Speeding in PA - 53 in 35

[pagotto]

Received a ticket today for what the officer claims was a 53 in a 35. I am positive that I was not going that fast as when I saw the lights behind me, I looked down at my odometer and was going literally 35. Officer was incredibly rude. When I mentioned that I thought that I was going 35, he proceeded to state that "then you are calling me a liar, which I'm not." He literally walked back after writing the ticket, handed it to me with the information, and stated "Plead not guilty if you want" and walked away. He did not ask me to sign the ticket, instead writing "ISSUED TO DEFDT" in the signature area. What are my best avenues to fight this? Thanks in advance for your help

 

[seniorjudge]

Received a ticket today for what the officer claims was a 53 in a 35. I am positive that I was not going that fast as when I saw the lights behind me, I looked down at my odometer and was going literally 35. Officer was incredibly rude. When I mentioned that I thought that I was going 35, he proceeded to state that "then you are calling me a liar, which I'm not." He literally walked back after writing the ticket, handed it to me with the information, and stated "Plead not guilty if you want" and walked away. He did not ask me to sign the ticket, instead writing "ISSUED TO DEFDT" in the signature area. What are my best avenues to fight this? Thanks in advance for your help

If you cannot prove you were doing 35 mph or less, then you have no defense.

 

[pagotto]

Just noticed as I was about to send in the citation that next to the speed, where boxes are listed for the way the speed was determined (ie. Radar, clocked, A.O.V., ESP, Vascar) no boxed is checked. Is this an appropriate technicality to mention at trial?

 

[seniorjudge]

Just noticed as I was about to send in the citation that next to the speed, where boxes are listed for the way the speed was determined (ie. Radar, clocked, A.O.V., ESP, Vascar) no boxed is checked. Is this an appropriate technicality to mention at trial?

If you cannot prove you were doing 35 mph or less, then you have no defense.

 

[loulblades]

At the risk of getting hammered by the "morality" crowd, I personally would motion for dismissal due to predjucation of my special rights etc etc. A poster on here several months ago used this defense to obtain a dismissal and you should search for it because the wording used was so "eloquent". I wouldn't depend on that as the only defense though.

Contrary to what some others post here, your goal is not to prove that you were going within the speed limit (which would be near impossible to prove in most cases once you have been cited unless you could present some objective evidence) but that the state has presented a proper basis for the evidence against you.

As always Good Luck (it helps when facing a PA magistrate).

 

[seniorjudge]

At the risk of getting hammered by the "morality" crowd, I personally would motion for dismissal due to predjucation of my special rights etc etc. A poster on here several months ago used this defense to obtain a dismissal and you should search for it because the wording used was so "eloquent". I wouldn't depend on that as the only defense though.

Contrary to what some others post here, your goal is not to prove that you were going within the speed limit (which would be near impossible to prove in most cases once you have been cited unless you could present some objective evidence) but that the state has presented a proper basis for the evidence against you.

As always Good Luck (it helps when facing a PA magistrate).

...predjucation of my special rights....

I give up...what does this mean and what are you talking about?

 

[loulblades]

According to the poster, he used the following at his hearing:

"At this time, I respectfully motion for a dismissal due to predjudication (whoops...spelled that wrong previously) of my special rights, in essence, I wasn't allowed a fair opportunity to prepare a fully cohesive legal defense due to improper, invalid or missing data on the citation."

Just repeating another poster, I have never used that defense even though I was prepared to at my last hearing. It wasn't necessary.

 

[loulblades]

Geesh, I know I can spell (I think). The correct spelling would be "prejudication".

Here is the link to what I am referring to: https://forum.freeadvice.com/archive/index.php/t-234766.html

Originally posted by seniorjudge
If you cannot prove you were doing 35 mph or less, then you have no defense.

If you were somehow able to prove your speed in some objective fashion, barring any special circumstances (like construction or school zone), in PA you would have to show you were doing 45 or less.