tagged by laser from bridge

[vigilocanis]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?GA 40-14-9. Evidence obtained in certain areas inadmissible; use of device on hill :. No speed detection device shall be employed by county, municipal, or campus law enforcement officers on any portion of any highway which has a grade in excess of 7 percent

I was tagged by laser device from bridge overpass. Does overpass constitute hill definition.a


GA CHAPTER 14. USE OF SPEED DETECTION AND TRAFFIC-CONTROL SIGNAL MONITORING DEVICES
ARTICLE 2. SPEED DETECTION DEVICES

Also no signs posted as required**************...
O.C.G.A. § 40-14-6 (2011)

§ 40-14-6. Warning signs required (a) Each county, municipality, college, and university using speed detection devices shall erect signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the corporate limits of the municipality, the county boundary, or the boundary of the college or university campus. Such signs shall be at least 24 by 30 inches in area and shall warn approaching motorists that speed detection devices are being employed. No such devices shall be used within 500 feet of any such warning sign erected pursuant to this subsection.

(b) In addition to the signs required under subsection (a) of this Code section, each county, municipality, college, and university using speed detection devices shall erect speed limit warning signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the corporate limits of the municipality, the county boundary, or the boundary of the college or university campus. Such signs shall be at least 24 by 30 inches in area, shall warn approaching motorists of changes in the speed limit, shall be visible plainly from every lane of traffic, shall be viewable in any traffic conditions, and shall not be placed in such a manner that the view of such sign is subject to being obstructed by any other vehicle on such highway. No such devices shall be used within 500 feet of any such warning sign erected pursuant to this subsection.

I saw no such signs on I75 which is also referred to a a state road. Comments?

 

[LillianX]

Does the bridge have a grade of over 7%? It's possible, but unlikely. 7% is pretty steep!

 

[vigilocanis]

Not sure. The law is vague in that it does not define the distance over which the 7% is measured.

 

[asiny]

Not sure. The law is vague in that it does not define the distance over which the 7% is measured.

The law does not define it- mathematics does.

The point the car was tagged (a) to the point of where the officer was (b). Determining the height of where the officer (h) was then the distance between the ground level from the officers height to point (a).. that would give you the % of the slope based on the ° angle.

Of course this is something you may have to prove to the court for your argument.

 

[vigilocanis]

Good point. If the officer was standing on the bridge and the bridge is 30' high and the distance to my car is 1000' on the road, what is the incline angle?

 

[asiny]

Good point. If the officer was standing on the bridge and the bridge is 30' high and the distance to my car is 1000' on the road, what is the incline angle?

5.71° = 10%

On your rough estimate that would give the angle of 1.72°. Which is way below 7%. The officer would have to be 75' to give you that 7% you are looking for.

It would seem your "Evidence obtained in certain areas inadmissible;" argument is not the one to use, sorry.

 

[LillianX]

5.71° = 10%

On your rough estimate that would give the angle of 1.72°. Which is way below 7%. The officer would have to be 75' to give you that 7% you are looking for.

It would seem your "Evidence obtained in certain areas inadmissible;" argument is not the one to use, sorry.

Yeah, this. I spent about an hour last night after the OP posted trying to figure out the slope of one of the very steep bridges in my hometown in NC... it's steep enough that you can take your foot off the accelerator at the top of the bridge and end up about 20mph faster than when you started... and it's only about 1/4 mile long. I ended up calling a family friend this morning who works in the public works department there, and the grade of that bridge is only 4%... still steep. He said that bridges with a grade of 7% exist, but they are usually little foot bridges and the like.

So, OP, this is not an argument you should attempt to make. However, you may have something with the signage argument. I BELIEVE (and we do have some police officers and highway patrolmen here who would probably know for sure) that an interstate is NOT classified as a state highway, except along portions where it is also labelled as such. For example, in MA, portions of I-95 are also state highway 128. The Mass Pike is also I-90.

 

[HighwayMan]

My interpretation is that it applies to the roadway the violator is traveling on. It makes NO difference if the radar/lidar is elevated as the cosine effect will work in the violator's favor.

Seems as though the intent of the statute is to prevent police from citing violators whose vehicles are traveling down significant grades.

 

[csi7]

You can also look at the topographic surveys for your area as well. You would have to consult the department in your area that handles that, and they will give you the numbers on the official survey.

 

[vigilocanis]

on another question

thks for the math help. I actually found a slope or incline caalculator on line.

What experience do you have with this speeding defense?.... The officer got me with laser from an interstate overpass, then drove in a direction away from the interstate to entrance ramp to interstate where he had to turn left across lanes and then drive approximately one to two miles before pulling me over. There is no way he could have maintained visual contact while driving perpendicular to the interstate then turning in the direction of my car unless he lowered the laser and put it in its case or on the seat, looked in his rear view mirror to leave the bridge, nad then turn and drive to my car without taking his eyes off my common colored suv. Any advice from anyone on that defense?

 

[HighwayMan]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?GA 40-14-9. Evidence obtained in certain areas inadmissible; use of device on hill :. No speed detection device shall be employed by county, municipal, or campus law enforcement officers on any portion of any highway which has a grade in excess of 7 percent

The more I read this the more I am convinced of my earlier statement. I think you're totally wasting your time with the grade issue. If the roadway you were driving on was relatively flat this defense means nothing.

I saw no such signs on I75 which is also referred to a a state road. Comments?

Doesn't mean one wasn't there.

 

[HighwayMan]

There is no way he could have maintained visual contact

Why are you under the impression that he must maintain visual contact? As long as he can identify your vehicle that should be sufficient in this particular case.

It all depends on what the officer can articulate about his observations.

 

[vigilocanis]

I think that unless the officer has a photographic memory, it is not believable to me that he can prove that he can look through a small scope of a handheld laser at my car which is 1000ft-2000 ft away driving directly towards him while he is located some 25ft above on a bridge, then pull the trigger on the handheld device, look at the reading, record the speed, then watch out for traffic on the bridge while he attempts to apprehend me, loses sight of my car for 15 seconds or so while he drives towards the entrance to the interstate, then is able to pick my car from among many other cars depending only on the quick look at my car through the small scope on his Laser device and then to be able to say without a shadow of doubt that even after losing sight of my vehicle that it is the exact vehicle that he observed through his device.

 

[asiny]

I think that unless the officer has a photographic memory, it is not believable to me that he can prove that he can look through a small scope of a handheld laser at my car which is 1000ft-2000 ft away driving directly towards him while he is located some 25ft above on a bridge, then pull the trigger on the handheld device, look at the reading, record the speed, then watch out for traffic on the bridge while he attempts to apprehend me, loses sight of my car for 15 seconds or so while he drives towards the entrance to the interstate, then is able to pick my car from among many other cars depending only on the quick look at my car through the small scope on his Laser device and then to be able to say without a shadow of doubt that even after losing sight of my vehicle that it is the exact vehicle that he observed through his device.

The 'wasn't me' defence will not pass in court - please don't try it. You'll find yourself laughed at (not literally).

 

[vigilocanis]

It certainly convinced me when I thought it....how 'bout "my dog commandeered the vehicle at the rest stop while I was asleep"? If my "it wasn't me" defense will be laughed at, the rest of my defense will have the court rolling in the aisles with hysterical guffaws. Candidly, this is one of the few times that the cops were actually wrong....by at least 7-10 mph.