What is the name of your state? Wisconsin
My wife--after bragging two months ago that she's never had a speeding ticket--of course screwed with cosmic karma and received one two weeks ago. She was clocked at 43 in a 25, but he only wrote her up for 35 in a 25; this is what the officer wrote on the ticket:
LTI LASER 43-35 REDUC, SHOWN SPEED OF 41 AFTER LOCKING IN 43, 40 + 41
The road is a four lane road on the outskirts of a somewhat small town and for some reason or other, the speed limit is 25 through there as opposed to 35, so it's easy enough to do. I see cops sit there all the time so I'm sure they're well aware of it.
The ticket is only $83 so it's no big deal, but my curiousity is peaked about it because of the following:
He clocked her about a quarter of a mile from a stop light. The light turned red as she approached it. He came up behind her, didn't turn his lights on. They sat through the red light for about a minute, minute and a half. They then drove through the intersection and roughly another quarter to half mile--right as the speed limit sign changed to 35 (and coincidentally enough, right before the town limits), he then turned his lights on and pulled her over.
Is there any WI statute that states how soon--either time or distance wise--after clocking someone that the officer has to pull them over or at least signal their intent to do so? It just seems odd to me that he had time to clock her, pull up behind her, sit at a light behind her, and then pull her over a good quarter to half a mile after the intersection, instead of pulling her over immediately once the light changed and they were through the intersection. There's a good sized shoulder there so it's not like they'd be obstructing traffic any more than where he ended up pulling her over.
Him writing her up as 35 in a 25 instead of 43 in a 25 oddly enough almost makes me question it, too. Like he's trying to make out that he's cutting her a break--and maybe he is (though a warning all things considered would have been better)--but maybe there's something more to it. It being her first ticket she didn't think to ask to see the radar or anything like that.
Or maybe I'm just getting too cynical in my old age.
My wife--after bragging two months ago that she's never had a speeding ticket--of course screwed with cosmic karma and received one two weeks ago. She was clocked at 43 in a 25, but he only wrote her up for 35 in a 25; this is what the officer wrote on the ticket:
LTI LASER 43-35 REDUC, SHOWN SPEED OF 41 AFTER LOCKING IN 43, 40 + 41
The road is a four lane road on the outskirts of a somewhat small town and for some reason or other, the speed limit is 25 through there as opposed to 35, so it's easy enough to do. I see cops sit there all the time so I'm sure they're well aware of it.
The ticket is only $83 so it's no big deal, but my curiousity is peaked about it because of the following:
He clocked her about a quarter of a mile from a stop light. The light turned red as she approached it. He came up behind her, didn't turn his lights on. They sat through the red light for about a minute, minute and a half. They then drove through the intersection and roughly another quarter to half mile--right as the speed limit sign changed to 35 (and coincidentally enough, right before the town limits), he then turned his lights on and pulled her over.
Is there any WI statute that states how soon--either time or distance wise--after clocking someone that the officer has to pull them over or at least signal their intent to do so? It just seems odd to me that he had time to clock her, pull up behind her, sit at a light behind her, and then pull her over a good quarter to half a mile after the intersection, instead of pulling her over immediately once the light changed and they were through the intersection. There's a good sized shoulder there so it's not like they'd be obstructing traffic any more than where he ended up pulling her over.
Him writing her up as 35 in a 25 instead of 43 in a 25 oddly enough almost makes me question it, too. Like he's trying to make out that he's cutting her a break--and maybe he is (though a warning all things considered would have been better)--but maybe there's something more to it. It being her first ticket she didn't think to ask to see the radar or anything like that.
Or maybe I'm just getting too cynical in my old age.