Speeding 50 in a 30 zone

[Norton]

What is the name of your state? Massachusetts

Hello,

I was cited for speeing going 50 in a 30 mph zone. I saw the police officer's car right when I turned onto the road and looked at my odometer and it should 35. How accurate are police radar guns? I tried to dispute this with the officer. Also, there was a truck in front of me as well but he did not stop the truck drive. I mentioned this to the officer, but all he said was well I got you. Could anyone offer some assistance or feedback on this?

Thanks!

[sukharev]

To make a long story short, fight the ticket in court. You get 2 tries: 1 in magistrate (not the real court), 1 in real court (extra $25).

Your truck story may help, but alone is insufficient. You can testify in court that the truck was right in front of you, and the readings may have come from it, but this would depend on speed measurement device used.

Look at the ticket to see if it was laser, if it was, tell me what was the distance (below the speed reading).

Also, tell me where it happened. Lots of roads have bogus speed limits posted, and no required documentation exists. In such case, you fall under basic speed law, which in MA has a distance requirement. More on that later, if you care.

[Norton]

Hello,

Thank you for your reply! It was checked off rader and estimated. Nothing for laser and blank for clocked. It occurred in the Town of Norton on Plain St. Further down the road it was posted a 30 MPH speed zone. As I mentioned the truck was in front of me and I looked at my speedometer and it showed 35. Do you know if regualr radar guns are accurate and how they stand up in court? Thanks again for assistance!!!

[sukharev]

Radar guns are only accurate under ideal conditions. Since you had a truck in front of you, you have a probable interference/ghost reading issue.

That said, save this for the court. In magistrate, your only chance is that the street had no special regulation for speed. Find on the ticket what was the statute you were cited with (for example, 90-17 or 90-18). If it's one of those, then basic speed law is your friend, but you have to use it carefully. How far away were you from the officer when he first saw your car?

[Norton]

He marked 90-17 on the ticket and was about 300 ft i would say from when he first spotted the car.

[Norton]

What do you mean by "then basic speed law is your friend, but you have to use it carefully"? What do you have to be careful about when speaking before the court/magistrate. I have an excellent driving record. The ticket was for $200 and the officer let the driver to the truck continue going w/o stopping him/her. Thank you again!

[sukharev]

Originally Posted by Norton

He marked 90-17 on the ticket and was about 300 ft i would say from when he first spotted the car.

Bingo! Get him to say it, and you are home free (look up 90-17 and site it to magistrate). If he does not show up, just say that he was 300 ft away (show the map and your location to prove it). But, you need to establish that there was no special speed regulation first. Call up the city hall to find out if there is one.

[Norton]

The only additional thing is that it is on the same street as a school but posted speed further down the road shows 30MPH. This is a middle school 9AM-3PM. He stopped me at 7AM. What is 90-17? Thank you again!

[sukharev]

Here it is: [url]http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/90-17.htm[/url]

You also need [url]http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/90-18.htm[/url]

School zone is irrelevant. You need special speed regulation per 90-18 above. City hall has it or not. If not, speed limit posted is a default one, and 90-17 applies. All you need is a note from city hall stating that no special regulation for that street was found. Present that at the hearing, and state that the sign was illegal. They would reply that in such case if was still 30 (default limit). You happily reply, yes, but you have to be observed for 1/8 mile traveling above this limit as a prima facie evidence of speeding. Radar or not, does not matter. It's the MA specific law, and magistrate would have no choice but to find you not responsible.

[Norton]

If city hall says that there is a special regulation for that street in Norton, then would I be found responsible. I have never appeared in court or in front of a magistrate. I feel I'll probably be very nervous when I do appear before the magistrate. I'll bring copies with me on both 90-17 & 90-18. I'll also go and speak to someone. Norton is a small town. It has a town hall. I think Taunton might be the City Hall governing it? I'm not sure. I have not lived in Norton very long. Thank you again and have a nice weekend!!!

[sukharev]

If there is a special regulation, then you have to prepare for court defense, and there try to argue that radar was not calibrated, truck generated false readings, grill officer on distance/time to find out that you could not be going 50 mph, etc. There are a variety of defense strategies, but your best bet is that officer would not show up. This happened to me, and can happen to you, too.

Take it one step at a time, though. Find out if there is no special regulation, and get it in writing from town/city hall.

[Norton]

Hi,
I talked to my boyfriend Friday night when I got home about the ticket and all. I mentioned what you had noted that if the officer doesn't show then the ticket would get dismissed. My boyfriend told me 2 yrs ago he had to appear before the magistrate Sullivan (Attleboro court) to fight a ticket, and the officer that stopped him was not present but rather a representative from the police station. He said he was found responsible even though the officer that pulled him over was not there. I had alwasy thought if the officer that stops you is not present, then the ticket gets waived. Could you please answer this? Thank you again!!

[sukharev]

Originally Posted by Norton

Hi,
I talked to my boyfriend Friday night when I got home about the ticket and all. I mentioned what you had noted that if the officer doesn't show then the ticket would get dismissed. My boyfriend told me 2 yrs ago he had to appear before the magistrate Sullivan (Attleboro court) to fight a ticket, and the officer that stopped him was not present but rather a representative from the police station. He said he was found responsible even though the officer that pulled him over was not there. I had alwasy thought if the officer that stops you is not present, then the ticket gets waived. Could you please answer this? Thank you again!!

Yes, indeed. This is because magistrate appearance is not a trial. You get to state your case (which is typically none), then hear the words "responsible". In a few cases, you can talk your way out of it (and a good lawyer can do that even better). However, no rules of civil/criminal procedure apply, so officer does not have to be there, and prosecution does not have to prove anything. That is why your only chance is the basic speed law, as I described, and maybe a little bit of charm. Don't admit you were speeding, just stick to the fact that speed limit was not established by special regulation, therefore prima facie rule applies: have to be observed for 1/8 mile.

If you are still found responsible at magistrate hearing, you can pay $25 and appear in real court, where officer has to be present and you get to argue your case.

[Norton]

So in your situation that you mentioned previously on Friday did your case go to court after a magistrate hearing and the officer that stopped you was not present? I'm planning on stopping by Norton's Town Hall before they close today to find out if there is a special regulation on speed limit for Plain St.

[sukharev]

Here is a good link (does not have Norton, but you can see why I recommended this defense): [url]http://www.motorists.org/ma/s.html[/url]

As for your last question, yes, I had this happen to me 3 years ago (when I used a lawyer and he was a waste of my money and lost magistrate hearing).

I also had a ticket dismissed myself at magistrate hearing 1 year ago, using this defense. They had no choice, as distance was written on a ticket, and I had a letter from government stating there was no special regulation.

For anyone reading this and getting all worked up about avoiding responsibility, etc. - both tickets were 10 mph over, which I got in a speed trap going at speed limit, but of course if you try to prove that, you are always found responsible, just like many innocent motorists are every day in Massachusetts.