84 in a 55...pleaded not guilty NEED HELP

[loulblades]

Whether you were going over the speed limit or not isn't the issue. The issue is whether or not the state can prove you were going over the speed limit and the speed limit was valid (along with some other procedural issues).

By the time I went to the hearing for my first speeding citation (97 in 65) a couple years ago I had at least 8 folders with defenses. These included officer no-show, calibration, judicial notice among others and I received a not guilty.

Accepting "responsibility" by taking your punishment like a man (or woman) is "crap". If you paid a fine and that were the end of it that would be one thing but it's not. Speeding has been turned into a crime against the "common good" and... oh don't get me started. Although I believe it has alot to do with easy income (although I know cdw will disagree) for the state.

BTW, was I doing 97? Never admit it because that is pleading guilty. If you are tagged with speeding as a result of radar/lidar/timing etc. it is near impossible as a defendant to prove otherwise so you must stick to the technical issues.

Once again, good luck because that can't hurt.

 

[JETX]

Whether you were going over the speed limit or not isn't the issue.

ROTFLMAO!!!
Of course it is THE issue, you nitwit!!!

The issue is whether or not the state can prove you were going over the speed limit and the speed limit was valid (along with some other procedural issues).

They don't have to PROVE anything. It will simply be the officers word against the cited drivers..... and the officer will usually, barring some incredible situation, win that one.

By the time I went to the hearing for my first speeding citation (97 in 65) a couple years ago I had at least 8 folders with defenses. These included officer no-show, calibration, judicial notice among others and I received a not guilty.

Wonderful. A miscarriage of justice for you... means absolutely NOTHING in other cases.

Accepting "responsibility" by taking your punishment like a man (or woman) is "crap". If you paid a fine and that were the end of it that would be one thing but it's not. Speeding has been turned into a crime against the "common good" and... oh don't get me started. Although I believe it has alot to do with easy income (although I know cdw will disagree) for the state.

Oh, I just love these nitwit 'jailhouse lawyers' who somehow think that the laws don't apply to them.... usually because they don't 'like' them!!

 

[sukharev]

Whether you were going over the speed limit or not isn't the issue. The issue is whether or not the state can prove you were going over the speed limit and the speed limit was valid (along with some other procedural issues).

By the time I went to the hearing for my first speeding citation (97 in 65) a couple years ago I had at least 8 folders with defenses. These included officer no-show, calibration, judicial notice among others and I received a not guilty.

Accepting "responsibility" by taking your punishment like a man (or woman) is "crap". If you paid a fine and that were the end of it that would be one thing but it's not. Speeding has been turned into a crime against the "common good" and... oh don't get me started. Although I believe it has alot to do with easy income (although I know cdw will disagree) for the state.

BTW, was I doing 97? Never admit it because that is pleading guilty. If you are tagged with speeding as a result of radar/lidar/timing etc. it is near impossible as a defendant to prove otherwise so you must stick to the technical issues.

Once again, good luck because that can't hurt.

LB, thanks for good points, it's great to know this stuff works and is not "crap"

 

[sukharev]

They don't have to PROVE anything. It will simply be the officers word against the cited drivers.....

It's the LAW, stupid

MUTCD is not just a manual, it is the law and every speed limit has to be established according to it, unless overriden by local law (for example, MA has its own speed limit law, also requires documentation).

 

[loulblades]

If I can get a "not guilty" on the technical issues (not the word of the officer against mine) when someone else says I can't, I wonder who the "nitwit" is.

And a "miscarriage of justice" would be when a person is found guilty in a court when they did nothing wrong not the other way around.

"Better to let ten criminals go free than to convict a single innocent party"

 

[s next2 the a]

ive been going on the speed regulation website but i still cant find how the speed of 55 was established when it is 65 everywhere else on the highway...can somebody help with this?

 

[sukharev]

ive been going on the speed regulation website but i still cant find how the speed of 55 was established when it is 65 everywhere else on the highway...can somebody help with this?

Find out who maintains/owns the road, then call them up. Be very specific about the location (down to the milepost). If they say no such document exists, get that from them in writing (e-mail is fine). It can certainly happen, I know for a fact that some speed limits are either old signs (PA used to have 55 as top limit), or were posted without proper procedure.

 

[JETX]

e-mail is fine

ROTFLMAO!!
More ignorance ..... the court will NOT accept an 'email' on something like this. If it exists at all (unlikely), it will be required to be in writing, on the agency letterhead, signed by an authorized person... and even then, may not be acceptable. Most courts want the 'testimonial evidence' in person... where it can be questioned and subject to examination.

It can certainly happen, I know for a fact that some speed limits are either old signs (PA used to have 55 as top limit), or were posted without proper procedure.

Yep... like in maybe 1% or less of the cases!!

 

[sukharev]

ROTFLMAO!!
More ignorance ..... the court will NOT accept an 'email' on something like this. If it exists at all (unlikely), it will be required to be in writing, on the agency letterhead, signed by an authorized person... and even then, may not be acceptable. Most courts want the 'testimonial evidence' in person... where it can be questioned and subject to examination.

Give it a rest, you clearly don't know what you are talking about. I have used e-mail successfully for this purpose, and the court will accept the printout. Of course, letterhead, etc. is better, but much harder to get. This is a statement from an agency about ABSENCE of a document, so they are not required to give you anything, unless it is an official FOIA request, which only works for government agencies.

And yes, most of the time the signs are posted for a reason, but in many cases this reason is either forgotten or not documented properly. However, in many cases even if it's documented, road survey may not be done or out of date (required to be recent, like within 5 years). Again, this is the law that is frequently overriden by local regulations, so it has to be researched in detail. I don't know the road OP has been ticketed on, so I cannot provide any more details, but he is directed towards the right sources and with some effort will find the information.

 

[You Are Guilty]

Give it a rest, you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

Pot, kettle, how do you do?

I have used e-mail successfully for this purpose,

And a layperson's anecdotal evidence is worth how much again?

and the court will accept the printout.

Well, thank you Kreskin. That's a mightly strong statement on Evidence you make there (and which just happens to be contrary to oh, 200 years of caselaw).

Of course, letterhead, etc. is better, but much harder to get.

Letterhead is, for legal purposes, just as good as an email (i.e. usually worthless). You can't cross examine a letterhead any easier than an email. Thus making a live body really what's "better".

This is a statement from an agency about ABSENCE of a document, so they are not required to give you anything, unless it is an official FOIA request, which only works for government agencies.

Oh good lord. If you can provide one iota of proof for this unique interpretation of FOIL requests, I will write you a 250 word apology. (Hint: What do you think PennDOT is?)

 

[sukharev]

Well, thank you Kreskin. That's a mightly strong statement on Evidence you make there (and which just happens to be contrary to oh, 200 years of caselaw).

Letterhead is, for legal purposes, just as good as an email (i.e. usually worthless). You can't cross examine a letterhead any easier than an email. Thus making a live body really what's "better".

Oh good lord. If you can provide one iota of proof for this unique interpretation of FOIL requests, I will write you a 250 word apology. (Hint: What do you think PennDOT is?)

You could not help it, could you? What you seem to forget (or ignore) is that the ABSENCE of the document does not need to be proved or admitted into evidence. When speeding case is heared, first thing the government does is declare what speed limit was on that road. And, of course, it is the government who has to present proof of the speed limit. Now, the only proof they get is from the officer, who says "55 MPH, posted". And, when cross-examined, he would repeat this same statement. What is his answer to "do you have any proof that this is a current speed limit and that the sign is posted according to the LAW?"

There is nothing unique about my interpretation of FOIA request. Anyone can request a specific document from the governmment, as long as such document exists. If it does not, you receive a letter stating this. The letter is a signed document, and would be perfectly admissible into evidence, as prescibed by 200 years of caselaw I have done it, and anyone else can, too. OP would just testify that he requested the information, and received this reply. Nothing less, nothing more.

 

[You Are Guilty]

http://www.violane.com/public_html/emoticons/bang_head.gif