Got a ticket, but never saw radar or was told how fast i was going

[evans029]

What is the name of your state? Iowa
I was recently driving along a divided highway when a cop drove by me on the other side, i was going around 90 in a 65. I have a radar detector and it didnt go off at all so i don't think he his radar on. The cop then turned around and pulled behind me, at this point i had slowed down to the speed limit. Then my radar detector started going crazy. And sure enough the highway patrol man pulled me over and comes up and gives me this line about honesty and stuff and how he wanted the truth and asked me how fast i was going. I tried tellin him i didnt know and he really started sweating me and i was like i dont know maybe "60 70 80 90..i really dont know" then he comes back from his car with a ticket for 90 mph. I signed it and then he just walked off and never told me how fast i was actually going or what he clocked me at. I don't think he ever got me on radar. Would it work to go to court and say i dont htink i was speeding and the cop was just pressuring me into saying i was?

[racer72]

Would it work to go to court and say i dont htink i was speeding and the cop was just pressuring me into saying i was?

Sure you can. And when the officer testifies about what he saw, who do you think the judge will believe?

[CdwJava]

You do realize that the officer can make a visual estimation of your speed, right? He does not NEED to get a hit with the radar to estimate your speed. And all because your radar detector did not go off did not mean that he was not using the radar or that it was not on a frequency that your detector could not read.

- Carl

[Dougthegreat]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

You do realize that the officer can make a visual estimation of your speed, right?

I don't know about the OP, but I didn't realize this. Many states assign more penalties to higher speeding violations, so will the court believe any number the officer states, or does he have to substantiate his claim?

[Curt581]

Originally Posted by Dougthegreat

I don't know about the OP, but I didn't realize this. Many states assign more penalties to higher speeding violations, so will the court believe any number the officer states, or does he have to substantiate his claim?

He has to articulate his judgement of the driver's speed. There is no other way to "substantiate" most any traffic violation.

If I see you run a stop sign, what would I have to substantiate it, beyond my testimony of what I saw?

If I saw you speeding, and used radar to verify my estimation of your speed, what substatiates this? Radars don't print out receipts, and we obviously can't keep the radar display locked until the court date.

The substantiation is the officer's testimony of what he saw.

The courts tend to give police officers a presumption of impartiality. Unlike the defendant, the officer has no vested interest in the outcome of the case. He doesn't stand to gain or lose anything, hence, there is no incentive for the officer to lie.

[Robbie0723]

Was there other traffic?

Visual estimates are very easy and accurate when made relative to surrounding traffic. You can probably estimate to within 5 mph without training.

Most modern radar units now have a rear facing mode where the officer can wait until you pass to get a reading. This greatly minimizes forward radar warning and many radar detections are much less sensitive to signals from the rear of the unit.

[evans029]

well i had slowed down by the time he passed me because i could see him, it was also on a divided highway which i think would make estimating my speed pretty difficult when he was traveling the other way. i'm 18 and have a clean driving record which is pretty rare....do you think pointing this out to the judge could give me some leverage?

[Robbie0723]

25+ is a misdemeanor and risks licence suspension in Iowa. The penalties may be more strict if under 21.

[URL=http://www.godmv.com/ia-iowa/traffic-school.htm]Traffic School [/URL] might be an option.

An 18 YO accused doing 90 in a 65 probably would not have much chance in court arguing against a trained law enforcement officer. An experience lawyer with the right connections could be a different story.