 | 
02-22-2007, 07:35 AM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5
| | | Error on Speeding Summons Spotsylvania, VA
I received a summons for speeding in Spotsylvania, Virginia. The radar said i was doing 62 in a 45. I know i wasnt over 57 but that is a moot point I was still speeding.
The summons has space for physical description and states that I have blue eyes when I do not. I clearly have dark brown eyes, can I use this as a cause for dismissal. This is my first offense, I have a clean driving record**************..or am I better off just paying the ticket and consider it lesson learned**************... |
02-22-2007, 07:53 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,123
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by TheresaTeee  The summons has space for physical description and states that I have blue eyes when I do not. I clearly have dark brown eyes, can I use this as a cause for dismissal. | No, sorry. It has no bearing on the offense, just an identifier for the DOT |
02-22-2007, 08:23 AM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: NJ
Posts: 19
| | | Your better off to appear and ask for leniency - driver's school, probation if you do not want to contest it. The insurance increase will be huge....you will most likely lose your good driver discount and get a big surcharge... |
02-22-2007, 11:54 AM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 10,871
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by TheresaTeee I received a summons for speeding in Spotsylvania, Virginia. The radar said i was doing 62 in a 45. I know i wasnt over 57 but that is a moot point I was still speeding.
The summons has space for physical description and states that I have blue eyes when I do not. I clearly have dark brown eyes, can I use this as a cause for dismissal. This is my first offense, I have a clean driving record**************..or am I better off just paying the ticket and consider it lesson learned**************... | Theresa, I am posting this here because you don't have your pm activated. You replied to a post in child custody. Your "advice" was wrong. You should not reply to a thread UNLESS you can back up what you say with the correct statute from the state in question. It is irresponsible.
__________________ Quote:
It almost never fails: OP asks for advice, gets the unvarnished truth from Ohiogal, OP gets in a snit and claims all the trouble has suddenly disappeared and the sun is shining once again.
This is a scientific phenomenon, and it should be called The OG Factor.
| ~CLT747~
|
02-22-2007, 02:14 PM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: NJ
Posts: 19
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by baystategirl Theresa, I am posting this here because you don't have your pm activated. You replied to a post in child custody. Your "advice" was wrong. You should not reply to a thread UNLESS you can back up what you say with the correct statute from the state in question. It is irresponsible. | Your virilic rant is not appropriate, nor is you lack of ability to READ the case law or look up statutes yourself. No one here owes you any research and this is a forum for consumers to share experience so you are furthermore offbase...  |
02-22-2007, 02:22 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: MD, WV - formerly WA, UT, AL, MS and OR
Posts: 563
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by baystategirl Theresa, I am posting this here because you don't have your pm activated. You replied to a post in child custody. Your "advice" was wrong. You should not reply to a thread UNLESS you can back up what you say with the correct statute from the state in question. It is irresponsible. | Start you own thread - quit hijacking...
__________________
_____________________________________________________
“[w]hen a statute is clear and unambiguous and the legislative intent is plain, the statute should not be interpreted by the courts, and in such case it is the duty of the courts not to construe but to apply the statute.”
"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.
|
02-22-2007, 03:19 PM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5
| | | Explain
Quote:
Originally Posted by baystategirl Theresa, I am posting this here because you don't have your pm activated. You replied to a post in child custody. Your "advice" was wrong. You should not reply to a thread UNLESS you can back up what you say with the correct statute from the state in question. It is irresponsible. | Excuse me, but what of my advice was wrong? Are you saying that my entire custody case is wrong? This was done through the courts, these are the things I was told by the judge, the children's advocate lawyer and personal experience.
My PM will be activated so that you can respond. |
02-22-2007, 05:14 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 10,871
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by camdenle Your virilic rant is not appropriate, nor is you lack of ability to READ the case law or look up statutes yourself. No one here owes you any research and this is a forum for consumers to share experience so you are furthermore offbase... | Excuse me...But was I even talking to you?? I think not!
This forum is to provide LEGAL advice for those in need ....if you want to "share experiences" join a support group for the driving impaired.
Oh and cepe...I didn't "hijack"...I was talking to the OP
__________________ Quote:
It almost never fails: OP asks for advice, gets the unvarnished truth from Ohiogal, OP gets in a snit and claims all the trouble has suddenly disappeared and the sun is shining once again.
This is a scientific phenomenon, and it should be called The OG Factor.
| ~CLT747~
Last edited by m martin; 02-23-2007 at 01:12 PM.
|
02-22-2007, 06:19 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: CO
Posts: 12,799
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by camdenle Your virilic rant is not appropriate, nor is you lack of ability to READ the case law or look up statutes yourself. No one here owes you any research and this is a forum for consumers to share experience so you are furthermore offbase... | "virilic" ??? What word is "virilic"???
You are wrong about what the forum is for: yes, it is for consumers to share experience, but the legal info needs to be VALID, or else it's pointles.: How would YOU like it if some numbskull gave YOU invalid info?? This is why statements given as fact should be backed up with references/citations.
__________________
"Judges want people to be reasonable. Where one parent won't be reasonable, judges still want the other parent to remain reasonable." Ford, at The Other Place
Last edited by m martin; 02-23-2007 at 01:14 PM.
|
02-22-2007, 06:21 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: CO
Posts: 12,799
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by TheresaTeee Excuse me, but what of my advice was wrong? | Damn near all of it. Quote: |
Originally Posted by TheresaTeee Are you saying that my entire custody case is wrong? This was done through the courts, these are the things I was told by the judge, the children's advocate lawyer and personal experience. | Was it in the same state? The same county? Instead of just blasting around, why not provide references so that everyone can benefit from your SAME STATE experience? If it's not in the same state, it's completely pointless.
__________________
"Judges want people to be reasonable. Where one parent won't be reasonable, judges still want the other parent to remain reasonable." Ford, at The Other Place |
02-22-2007, 06:23 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 10,871
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverplum Damn near all of it.
Was it in the same state? The same county? Instead of just blasting around, why not provide references so that everyone can benefit from your SAME STATE experience? If it's not in the same state, it's completely pointless. | Sil...T went to the thread and clarified...She meant no harm...just a newbie that didn't know better...be nice... 
__________________ Quote:
It almost never fails: OP asks for advice, gets the unvarnished truth from Ohiogal, OP gets in a snit and claims all the trouble has suddenly disappeared and the sun is shining once again.
This is a scientific phenomenon, and it should be called The OG Factor.
| ~CLT747~
|
02-22-2007, 06:24 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: St. Odo of Cluny Parish
Posts: 27,482
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by TheresaTeee I received a summons for speeding in Spotsylvania, Virginia. The radar said i was doing 62 in a 45. I know i wasnt over 57 but that is a moot point I was still speeding.
The summons has space for physical description and states that I have blue eyes when I do not. I clearly have dark brown eyes, can I use this as a cause for dismissal. This is my first offense, I have a clean driving record**************..or am I better off just paying the ticket and consider it lesson learned**************... | You are better off just paying the ticket and considering it lesson learned.
__________________
My signature is not working.  |
02-22-2007, 06:26 PM
| | Senior Member | | Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: CO
Posts: 12,799
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by baystategirl Sil...T went to the thread and clarified...She meant no harm...just a newbie that didn't know better...be nice... | So I see!
I therefore and hereto print a retraction.   
__________________
"Judges want people to be reasonable. Where one parent won't be reasonable, judges still want the other parent to remain reasonable." Ford, at The Other Place |
02-23-2007, 08:25 AM
| | Member | | Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: MD, WV - formerly WA, UT, AL, MS and OR
Posts: 563
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by seniorjudge You are better off just paying the ticket and considering it lesson learned. | Excellent advice - so instead of taking driving school or getting a possible deferment she can incur a $2000+ insurance increase. Excellent legal advice and brilliant legal strategy.
OP given your clean record and a citation not in excess of 80+ on the freeway - I would highly consider either contesting it - speed limit justified by 85% speed, current calibration within 6 months or plead guilty show your driving record and ask for driving school or deferment to keep the points off your record. You will see in court the judge will be often be fairly decent to those who show up in terms of leniency. It is almost always worth your time on a case like this.
__________________
_____________________________________________________
“[w]hen a statute is clear and unambiguous and the legislative intent is plain, the statute should not be interpreted by the courts, and in such case it is the duty of the courts not to construe but to apply the statute.”
"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.
| |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Rate This Thread |  Linear Mode | | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | |
|
