPH error margin for most laser/radar devices, and most judges would be reluctant to trust the speed measurement unless the driver admits he was going that fast.
The Cop might stop you to check for other infractions (license, registration, safety check, kilo of coke on the front seat ...), but they will probably just issue a verbal warning for the speeding alone.
Just my experience.
-
Most courts will dismiss any ticket that is only 5 miles or less over the limit. There's at least a 3 MPH error margin for most laser/radar devices, and most judges would be reluctant to trust the speed measurement unless the driver admits he was going that fast.
The Cop might stop you to check for other infractions (license, registration, safety check, kilo of coke on the front seat ...), but they will probably just issue a verbal warning for the speeding alone.
Just my experience.
i agree with mauidog on this one and i'd like to add to this. Although it's true that a court will probably dismiss the ticket, i would rather not have to take off from work just to appear in court and end up wasting a whole half day. also regarding the police officer stopping someone for only 5 mph over, i would rather not give officers any reason to stop me in the first place. it's not that i have something to hide, but more like my time is precious and i could be doing better things than being pulled over.
-
While it is true that driving slower than traffic can lead to more dangerous situations, it is still a violation to drive above the speed limit. I've definitely heard motorists make this version of the cruise control argument in court and i haven't seen it work. HRS 291C-102 is pretty clear and unambiguous and leaves no room for a "keeping up with traffic" affirmative defense.
also keep in mind that using that argument is an affirmative defense, which means that you're admitting to being in violation. I'm not sure if that's a good idea, especially if you're trying to argue that you weren't speeding.
I say that because my background is in Civil Engineering. What the general public does not know is that the 85th percentile rule is used to determine speed limits in many cases. So the argument that speeding is dangerous is actually false in many cases. Mostly it's because some engineer got overruled by a politician. Is it against the law? Yes, but not unsafe and that would be my argument.
Also if you're only talking 5 mph or so it is something that could easily be explained by different tire choices. Understanding how your speedo works is important too.
-
Most courts will dismiss any ticket that is only 5 miles or less over the limit. There's at least a 3 MPH error margin for most laser/radar devices, and most judges would be reluctant to trust the speed measurement unless the driver admits he was going that fast.
The Cop might stop you to check for other infractions (license, registration, safety check, kilo of coke on the front seat ...), but they will probably just issue a verbal warning for the speeding alone.
Just my experience.
I seriously doubt the radar/laser is off by 3 mph. Those devices are probably significantly more accurate than the speedometer in your car,
The speedo in your car is linked to the rpms of your drive wheels. The rpms is linked to the OD of the tire. In some cases the speedo "gearing" may not be perfectly linked to the tire diameter..........for example say Toyota uses a certain "gear" it would be cheaper for their suppliers to manufacture only certain "gears." Meanwhile the tire manufacturers have different ODs (outside diameters) for their tires..........so Pirelli, Michelin, Firestone may all produce a 205/55 R15 tire but they might all have different outside diameters. This means the same sized tire from different manufacturers will have different speeds at the same rpms of the drive wheels. Throw in the fact that the tire wears and even the same rpms of the same tire will have different actually speeds depending on how much wear the tire has.
This is the reason why the courts typically throw out tickets at +5 mph or less. Simply speaking the speedos do not record the actual speed of the car accurately most of the time.
-
I say that because my background is in Civil Engineering. What the general public does not know is that the 85th percentile rule is used to determine speed limits in many cases. So the argument that speeding is dangerous is actually false in many cases. Mostly it's because some engineer got overruled by a politician. Is it against the law? Yes, but not unsafe and that would be my argument.
Also if you're only talking 5 mph or so it is something that could easily be explained by different tire choices. Understanding how your speedo works is important too.
i understand what you're trying to say here, but i think the "safety" argument is kind of unwarranted in court. it would be an entirely different story if we're talking about a 291C-101, the basic speed rule violation.
the point i was trying to make was that most motorists don't realize that affirmative defenses aren't very helpful in normal speeding cases. the law clearly states that if you're over the limit, you're in violation. you could try to justify yourself to the court, but ultimately you're still in violation.
I seriously doubt the radar/laser is off by 3 mph. Those devices are probably significantly more accurate than the speedometer in your car,
The speedo in your car is linked to the rpms of your drive wheels. The rpms is linked to the OD of the tire. In some cases the speedo "gearing" may not be perfectly linked to the tire diameter..........for example say Toyota uses a certain "gear" it would be cheaper for their suppliers to manufacture only certain "gears." Meanwhile the tire manufacturers have different ODs (outside diameters) for their tires..........so Pirelli, Michelin, Firestone may all produce a 205/55 R15 tire but they might all have different outside diameters. This means the same sized tire from different manufacturers will have different speeds at the same rpms of the drive wheels. Throw in the fact that the tire wears and even the same rpms of the same tire will have different actually speeds depending on how much wear the tire has.
This is the reason why the courts typically throw out tickets at +5 mph or less. Simply speaking the speedos do not record the actual speed of the car accurately most of the time.
although the radar and laser devices themselves probably aren't off, they can give severely inaccurate readings if used improperly, and those variances can be significantly more than 3 mph. regardless, this issue is somewhat off topic.
and in response to the issue you raised about the speedometers the issue has already been addressed on multiple occasions by the appellate courts (for a recent decision, see State v. Fitzwater, 277 P.3d 520 (2010)). the law doesn't care whether your speedometer was reading accurately or not. what does matter is whether you were traveling faster than the posted speed limit. If i were a prosecutor, i would argue that, if the motorist knew that there was a certain amount of variance in the output reading of the speedometer and the car's actual speed, then shouldn't the motorist have known to drive much slower than the limit so that the inaccuracies would not become a detriment later?
again, i'm not trying to argue whether the law should be this or that. I'm merely pointing out that the law is unambiguous and, because of that fact, it is difficult to prevail on certain arguments in court.
-
When I changed the gears in my speed cars. My speedo was off about 10 mph. Had a shop in Waipahu to re cal but closed now. Ladar is accurate, before use, user must do status cal check. Someone should get a ticket if going 10 over. Drive safe, might be my family on the road. If I was to get a speed ticket, I would ask nicely to see the Ladar violation speed, po don't have to show to you.
-
When I changed the gears in my speed cars. My speedo was off about 10 mph. Had a shop in Waipahu to re cal but closed now. Ladar is accurate, before use, user must do status cal check. Someone should get a ticket if going 10 over. Drive safe, might be my family on the road. If I was to get a speed ticket, I would ask nicely to see the Ladar violation speed, po don't have to show to you.
different cars pull speed from different places. my bmw pulls the speed off a reluctor ring in my diff. the camaro t56 i have has a sensor mounted near the output shaft.
-
i understand what you're trying to say here, but i think the "safety" argument is kind of unwarranted in court. it would be an entirely different story if we're talking about a 291C-101, the basic speed rule violation.
the point i was trying to make was that most motorists don't realize that affirmative defenses aren't very helpful in normal speeding cases. the law clearly states that if you're over the limit, you're in violation. you could try to justify yourself to the court, but ultimately you're still in violation.
although the radar and laser devices themselves probably aren't off, they can give severely inaccurate readings if used improperly, and those variances can be significantly more than 3 mph. regardless, this issue is somewhat off topic.
and in response to the issue you raised about the speedometers the issue has already been addressed on multiple occasions by the appellate courts (for a recent decision, see State v. Fitzwater, 277 P.3d 520 (2010)). the law doesn't care whether your speedometer was reading accurately or not. what does matter is whether you were traveling faster than the posted speed limit. If i were a prosecutor, i would argue that, if the motorist knew that there was a certain amount of variance in the output reading of the speedometer and the car's actual speed, then shouldn't the motorist have known to drive much slower than the limit so that the inaccuracies would not become a detriment later?
again, i'm not trying to argue whether the law should be this or that. I'm merely pointing out that the law is unambiguous and, because of that fact, it is difficult to prevail on certain arguments in court.
I agree that if you're speeding, you're speeding and you're breaking the law........but the argument of traffic flow is a valid one.
Also I still don't think that a misused radar, lidar, or laser is going to be off by over 5 mph at 60 mph, that's a 8.3%+ error. It could be miscalibrated but misused?.....unlikely. Rather if you get a "bad" reading it's more likely that the officer shot another car and not you, it doesn't take much to miss the front plate or headlights.
I'm pointed out facts why the speedometers can be off. I'm not talking about guys changing tire sizes I'm talking about how oem equipment can be off and how the same tire will read different speeds during its life. With regards to the law doesn't care, I again must disagree, this is within the discretion of the judge. Many many people have gotten off due to this. Heck I've heard stories about guys following officers, the officer pulls over then tickets the person following and those get thrown out despite the person speeding.........the reason, because the driver had a reasonable expectation that they were keeping up with the flow of traffic (set by the LEO).
This being said I do agree that the law is/can be ambiguous. There are always going to be situations that are not taken into account my the lawmakers when bills are drafted/approved.
It really all comes down to who you pull as a judge the day you go to court.
-
Awesome to the point.
-
.
-
I finally got a call from the public defenders office asking for the video, to help the other driver. I am happy and hope his case gets dismissed. The PD was explaining that he was worried as it was the cops word against his. Now he has this I guess :D
-
I agree that if you're speeding, you're speeding and you're breaking the law........but the argument of traffic flow is a valid one.
Also I still don't think that a misused radar, lidar, or laser is going to be off by over 5 mph at 60 mph, that's a 8.3%+ error. It could be miscalibrated but misused?.....unlikely. Rather if you get a "bad" reading it's more likely that the officer shot another car and not you, it doesn't take much to miss the front plate or headlights.
I'm pointed out facts why the speedometers can be off. I'm not talking about guys changing tire sizes I'm talking about how oem equipment can be off and how the same tire will read different speeds during its life. With regards to the law doesn't care, I again must disagree, this is within the discretion of the judge. Many many people have gotten off due to this. Heck I've heard stories about guys following officers, the officer pulls over then tickets the person following and those get thrown out despite the person speeding.........the reason, because the driver had a reasonable expectation that they were keeping up with the flow of traffic (set by the LEO).
This being said I do agree that the law is/can be ambiguous. There are always going to be situations that are not taken into account my the lawmakers when bills are drafted/approved.
It really all comes down to who you pull as a judge the day you go to court.
my apologies for not clarifying what i had said earlier, and also for this late response. I must have glanced over your reply. to start off, please don't take my response as a personal attack on you.
if i'm not mistaken, i believe you said that you are an engineer in another thread. i certainly am not so please excuse my ignorance.
you said that you don't think that a misused radar or lidar device would provide a very large margin of error. maybe i should clarify myself. when i said "improperly," i actually meant that the device was used with the intent to measure the speed of a car, but the method of obtaining that measurement could lead to the device providing inaccurate readings. I'm not a physicist by any means, but it is my understanding that the radar and lidar used by traffic cops rely on the Doppler principle.
I've done my fair share of research, which i had intended to present in court, but i've never had the opportunity. given that you're an engineer, can you provide an explanation in layman's terms how a difference in vantage point of a velocity measurement device with respect to the vector of travel will affect the reported measurement? in other words, using an extreme example, what kind of readings would i get if i were lasering a vehicle traveling directly at me (or directly away from me) versus lasering a vehicle traveling in a direction perpendicular to my direction of aim?
also, i apologize to monster if it appears like i'm hijacking his thread. i'm hoping that the resulting discussion will be somewhat relevant to the topic of speeding and speed traps in general.