Speeding Ticket

[Harry]

So I just got my first speeding ticket tonight. I was going 81mph in a 55mph zone. $189.50 - almost a buy-in lost and I wasn't even playing poker =( I will also get 5 points on my license.

This is assuming I don't fight the ticket. I don't really see how I can. I was the only person on the road and was definitely going around 80mph.

Thoughts?

[bigspenda73]

Defensive Driving online FTW

Gets the pts off your insurance

[lolzzz_321]

My friend always gets a lawyer to dismiss his tickets

[Zee Devee]

I got a ticket for going 81 in a 65. I went to court and contested it- I didnt need to explain anything, the judge just called me up, said "accept the ticket or contest" so I said contest, then they lowered it to a 1-10 minimal violation.

[euphoricism]

lawyer is the easiest method. Itll cost you around $60 usually but the ticket almost always disappears. If it doesnt, youre on the hook for the whole ticket but the lawyer usually waives his fee.

You can of course do it yourself. Requires a bit of work though.

[Fimanoid]

fight the ticket. schedule the court date. show up. either look for a cop that pulled you over and talk to him or talk to the prosecutor or even better if you talk to both of them. plea bargain for a lesser charge. most likely the fine will stay, but you'll probably get rid of the points.

gl!

[givememyleg]

I was pulled over for 88 in a 55 last summer, but due to a mixture of my good looks and a very very rad state cop, he let me go.

[Corey]

Fight the ticket will only lose you more money. Go to court, and see if defensive driving or a course on driving is offered, if so take pay your fines take the course and wish you never committed the crime.

[thizzSantaCruz]

I'll add to the OP, I just got blurped the other day as well by highway patrol. I am taking the newly washed car out for a spin and smashing on anything looking remotely fast, so I pull up next to an older modle Camaro that has been pretty well taken care of. The license plate says FST CAMRO or something like that so I know the guy has modded it out. Anyways I down shift and floor it speeding ahead, right as I am doing this a highway patrol crosses my path in the opposite direction, at this point I should have turned into the next cutty dirt road off to the side and waited for him to drive by but for some reason I did not think he would turn around.

Skip forward 2 minutes (at this point I am driving the speed limit, I had gotten spooked). I glance in my rear view and see the same high way patrol slowly passing the traffic behind me to catch up, he throws his lights on and pull over.

The officer says he caught me going 75 in a 55, in reality I was going about 90 when I saw him so I knew he did not have me on radar. He hardly believes the car is mine and asks me all these bullshit questions. After I answer to his satisfaction he goes back to his car and radios in my info, winds up coming back and saying he will only wrote me up for 65 in a 55. If he hadn't said that I was going to tell him I was only going 70 becasue he has no proof of my speed. So basically I am a luck box because I could have got caught for wreckless endangerment.

Anyways this will be my 3rd point, looks like I can't be racing anymore if I want to keep my license.

[Muzzard]

The officer says he caught me going 75 in a 55, in reality I was going about 90 when I saw him so I knew he did not have me on radar.

If he has no radar how can he prove beyond all reasonable doubt that you did actually commit an offence? Judge, he looked like he was going fast...

If you appealed this, he has no actual evidence and it would be quashed 100%. No radar, or video for a speeding offence = no crime

[Corey]

The officer says he caught me going 75 in a 55, in reality I was going about 90 when I saw him so I knew he did not have me on radar.

If he has no radar how can he prove beyond all reasonable doubt that you did actually commit an offence? Judge, he looked like he was going fast...

If you appealed this, he has no actual evidence and it would be quashed 100%. No radar, or video for a speeding offence = no crime

I agree with Pokermuzz hopefully you did fight this or you will.

[Borgib]

Once while my sister was driving her red camero she passed a cop doing about 90 on busy DC highway. She then slowed down and pulled over before he could even react. She was real nice and he wrote her for failure to obeying a highway sign. Less points. Less fines. Police observation is a credible witness to a crime. I think, I am no lawyer nor do I play one on TV.

[Muzzard]

Police observation is a credible witness to a crime.

True, but the speed of a vehicle isn't exactly easy to tell by sight. Sure they are credible witness to other crimes like assault etc. But 'I think he was going fast' just isn't enough to prove it beyond the required threshold.

Sure, the cop might have been able to tell you were going over the speed limit, but he needs a radar or video to back it up. Just saying someone is going over the speed limit is not going to satisfy the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal court of law.

[andy-akb]

The officer says he caught me going 75 in a 55, in reality I was going about 90 when I saw him so I knew he did not have me on radar.

If he has no radar how can he prove beyond all reasonable doubt that you did actually commit an offence? Judge, he looked like he was going fast...

If you appealed this, he has no actual evidence and it would be quashed 100%. No radar, or video for a speeding offence = no crime

Chardrian, correct me if Im wrong, but in this sort of case it doesnt have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Im hungover right now so Im not going to try to use the correct wording, but the burden of proof in a case like this is much lower than in a criminal case.

[Muzzard]

The officer says he caught me going 75 in a 55, in reality I was going about 90 when I saw him so I knew he did not have me on radar.

If he has no radar how can he prove beyond all reasonable doubt that you did actually commit an offence? Judge, he looked like he was going fast...

If you appealed this, he has no actual evidence and it would be quashed 100%. No radar, or video for a speeding offence = no crime

Chardrian, correct me if Im wrong, but in this sort of case it doesnt have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Im hungover right now so Im not going to try to use the correct wording, but the burden of proof in a case like this is much lower than in a criminal case.

Ok, this may be so in some American States, I did not realise. I just found an article on Honolulu traffic law. Apparently it is decriminalised, so it is a civil hearing and the burden only needs to be 'on the preponderance of eveidence.' I'm not sure about other states in the US.

However, in the UK it is a criminal hearing, so my agrument is only valid for the UK and states which still have criminal traffic law.

EDIT: I also found this on the Honolulu law

If judgment is rendered in favor of the government (in the civil case of a traffic infringement), the defendant may request a trial. The burden of proof at trial is "beyond a reasonable doubt," as the defendant has exercised the right to have the case decided in the criminal system.

As I say I'm not certain of the law in the rest of the States... But this seems to be a fair proposition. If it has been decriminalised then you still have the right to a criminal trial where it must be proved beyond all reasonable doubt.