Received 2 tickets & must go to court

[Julie2991]

I was driving my roommate's car in Georgia on the highway shortly after sunset and forgot to turn on the headlights. I could still see because it was not fully dark and even with car lights off, there are still dim yellow lights that are always on in front of the car. I got pulled over for speeding and because I had no taillights on (which I was unaware of because I didn't know that those lights could turn off) and turned them on immediately once the officer mentioned it. I received a ticket for a tail light requirement, violation code 40-8-23; and speeding at 85 mph in a 70 zone, code 40-6-181-B.

I read about the tail light code online and the car met the requirements for tail lights, they just were not on at the time because I was not aware the lights were off. I don't know why I didn't receive a warning for it.

The speeding occurred unfortunately because there was a car following closely behind me in the far left lane, and two other cars driving in the middle lane on my immediate right. I had my turn signal on but the car in the middle lane wouldn't slow down enough for me to get over without cutting in front of them. I know in court this may be no excuse for speeding, but I wanted to get out of the way without slowing to a dangerous speed with a car that was also speeding behind me. I'm still the only one that got pulled over.

Is there anything that I can do at all to help myself with this in court? I've never been to court for a traffic violation so I'm afraid of what may happen.

 

[FlyingRon]

The tail lights come on with the headlights. This is true in just about every car on the road. The DRLs (those yellow lights) are for DAYTIME driving (and even then it is often advisable.

You are right, 40-8-23 covers not having operable taillights. Perhaps the officer was giving you a break as this is probably a lesser charge (i.e., no points) than the failure to burn headlights (which is a three pointer). Of course, feel free to bring in a proof that the car had operable taillights and see if you can get consideration on that charge.

You have no defense for the speeding charge it would seem. Cars following closely behind you do not justify speeding. In fact, it is better to (smoothly) decrease your speed in such instances. It gives the following car maximum opportunity to pass, and if not, it will increase the reaction times and avoid and, in the worst case, decrease the severity of the ensuing accident.

The fact that others were speeding is not a defense either.

One option that may help you is to request a nolo plea on the speeding charge (if you've not done this before). You'll still pay the fine, but avoid the points.

 

[Julie2991]

The tail lights come on with the headlights. This is true in just about every car on the road. The DRLs (those yellow lights) are for DAYTIME driving (and even then it is often advisable.

You are right, 40-8-23 covers not having operable taillights. Perhaps the officer was giving you a break as this is probably a lesser charge (i.e., no points) than the failure to burn headlights (which is a three pointer). Of course, feel free to bring in a proof that the car had operable taillights and see if you can get consideration on that charge.

You have no defense for the speeding charge it would seem. Cars following closely behind you do not justify speeding. In fact, it is better to (smoothly) decrease your speed in such instances. It gives the following car maximum opportunity to pass, and if not, it will increase the reaction times and avoid and, in the worst case, decrease the severity of the ensuing accident.

The fact that others were speeding is not a defense either.

One option that may help you is to request a nolo plea on the speeding charge (if you've not done this before). You'll still pay the fine, but avoid the points.

FlyingRon - Thank you for the advice.