Speeding Ticket in Ambiguous Speed Limit Area

[golfertilltheen]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NJ


Hi everyone. I was pulled over in NJ for speeding recently. I have NO prior speeding tickets in 11 years of driving.

I was coming down a road that I know to be residential, and was going 25-30.

Starting going downhill towards a little bridge over a lake, where I though the limit was 35**************I THOUGHT I was going maybe 40-42 or so....probably too fast.

Cop pulls me over and said I was doing 48 in a 25.


I went back and took pictures, and sure enough, the spot where I got pulled over is in an "ambiguous speed limit zone", as I would call it.

The 25-35 transition going one way and 35-25 transition going the other way occur in spots separated by over 800 ft, so there's a region in the middle where the speed limit is different in different directions (huh?)


I am accustomed to travelling this road in the one direction, so I thought the limit was 35 in the area that I was going 40-42.


I explained to the office that I was unfamiliar with the road, but acknowledged I may have been going a bit too fast.

He knew that I had no prior tickets and he knew my unfamiliarity. Rather than giving me a "warning" by giving me, say, a 44 or 45 in a 35 (still get a ticket and "learn your lesson"), he completely RAILED me and gave me the worst possible differential that could have been possible.....48 in a 25.

This is really bad....$200, but worse off, 4 points.


I have evidence to prove the speed limit being different in different directions**************should I go to the prosecutor and just try to pay down the points (which I believe, in NJ, is what almost always happens).

Or should I bother even trying to explain why I think the original ticket (48 in 25) is under unfair circumstances, and FIRST try to ask them to lower it to 48 in 35 or 44 in 35 or something, before trying to then pay down a 2-point offense?


I am not sure what to do here......I am a good guy with a perfectly clean record that got completely screwed over by a lack of knowledge of the area and signs that are inconsistent with each other.

I admit I was going a LITTLE too fast, but I know I wasn't going 48 (combination my speedo/his radar could easily be +/- 4 mph) and I honestly thought that it was 35 there.

I am not sure why he chose to screw me over as bad as possible, rather than giving me a lower ticket which would still get me to slow down a little in the future.


Thanks! Sorry for long story.....

 

[HighwayMan]

The 25-35 transition going one way and 35-25 transition going the other way occur in spots separated by over 800 ft, so there's a region in the middle where the speed limit is different in different directions (huh?)

Why are you concerned with the other side of the road? It doesn't matter what the speed limit is for opposite bound traffic.

Your speed limit is based on the last sign that you passed. Period.

 

[golfertilltheen]

Why are you concerned with the other side of the road? It doesn't matter what the speed limit is for opposite bound traffic.

Your speed limit is based on the last sign that you passed. Period.

This is not advice. I asked for advice, not criticism!

I understand that, I am simply saying i have only really travelled the road in one direction.


I actually doesn't seem like there is any other reason for the signs to be like that OTHER than that it is a speed trap.

Both sides of the road in this region have no houses an are identically similar.



So, any advice?

 

[HighwayMan]

This is not advice. I asked for advice, not criticism!

You don't seem to understand that the other side of the road does not matter. I was informing you of that but I guess that does not suit you. That would not be the only roadway in the area where the speed limits change in different places on different sides of the road.

If you are going to mount a defense to the speeding charge, relying on that will get you one place - nowhere.

 

[Zigner]

This is not advice. I asked for advice, not criticism!

I understand that, I am simply saying i have only really travelled the road in one direction.


I actually doesn't seem like there is any other reason for the signs to be like that OTHER than that it is a speed trap.

Both sides of the road in this region have no houses an are identically similar.



So, any advice?

Yes, I would advise you to not even MENTION the other side of the road as it has no bearing on your offense.

I would also advise you to drive more slowly and obey the speed limit.

 

[golfertilltheen]

Wow, this is an absolutely terrible forum so far.....it says "outstanding advice".


Neither person who has responded has provided me any good information with how to handle the situation from this forward in the best possible manner.

 

[Zigner]

Wow, this is an absolutely terrible forum so far.....it says "outstanding advice".


Neither person who has responded has provided me any good information with how to handle the situation from this forward in the best possible manner.

We are telling you that your "evidence" of the speed being different in the other direction has absolutely no bearing on your offense.

Yeesh!

 

[golfertilltheen]

I understand that, and I get your point.


However, in nearly all circumstances, polie officers and/or judges seem to give you a SMALL break due to 1) being unfamiliar 2) differences in speedos on cars 3) radar perhaps a few off (Doppler effect? haha).


That being said, I am wondering why the cop didn't give me 44 in a 35 or something. Certainly would teach me to slow down there!

However, he took the HIGHEST possible radar reading he had (he told me.....get this.....that he had me at 44, and then I SPED up as he pulled out behind me......which makes no sense, bc as soon as i passed him, I knew it was a cop and took my foot off the gas immediately).

....and also, he used 25 rather than 35, even when I informed him I am unfamiliar with the area and that I have a perfectly clean record.


In other experiences, I have been pulled over for going a little fast (say 75 on an 65 interstate), and every time, the office is kind and simply says "slow down a little bit".


It seems like these local officers are really just out to nail people for as much money as possible.....

 

[davew128]

I understand that, and I get your point.

Which of course explains why you are arguing.

However, in nearly all circumstances, polie officers and/or judges seem to give you a SMALL break due to 1) being unfamiliar 2) differences in speedos on cars 3) radar perhaps a few off (Doppler effect? haha).

Then go to court and find out.

That being said, I am wondering why the cop didn't give me 44 in a 35 or something. Certainly would teach me to slow down there!

Go ask him.

 

[JustAPal00]

I understand that, and I get your point.


However, in nearly all circumstances, polie officers and/or judges seem to give you a SMALL break due to 1) being unfamiliar 2) differences in speedos on cars 3) radar perhaps a few off (Doppler effect? haha).


That being said, I am wondering why the cop didn't give me 44 in a 35 or something. Certainly would teach me to slow down there!

However, he took the HIGHEST possible radar reading he had (he told me.....get this.....that he had me at 44, and then I SPED up as he pulled out behind me......which makes no sense, bc as soon as i passed him, I knew it was a cop and took my foot off the gas immediately).

....and also, he used 25 rather than 35, even when I informed him I am unfamiliar with the area and that I have a perfectly clean record.


In other experiences, I have been pulled over for going a little fast (say 75 on an 65 interstate), and every time, the office is kind and simply says "slow down a little bit".


It seems like these local officers are really just out to nail people for as much money as possible.....

I think you're a little confused on how speed limits work. When you're driving in a 25mph zone and see a "35mph ahead" sign, it is still 25mph until you reach the next speed limit sign that should say "speed limit 35mph". That first sign is a warning that the speed limit is about to change. It doesn't mean the speed limit is somewhere between 25-35 mph until you reach the 35mph sign. So you were still in a 25mph zone when pulled over. Now the officer could have given you a warning, but not only were you accelerating too soon, but you were already going faster then the speed limit ahead. I can see why he gave you the ticket.

 

[HighwayMan]

However, in nearly all circumstances, polie officers and/or judges seem to give you a SMALL break due to 1) being unfamiliar 2) differences in speedos on cars 3) radar perhaps a few off (Doppler effect? haha).

How can you say "nearly all circumstances"? Do you spend that much time in court? Doppler effect is already taken into account when the speed is displayed on the radar set and it's always in YOUR favor.

That being said, I am wondering why the cop didn't give me 44 in a 35 or something.

Maybe because he wrote you for what his radar set displayed and he didn't want to lie about that or the speed zone either?

However, he took the HIGHEST possible radar reading he had

And? That was probably the speed displayed when he hit the "lock" button on the radar set.

....and also, he used 25 rather than 35, even when I informed him I am unfamiliar with the area and that I have a perfectly clean record.

What a sense of entitlement you have. Your prior record has NO bearing on anything while on the side of the road. Why should it? You wouldn't think it was so fair if the situation was reversed, would you? (i.e. you had a bad record and that prompted the officer to write you instead of warn).

If you are unfamiliar with the area then you should be driving slower and paying even more attention to posted signs and pavements markings instead of ignoring them.

In other experiences, I have been pulled over for going a little fast (say 75 on an 65 interstate), and every time, the office is kind and simply says "slow down a little bit".

So then you should count your blessings that you've gotten so many warnings. Your luck finally ran out and I don't think you have any right to complain about that.

It seems like these local officers are really just out to nail people for as much money as possible.....

Yes, of course. Everyone who gets caught and written blames their plight on this. Never mind that the officer is just doing what he's supposed to do. Same people who say things like "why don't you go catch some murderers or drug dealers instead of harassing me" when they get pulled over.


You came here looking for advice. You presented your side and you've been told that you have no argument but you don't accept that and then you blame us.

Send in a "not guilty" and go to court. See what, if anything, the prosecutor offers you and take it from there. Maybe he will reduce your speed to something you consider appropriate for your situation.

 

[golfertilltheen]

Unfortunately, the advice I am being given sounds very different than what I have already been given by some friends who are lawyer.


I am looking for advice on what I can do to make the outcome the least terrible for me.


"Same people who say things like "why don't you go catch some murderers or drug dealers instead of harassing me" when they get pulled over."

The problem is that it is true.

I and many others routinely see police hiding in speed trap areas, etc., doling out expensive tickets for relatively minor infractions, which brings in tons of money to the local gov't.


.....however, I routinely sit at dangerous intersections and watch people run red lights......an infraction which can SERIOUSLY injure other people**************.but there are never any officers to be found!

I don't know much about police officers, but I doubt this is by THEIR choice.....probably a top down decision, right?


Why not post up officers at dangerous intersections and give out tickets for people running red lights??? I almost never ever see this, but always see people running lights in extremely aggregious manners.


Meanwhile, they are giving out tickets for going 10 or 15 over in an area where there aren't even any people or other cars!



It jusn't isn't congruent with the notion of "protecting the public"**************.someone going 10 over in a rural area is not really of any threat to anyone other than themself, but the idiot who blatantly goes through a stale red light is going to wind up killing someone and probably himself.



....so that is my major issue with this type of practice......allocation of resources that does not appear to be congruent with "protecting the public"

.....the allocation of resources instead appears to be aligned with "which strategy can bring in the most money"

 

[HighwayMan]

Unfortunately, the advice I am being given sounds very different than what I have already been given by some friends who are lawyer.

So? Then why are you even here? Are they traffic attorneys who practice in New Jersey?

"Same people who say things like "why don't you go catch some murderers or drug dealers instead of harassing me" when they get pulled over."

The problem is that it is true.

Great. Let's pull all the police off of every enforcement detail and put them all on drug dealer and murderer surveillance. I'm sure that would be very successful.

.....however, I routinely sit at dangerous intersections and watch people run red lights......an infraction which can SERIOUSLY injure other people**************.but there are never any officers to be found!

But then when a red light camera is installed or some directed enforcement is done the whiners like you come out in force to complain about revenue generation yet again.


All you have to do is look at any red light camera thread - it's always the same.

No matter what enforcement is done there are complaints. You committed an offense, you got caught. Live with it.

Go fight it out in court like everyone else. If you have one of your friends represent you then you should be all set.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Why are you trying to negotiate your guilt here by haranguing members. Highwayman gave you sound legal advice. If you don't like the ticket, deal with the judge or prosecutor. If the officer did not give you a break, it is probably due to your argumentative demeanor. Good Luck.

 

[golfertilltheen]

Great. Let's pull all the police off of every enforcement detail and put them all on drug dealer and murderer surveillance. I'm sure that would be very successful.
[\QUOTE]

Oops, I wasn't clear.....I didn't mean that they should be doing that ^, just that the allocation of resources is sadly misplaced......in a suburban little town with no crime, there is nothing better for them to do than pull people over for minor infractions.....very, very sad.

Why are you trying to negotiate your guilt here by haranguing members. Highwayman gave you sound legal advice. If you don't like the ticket, deal with the judge or prosecutor. If the officer did not give you a break, it is probably due to your argumentative demeanor. Good Luck.

No one here has yet given me advice on what the best strategy is to minimize the monetary damage (this includes the ticket and associated cost of a potential increase in auto insruance).


I have found other forums that DID give such advice, but was simply trying to get another point of view here......but all I got was "you messed up"**************.yeah, no ****, but that is not advice.