Speeding 22 MPH over, possible defense?

What is the name of your state? NY

The Story:
I was on the highway talking on my phone through my car (bluetooth) in the left lane. I had a radar detector in my car. I noticed the van way in front on the right lane was hitting his brakes and at that same time I hit my brakes slowing down to the speed limit. It turns out the cop just pulled over recently to the side of the road. By the time I passed him, I was going the speed limit but the cop proceeded to follow me. For 5 minutes he was behind me and I definitely knew this. I was going the speed limit, even slightly below the speed limit at times. After some time he pulled me over. He asked me how fast I think I was going and I said, "I don't know, maybe 60" (the speed limit was 55). The cop took one look at me and said I'm writing you a ticket for a 77 in a 55. Went back to his car and when he handed me the ticket, told me I should of told the truth and he would of reduced the charge.

Defense:
What possible defenses are there against this ticket? I was looking online and there is alot of stuff about how you can ask when the radar was last calibrated and if the officer does not have proper documentation showing the radar was checked recently right then at the court, the ticket can be dismissed immediately. Is this true? Anyone know how often radars must be checked in New York?


Thanks

The process by which you request calibration records is called "Discovery".

jdog24 said:

I was on the highway talking on my phone through my car (bluetooth) in the left lane. I had a radar detector in my car. I noticed the van way in front on the right lane was hitting his brakes and at that same time I hit my brakes slowing down to the speed limit. It turns out the cop just pulled over recently to the side of the road. By the time I passed him, I was going the speed limit but the cop proceeded to follow me. For 5 minutes he was behind me and I definitely knew this. I was going the speed limit, even slightly below the speed limit at times. After some time he pulled me over. He asked me how fast I think I was going and I said, "I don't know, maybe 60" (the speed limit was 55). The cop took one look at me and said I'm writing you a ticket for a 77 in a 55. Went back to his car and when he handed me the ticket, told me I should of told the truth and he would of reduced the charge.

Click to expand...

Before you slowed down, were you going about 77? Your mention of "highway" makes me think that, much like where I live, the car on the ground may have been coordinating with enforcement in the air. That would account for the officer pulling over, following you, and then disbelieving your speed estimate.

But if they do not bring the calibration records to the trial, which most prosecutors won't, then the trial is most likely dismissed because there is reasonable doubt that the radar did not work correctly.

And if the prosecution asks for time to gather the records, you can object and say the prosecution should have been prepared for this trial beforehand.

Is this correct?

jdog24 said:

But if they do not bring the calibration records to the trial, which most prosecutors won't, then the trial is most likely dismissed because there is reasonable doubt that the radar did not work correctly.

And if the prosecution asks for time to gather the records, you can object and say the prosecution should have been prepared for this trial beforehand.

Is this correct?

Click to expand...

What if the do bring the calibration records?

What if the officer did not use radar to measure your speed? (You mentioned a radar detector but never mentioned it going off or you discussing the method that the officer used to do so).

jdog24 said:

But if they do not bring the calibration records to the trial, which most prosecutors won't, then the trial is most likely dismissed because there is reasonable doubt that the radar did not work correctly.

And if the prosecution asks for time to gather the records, you can object and say the prosecution should have been prepared for this trial beforehand.

Is this correct?

Click to expand...

The prosecution is not required to provide any documents you did not request via Discovery. In court, assuming that Radar was tool used to determine your speed, they will state as much, and then it will be up to YOU (not them) to show that it wasn't used correctly as it was not calibrated, which cannot be done unless YOU (not them) bring the calibration records to court.

jdog24 said:

But if they do not bring the calibration records to the trial, which most prosecutors won't, then the trial is most likely dismissed because there is reasonable doubt that the radar did not work correctly.

And if the prosecution asks for time to gather the records, you can object and say the prosecution should have been prepared for this trial beforehand.

Is this correct?

Click to expand...

This is called wishful thinking. This rarely if ever works in traffic court.

Call me crazy, but here's an idea....

You were talking on your phone when driving (hang up and drive, darn it) and not paying attention. You were speeding. You got caught. Pay the fine and quit trying to weasel out of being responsible.

*shrug* Just a thought....

Personal responsibility. What a concept...