![]() |
| ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| | |||||||||||||
| |||||||
| | |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
| |||
| |||
Prosecution questionI have a question about the prosecution of my speeding ticket. I was on a college campus and the campus police officer 'claims' that I was speeding 19 miles in a 10 mph speed limit. He sent a summons stating that I was speeding and resisting and evading. I filed a motion to produce a number of items. I recieved the information: there was no tape either visual or audio that demonstrates me supposedly running from him, there was no tape or print out from the speed gun. It is his word against mine...not to mention that i have a witness in the vehicle during this period. This officer has recently quit his job with campus security and has been hired on to the city police force. I am doing this cas pro se, so the magistrate told me that he (the cop) has to prosecute the case (not the DA). So....here are my questions: 1. Can this cop prosecute a ticket against a person when he is no longer employed by that agency (State University)? 2.) Does the calibration certificate have to be certified? I would appreciate any information that might help me to dismiss this case/ or try it. Thanks eergael |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
__________________ There are two rules for success: (1) Never tell everything you know. |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
eergael's stateI live in New Mexico. |
|
#4
| |||
| |||
| There are some things you need to keep in mind. Firstly, the officer does not need any video footage. Secondly, I don't know of any radar units that produce any sort of printout, so again, not necessary. In fact, a radar reading isn't even actually required because an officer that has gone through radar training has actually been trained to VISUALLY estimate speeds. Also, my guess is your witness won't mean squat. The officer is considered to be an unbiased, uninterested party, while you and your witness have obvious reasons to bend the truth.
__________________ Due to popular demand, I have edited my signature: I may have "Senior Member" status, but that's because I know more than you! |
|
#5
| |||
| |||
| It's VERY easy to confuse police officers on the stand and create reasonable doubt in the eyes of the judge or magistrate. I speak from experience, if you want to get off of minor traffic violations, you almost always can. It's a matter of how much time you want to put into research. |
|
#6
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
But, to each his own. - Carl
__________________ A Nor Cal Cop Sergeant "Make mine a double mocha ... And a croissant!" He Who Kneels Before God Can Stand Before Anyone ....author unknown |
|
#7
| |||
| |||
| I agree with Carl. I've yet to see evidence to support Blaker's claim, and I have sat in on a lot of traffic cases. The closest I've seen is when the defendant hires a traffic attorney, and what usually results is some sort of plea bargain; I've yet to see a traffic attorney successfully create doubt from an officer's testimony. I'm not saying it's impossible, I just haven't seen it yet.
__________________ Due to popular demand, I have edited my signature: I may have "Senior Member" status, but that's because I know more than you! |
![]() |