Speeding 53 in a 35mph zone & no ins

[Icelegend22]

What is the name of your state? Texas

A few days ago I got two tickets: one for going 53 mph in a 35 and another for no insurance. My radar, that I've had for five years that's prevented me from receiving several tickets, never went off which leads me to believe the cop might have only thought he clocked me. I'm pleading not guilty and I'm scheduling the trial on the officers day off. If I get my speeding ticket dropped, doesn't the "fruit from poisonous tree doctrine" demand that my ticket for no insurance be dropped as well?

Also, when it comes to challenging my speeding ticket how do I go about finding the proper laws? What title do I look for? Public transportation never has anything pertaining to traffic law.

 

[JETX]

I find it particularly interesting that:
1) Your post makes NO claim of your 'innocence', and
2) Your post says that you admit to your radar detector preventing you from "receiving several tickets".

These two lead me to believe that you realize that you are guilty of speeding and as such, you should accept the responsibility for your actions.

Q1) "I'm pleading not guilty and I'm scheduling the trial on the officers day off."
A1) Depending on the issuing authority, the old 'day off' tactic no longer works. I know that in Houston, your day in court is set by the officers 'scheduled court day', not to your convenience. And numerous other agencies make allowances of 'off days'.

Q2) "If I get my speeding ticket dropped, doesn't the "fruit from poisonous tree doctrine" demand that my ticket for no insurance be dropped as well?"
A2) No.

Q3) ""when it comes to challenging my speeding ticket how do I go about finding the proper laws? What title do I look for? Public transportation never has anything pertaining to traffic law."
A3) Look for Texas Statutes, Transportation Code, Title 7 (or any municipal ordinances).

 

[Bravo8]

I would prefer that all of my hearings are scheduled at times when I am not working. I especially enjoy it when I know that the defendant specifically requested it on my "day off". I sure do enjoy being paid overtime for a minimum of 2 hours to appear in court for 20 minutes........at the taxpayer's expense of course! Way to go, slick........

The discovery of you driving without insurance is not a search, so the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine would not apply.

Additionally, even if it was considered a search, the officer had reasonable PC even if it was not accurate. The "search" would therefore be legal. To put it in perspective, if the officer stops you, sees something that a reasonable person would believe to be contraband, and searches your car. During the search, he discovers that the initial "contraband" was not in fact an illegal item, but discovers other contraband, the actual contraband would be legal.

Are you sure the officer obtained your speed by Radar? People often assume that's the case, but many times it is not.

You can afford a Radar detector, but not car insurance? You deserve the ticket, stop trying to be a weasal.

 

[Icelegend22]

ATTENTION HALKET

Pleading “not guilty” inferences my feeling of innocence. Equipped with the “legal education” you claimed to have and looked upon for intelligence in legal matters, can you expect to be looked upon with competence from anyone who needs to redundantly pinpoint the obvious? Furthermore my having a radar only stands to prove that I was mistakenly ticketed, for it has served its purpose well during the occasions I needed to speed. I’m sure the items wouldn’t be as popular as they are if it premised an outcome of guilt in the unlikely event a person were ticketed and taken to trial.

As for the above mentioned statements leading you to believe I'm guilty, far from it. Quite a few citizens pay for tickets because they'd like it to be over and done with, and because an officer’s word is considered law to the nescient citizen. With that being said, its no wonder uncontested officers often think they sit to the right hand of God.

 

[JETX]

Nice speech..... but it doesn't alter the FACT that you were stopped and cited for speeding. Your only apparent defense is "the cop might have only thought he clocked me."

That defense has been tried hundreds (thousands?) of times and virtually NEVER works (without some other independent proof of an error).

Oh, and lets not forget your other 'defense'... that your radar detector (not radar as you claim) hasn't failed you in the past... so the fact that you got caught this time is prima facie evidence that the officer really wasn't 'gunning' for you. I would love to see the courts response to that 'defense'!!!

Simply, you got caught speeding. You have made NO statement on this forum that you were NOT speeding..... only that you shouldn't have gotten caught. You obviously have NO idea how 'pulse' radar guns work. Simply, the gun does not transmit a signal until the officer aims and 'fires'. And the instant he does, your speed is read. So, literally, the instant your detector goes off.... you are already caught. And there are lots of cases where detectors malfunction and go active when a radar is not present.... or even don't go off when one is present. Finally, lets not forget the fact that NONE of us even knows what type of detector you have..... or what type of speed control gun the officer was using. Could be laser, or X band, or K band, or even XK band. Or could be from the side or back... LOTS of factors must be considered when evaluating (and challenging) radar-issued tickets.

So, get off your high horse, realize that you got caught for once (of many) and pay your fine. Or, go ahead and challenge the ticket in court. Personally, I feel that you have ZERO, nada, zip chance of success.

 

[Icelegend22]

ATTENTION BRAVO8

It’s truly a shame that good policemen where killed during the collapse of the World Trade Center, and your type remains untouched.

You openly joke about being overpaid at taxpayers expense, with a preference of going to court during your off days, a rote remark no less that indicates dishonesty that should warrant your immediate termination.

Having a radar has nothing to do with someone’s financial status. Stupid policeman, I refuse to waste money on insurance when I'm a careful driver, especially when I have enough money saved in the unfortunate event something like that should happen. Indeed, I deserve this ticket no more than you deserve to be an officer. Never sully my post with your skewed logic again.

 

[Icelegend22]

RE:HALKET

Just forget it; clearly this situation is far beyond your ken and I’ll discard parts of your advice as I see fit. Since I didn’t pay for this advice I guess the most I can say is thanks for trying.

 

[JETX]

Ice-boy: Tell you what.... you need to contact a local attorney right away. Make sure that you get his business card with a 24-hour contact number.... because with a juvenile, whiny, full of crap attitude like yours.... you will definitely need it.

Have a happy day.... and grow up and pay your damn ticket.

And go ahead... reply with more of your 'screw society' BS as we all know you will.

 

[Icelegend22]

Halket

How childish and ungallant you are to reduce such a discussion to the crudest terms imaginable. Reading comprehension must have been a subject not covered in your "legal education." If it were, you would have understood my last reply was not meant to be rude or nasty.

If understanding what someone wrote is so troubling, show it to an educated adult or ask the author about it. Not really that difficult Halket. You've chosen to lampoon my post from the start and by your becoming unreceptive to like treatment, its no wonder my subsequent response has become substrate to your bellicosity.

By the way, "we" as used in the last sentence of your reply was used incorrectly; no antecedent precedes it! Also, here in the United States single quotation marks are used between quotes, or in headlines of newspapers where double quotation marks would otherwise appear, smarty!

 

[JETX]

Whine, whine.... when you know you're wrong, change to personal attacks, right???

In any case, pay your damn ticket. You have NO defense... and your insistance that you are above the law ("during the occasions I needed to speed"). And your total disregard for common sense and others is exhibited in your statement, "I refuse to waste money on insurance when I'm a careful driver".

If you were truly such a 'careful driver', you wouldn't need the radar detector!!

Have fun... pay your ticket.... grow up.

 

[Icelegend22]

Tying subjects together that have no relation to one another is downright pedantic. When using quotation marks put periods within the quotation except when a parenthetical reference follows the quotation.

 

[JETX]

You said, "When using quotation marks put periods within the quotation except when a parenthetical reference follows the quotation."

Obviously you forgot that the above does NOT apply when the energizing plain reacts with the third nucleonic factor, thereby causing a complete upheaval of the pedantic idiom and repetitive spires.

This oversight of the particulated "Rule of Reactives" is a very common mistake for those who either never graduated from high school or those that graduated from A&M with honors.

And while you are thinking about it... pay your damn ticket!! We need the tax money to purchase MORE traffic enforcement radar units!

 

[Icelegend22]

You're about to take this to a new level. Trust me; I almost never lose.

 

[JETX]

"Almost Never"?? What a confidence builder!!

 

[Icelegend22]

Still don't understand the use of parenthesis do you?