Okay, this is the second time typing this after the first time got borked for some odd reason.

I've seen a couple of threads on here with some really good advise on the subject, so I thought I'd post my situation and get a little feedback.

Background
As US-411 enters my town it goes to 4 lanes (well, 3, then 4). As it does this, the speed limit is increased from 45mph to 50mph. Everyone and I do mean EVERYONE does 60 in this zone. I pass a cop going North bound or a cop passes me (headed South bound going back to the station) nearly every morning. My wife and I even witnessed two cops racing on this street back to the station at least once (even going as far as turning their lights on to run a red light).

Event
Going to work like any other morning a cop passed me going North as I was traveling South (towards town). I noticed in my rear view mirror that he slowed down and turned at the next cut through in the median to turn around and head South. After sitting there a moment he sped South bound. Okay, no big deal, probably just forgot his lunch or something seeing as how we're only a half a mile from the station. He reaches me at almost the same time as I reached the first traffic light (it had just turned green so I had slowed down some for when it was still red in preperation to stop). He then tailed me in the left lane. Seeing how there was some cars in the right lane and he seemed to be in a hurry, this didn't bother me. We passed the road to turn to go to the station. Hrm, he's still behind me. The first opportunity for me to get into the right lane I took it thinking he'd zoom on by. He followed me. Odd. We continue on and the South bound side expands to 4 lanes (one for the I-759 on ramp and the other was a turning lane). I merge once more to the right into the I-759 on ramp lane. He follows. Seconds later, he turns on his lights. Maybe he needs to get on I-759 for some reason. So I merge once more into the turning lane. He follows. I pull into Toco Bell and come to a stop. I get my license and insurance card out as I wait for him to approach my car (it's lightly raining so I still have my window up). He approaches, introduces himself and informs me he stopped me for speeding. He then asks for drivers license and proof of insurance, which I give to him. I tell him I'm supposed to be at work by 6:00 (it was nearly 6:00 then). He goes to his car and comes back. He tells me he wrote me a ticket for going 60 in a 50 and had me sign the ticket. He gave the copy back to me and told me to "please slow down for me and have a good day." Meh.

That was on 3-28-05 (the day after my birthday). Yesterday I called and asked when the ticket was turned in. They didn't know because they don't keep up with that (no accountablity in the system these days I guess). I also sent the letters to the City Procecuting Attorney for the Subpeona and a sperate one for the other stuff (sworn statement, witness list, other evidence, etc.).

I think I can handle it if the cop doesn't show up, but if he does, the only deffense right now that I have is of him breaking the the same infraction he cited me for. I get this from the fact that the distance I transversed from the time we met was 0.6 miles. Taking the assumption that I was going 60 mph, it would of taken me ~36 sec to get there. The distance the cop would of had to transverse in the same amount of time would of been 0.6 + 0.1 to nearest turning cut through + 0.1 transverse the same distance back = 0.8 miles. This translates to a speed of ~90mph. So I was going to the "Question the Citing Officers integrity for writing the ticket after sevearly breaking the same infraction he cited me for."

Ideas, suggestions, feedback of any kind welcomed!

That defense won't work because officers are above traffic laws.

Sorry, that's not a defence. It's called a "logical fallacy" and it's the reason alot of people do 5 mph over the limit ("everyone else is doing more, why single me out?") The truth is, you broke the law, plain and simple. What the police officer did doesn't affect that you broke the law.

[Edit: and what Freelancer said]

You're not going to get off by saying the cop was speeding too. Change your court date and hope the cop doesn't show up. That's your best bet.

I'd pay the ticket and just bite the fact that there is no way around it. Besides, you can't just hope he doesn't show. More than likely he probably will be there. You may be lucky and the judge could lower your citation but, I'm not sure how the system works where you are from. Good luck,

bad idea. Your insurance will gouge you with higher rates if you simply pay the ticket. Fight it in court.

Countdown to Brian's post in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...

EDIT:



That was a mistake. You shouldnt be pulling that stuff out until the cop asks you for it. For one thing, having it ready is practically an admission of guilt or that you know what you were pulled over for, and also, its generally not a good idea to be rooting around in the glove compartment or your pockets when the cop is approaching your car. It looks like you are either trying to stash drugs or pull out a weapon.

But really, what is there to fight? If you don't want your insurance to go up because of higher rates.. don't speed. I had to learn all this the hard way. Besides, as long as you never tell your insurance company they will never find out.. Just don't buy a new car or get a policy change in the next couple of years.

If you take defensive driving, it should wipe the ticket clean from having you pay it, and from having your insurance find out. You'll still have to pay for defensive driving though, but that's a lot cheaper.

You broke the law. They have quotas to meet. You got screwed. Pay the fine.

Never tell the court the cop is lying or the cop was speeding or anything like that, they will just think you are a fool. Trust me, the fact that that same exact cop was speeding right there 2 minutes before you does not, in the eyes of the law, justify you breaking the law.

FFF

(fight, fight, fight)

:: If the cop was speeding in order to catch up to you, he has that right. Officers cant just go the speed limit and hope to catch someone that broke that law simply via traffic lights.

:: Since you have no way of knowing for a fact exactly how the officer was going and you have no formal training in calculating the speed of another vehicle, accusing the officer of speeding wont get you far. He'll respond with "Yes, I was going faster than the speed limit in order to catch up to the vehicle I noticed speeding." In which case he broke no law.

:: Fiddling around the glove compartment as the officer is walking up probably isnt a great idea for your own safety (not that he's going to start shotting, but he might seem a little more hostile than normal). But I dont think he's going to go into court and say "I also know he was guilty of speeding because he had everything ready that everybody knows an officer asks for everytime they pull someone over for anything." Even if they just want to tell you that your taillight is out, they'll more than likely still ask for license, registration, and proof of insurance just to make sure you have it all.

I suggest go to court, see if here's there, and if he is just talk to him and he'll reduce it probably.

By fighting the citation when you know that you're perfectly guilty is really just wasting everyone's time, and is incredibly selfish.

By linking this to a previous thread on a similar topic, it is perhaps not 'speeders' that deserve the death penalty, but those that spend their time whining and fighting offenses for which they know they've committed sure come close.

What the US really needs is speed cameras. You go over the speed limit, the camera takes a photo of your numberplate, sends the fine to your address automatically. If you want to challenge it, there's video evidence of you speeding. None of this weaseling out. And it saves the police a lot of hassle too.

I'm kind of tired of reading: "you broke the law and that's that." The "law" isn't intrinsically valuable. If the flow of traffic is greater than the speed limit, then it's reasonable to go that speed.

Speed limit laws seem to have one major purpose: revenue. Granted, in theory they also have the purpose of creating a standard for cars to follow. If there wasn't a speed limit, then the speed of the flow of traffic could be all over the place and yes, unsafe. Going 90 in a residential area is bad because there's great danger to life involved. That law is a necessity for the protection of citizens.

We need people to be punished when they break laws because it helps to deter people. However, we also need people to challenge the law constantly in court in order to deter the government from making false charges. Make the government account for its actions at all times.

Don't become a sacrifice to the State.

You're talking to a bunch of people from a capitalist, democratic nation. Selfishness is our VIRTUE my friend.

What the US really needs is other countries to stop telling us what to do.

Your entire argument is based on the false assumption that cops want people to stop speeding. They don't - traffic cops exist solely to produce "revenue" (but more aptly titled "tax" or "fees") for the state. If they really wanted people to stop speeding, there would have been laws 50 years ago that were strict enough to actually deter people.

Also, what if you lend out your car? You'd have to have facial recognition software and we all know how well that went over in air ports.

That would go over REALLY WELL with the american people, I'm sure.

The law is not always right, and we should as citizens always be ready and willing to challenge the law. Wake up, man.


Like others have said, speed laws exist mainly to generate revenue for the state. If they really gave a tinker's damn about protecting you, your car would only be able to go 65 mph for highway driving instead of up to 130 mph. Rather than admit this, the government gives everyone a bunch of bull**** about public safety.

'zactly. Thought I don't necessarily agree with an extreme fight the power mentality of some people, the law is not rock solid and right just because it is the law.

you should've gone all GTA on his ***.

Same thing about happened to me, the cop tails me out of a green light and he's like right up my ***, so i naturally, speed up to get a space cusion.....but the ****er decides to put his lights on and pull me over and give me a ticket for 'reckless driving' cost me $105 and 3 points off my license so now i'm screwed out of job opportunities the stupid mother ****ers. I payed the fee cause i didn't know what else to do, and didn't think it would affect any points and ****. and don't go on with 'you drove recklessly' i've SEEN reckless. mother****ers passing on a double yellow line, almost saw a car get rear-ended by a damn tractor trailer at a red light today, also everybody likes to use their high beams at night-in the rain of all weather. makes me want to just pack my trunk full of explosive and drive it into a nursing home.

if you want to 'fight the law', then how about actually fighting the law. Yes, I agree entirely that if the law isn't logical, then it should be fought, but simply going to court over every citation isn't 'fighting the law'. It's just wasting everyones time.

If you really cared about the law, you'd be writing letters to your local politicians, judges, lawmakers, campaigning for a change in the law - even if that is only to have the speed limit on a stretch of road increased.

But of course that isn't really the case. You care enough to moan and whine and try to weasel out selfishly of paying money, but when it comes to actually fighting the law and campaigning for change... nah.
You care about 'your money', nothing else, so don't pretend to be some holy crusader revolting against the system.

Who says they haven't done that? I mean, you're just putting words in their mouths, now.

Great job Mort, you're a master debater.

They set aside money in the budge several months ago for increasing the 2 lane section (aka the 45mph zone that everyone goes 60mph in) of the road to 4 lanes. The reason? Speeding (not due to an increase in tickets, just the the excepted fact that speeding does occur) and accidents. This, after a huge petition was signed (and yes, I signed it as well). If it was any other road I'd say "okay, ya got me." But this is a matter of principle for me.

Anyhow, I need help on this. My wife's friend is dating a cop for the same city. I'm going to see if she can get him to serve the subpeona for me and perhaps talk the cop out of showing up. If he still show's up, can I ask him to show proof of radar certification and stuff and if he's unprepared/doesn't have them, move for it to be dismissed? How late can I wait to get my court date changed and what's the process for doing so?

Oh, and "technically" I'm not guily of the specific infraction he cited me for. While my speedometer was showing 60, I also know that it reads 1-2mph faster then my actual speed, so "technically" I was only going 59.

I don't know about your area, but there are no quotas here.

I believe so. IIRC, he needs to be certified to use the radar, and the radar itself needs to have been calibrated before the incident.

The better idea, though, would be to plead no contest and take defensive driving.

Just a question. In America, do you have to have all your documents with you? In England we've just got to take them to a Police station withen 7 days of an offence.

I think you have to produce them within 24 hours, but some cops will get pissed off if you dont have them on you. I was pulled over once in my moms car, and I couldnt find the registration, but the cop was cool about it though, he didnt care.

Generally yes. When a police officer pulls you over, the two things s/he asks are "license and registration." There are other thing that you may have to produce such as proof of insurance. That's probably up to the municipality.

He's not required to show proof of any of that, it's your job to get it. Different states have different regulations on how to get it.

After reading this thread, you my friend, rock my socks.

"Speed limit laws seem to have one major purpose"

The speed limit is the maximum speed the local government has determined to be safe for that area. The one major purpose is to keep people driving safely.

"However, we also need people to challenge the law"

He doesnt want to challenge the law that the limit should be higher. He wants to challenge that the officer did the same thing he did. He doesnt want to change the law, he wants to get out of a citation because the officer broke the same law. If he wants the officer punished for breaking the law, he is by default agreeing that the law is just.

"deter the government from making false charges."

He already admitted he broke the law. Nobody said it was false.

"traffic cops exist solely to produce "revenue""

Most "traffic cops" are patrol officers, not traffic cops. They respond to any complaint filed. If they see you break the law via speeding, they still stop you for that too. They are protecting your saftey as well as that of those around you.

"can I ask him to show proof of radar certification and stuff and if he's unprepared/doesn't have them, move for it to be dismissed?"

You need to check the local laws and the police department's policies on this. He may or may not need to have all that with him.

""technically" I'm not guily of the specific infraction he cited me for."

They penalty is not for the specific speed. It's the /range/ of how much you were over. Either way you fall into the "10 mph or less" over range. You can check with the department what the range is. But it's probably on the ticket somewhere what the ranges are.

If a cop drives the speed limit, 99% of the people behind him are definately not going to risk passing him and getting a ticket for going over the speed limit. I've seen this happen, a state cop was going 65 on a highway, and there was a huge backup of cars tailgating each other behind him because no one wanted to pass him.

If you're the kind of person who says that "everyone should follw the speed of the traffic around them even if it is over the speed limit," then this should apply to the cops as well. It would even seem that Cops should actually have to go faster than surrounding traffic to prevent unsafe situations like the one mentioned above from occuring.

(This post wasnt directed at anyone in particular, just my thoughts on the subject)

Quotas for tickets are illegal, I believe.

Yeah but cops are the best at weaseling around laws. Hell, they don't have to weasel, nobody can arrest them. Here, they get prizes and gold plated model police cars for "out-performing" everyone else. So it's not a quota, it's a freaking contest!

My girlfriend got pulled over for speeding yesterday. The cop clocked her while she was passing on a two-lane highway. WA has laws specifically stating that it's perfectly legal to exceed the speed limit to pass a car on a two-lane highway as long as it's safe for conditions. The cop gave her this BS about how that only "means" she can go "5 over" to pass - which is complete and utter BS. So now she has to take a day off work to go to court and get the ticket dismissed when the ahole cop shouldn't have written it in the first place.

Thats not true around here. The State Police, who are way more laid back and recieve a lot more training and held to much higher standards than the local police can and do pull over and issue tickets to on duty local police officers.

I also say you change the court date an hope that the cop does not show up or find out if his vaction is coming up and set the date for then it works trust me

The state police here are more "above the law" than the local guys, and they also have more history of abuse.

Internal Affairs Division/Bureau