Roddyr's 22348

[JIMinCA]

Hopefully, the trolls will stay away from this thread.

Here is the post I was preparing when the original thread was closed:

There is some number issues I am concerned about. You say his vehicle number is in the box next to radar? Could that be his radar unit number? The point I am getting at is that if he did not use radar or lidar, he may have paced you. If so, he certainly did NOT have time to catch up to you and pace you before pulling you over.

I was pulled over once by a cop in a 45 speed zone and I was doing EXACTLY 45 (I know, because I knew the cop was there and I paid attention). He told me I was speeding and that he had to do 70 to catch me! I told him that I was driving 45, which was the speed limit.... if he did not exceed the speed limit, he never would have caught up to me. I then told him that if he looked really hard, he'd find an algebra problem in there someplace!! The cop simply looked puzzled, gave me my license back and sent me on my way. Point is... there are stupid cops out there. A badge doesn't automatically make you smart.

The bottom line is, you were doing 92 on the freeway. You deserve to be smacked in the back of your head. But, you do NOT deserve to be convicted of 22348!

So, with all this... the FIRST thing you need to do is request discovery. You need to know if he used radar or pace. You should go here for instructions of how to file a discovery request: Discovery

 

[You Are Guilty]

The "I had to do XXX mph to catch up to you" seems to be a very common justification for speeding tickets, and may be where the 122 figure was arrived at here. Discovery is going to be very important to minimizing the damage. Forcing folks to guess at what might be in there is not really helping anyone.

Incidentally, the reason why the math "didn't work" in the original post is because you need to use calculus to determine the rate of speed/distance relationship. (Not that it matters because unless the bike is say a 250cc and physically incapable of hitting 122mph, any sport bike on the planet made in the last decade can get up over 100 in the first quarter mile).

 

[roddyr]

Not sure why my thread was closed.. but I just got back from a victory in Traffic court.

Lessons learned:

I got to the court house at 8:45am for a 9am hearing which was posted on my courtesy letter. For those of you going to court for your first time, it seemed like roll call by the ballif started at 8:30am so get there early! Everyone sworn in at 9am.

Other than that, getting over your nerves is probably the biggest part. It helps to go over your pitch the night before, the morning of, and while your driving there.

The only questions I asked were about the entire incident from the point the officer saw me to the point we pulled over. The CHP didn't sound very confident in his recollection of the incident and it just got worse when I pulled pictures out of where he was parked on the on ramp. Take as many visuals as you can. What I had with me were pictures of where he was and a diagram of the distance between entrance to the freeway and where I was stopped. That was another thing, I did ask the CHP if I was cooperative in pulling over right away and he actually said yes (another point that I believe helped me in my argument about the distance this all took place in. Back to the diagram, it wasn't anything I think would hold up in court, but I do believe it helped provide a visual of the short distance this all took place in, it was just a screen shot from Google maps. I think I probably could have drawn it out and it would have helped just the same. I also had a signed affidavit from a co-worker who was on the on ramp and saw me get on the on ramp as well as the CHP parked at a complete stop to the side of the on ramp.
I also asked the officer if he lost sight of me at anytime before he made his way over to the carpool lane and he did say that he was indeed held up by traffic for a short time. Which led me to ask about the traffic during that time of day. The thing is, I was able to split lanes through the congested traffic and eventually hit my pocket of light traffic. When asked how he was able to approximate my speed he did say he used a pacing method. I read that tire pressure plays a factor when using this method and I had asked him if he knew what his tire pressure was that day and he had no response.

At the time where I was able to provide any other statements I did throw the small pitch of the math I was hesitant to use but at this point I figured we were pretty much at the end of the hearing and throwing it out there wouldn't hurt if it didn't take too long. I had proposed that simple math would validate that all the activity presented during this citation would have to fall within a span of 60-90 seconds. I believe myself to be a good motorcycle rider, but far from a professional. I don't believe my riding ability would make me capable of achieving this feat in this short amount of time and distance. I'm not sure if this played a factor, maybe it did, maybe it didn't. I found a decent article about it here:

http://www.motorists.org/blog/traffic-tickets/fight-your-speeding-ticket-with-simple-math/
5280ft in 1 mile, so at 1mph you cover a distance 5280ft
60min in 1 hour, so at 1mph you cover 1/60th of 5280ft or 88ft in one minute.
60sec in 1min, so at 1mph cover 1/60th of 88ft or 1.47ft in one second

Speed multiplied by 1.47 = Distance
Distance divided by speed, then divided by 1.47 = Time

My distance for this scenario was 1.7 miles. The formula below used 65mph as an example. If you increase the speed, the amount of time to cover this distance gets smaller.

MPH 1.7mi (8976ft) / MPH / 1.47
65 138.09 93.94
70 128.23 87.23
75 119.68 81.41
80 112.20 76.33
85 105.60 71.84
90 99.73 67.85
95 94.48 64.27
100 89.76 61.06
105 85.49 58.15
110 81.60 55.51
115 78.05 53.10
120 74.80 50.88
125 71.81 48.85

The judge gave me a short lecture, but found me NOT GUILTY, case dismissed.

Maybe it was the pictures...
Maybe it was the lack of competence by the CHP
Maybe it was the math

Who knows! The lesson here is that if there is a shadow of a doubt.. then you should try your best to expose it.

I hope I never have to come to this forum again and I can honestly say that most of the responses I've seen here reduce anyone's confidence. I believe everyone is innocent until proven guilty and the advice in this forum is entirely the opposite. I've read the comments about my type of motorcycle and my "stubbornness". Why does that matter? My stubbornness was provoked by 2 10 year old kids playing the part of a SeniorJudge and his lackey. Both of which offered the worst advice I have ever heard in my entire life. The fact that I have a sport bike means nothing. ASSumptions are made and people are labeled.

I'm sorry... but IGB and JIMinCA had the only meaningful responses. Thanks to both of you for providing meaningful feedback. Hopefully my experience will help someone else in the future. Thats what GOOD ADVICE IS. Its helping others.. not breaking them down.

RoddyR OUT!

 

[roddyr]

Thanks "You are Guilty".

 

[Zigner]

Congratulations.
Now, I hope you DID take away from this at least the lesson of SLOW DOWN

 

[roddyr]

Sorry IGB.. but this comment you made is bugging me...

Last but not least, just so that you are prepared... And since you seem to be a little stubborn... And you may have already convinced yourself that even though you know you did wrong, that you don't deserve to be punished. Not once in this entire thread have you expressed remorse, admited fault or even tried to man up and take responsibility for what you did!

I admitted I was speeding, but I'm not here to argue that, nor did I go to court with the intent to argue if I was speeding or not. My citation stated that I was exceeding 100 and that I was approximately going 122. Which I was not, and found not guilty of doing. Why would you expect me to show remorse for something I didn't do? Why would you expect that from anyone? Innocent until proven guilty. had I been given a speeding ticket for going 92.. I would have just paid the fine, end of story. But why expect people to be punished for something they didn't do? Thats like me punching you in the face and getting put away for murder. How does that make any sense?

You are very helpful here.. don't let these other morons rub off on you and lead you in the wrong direction.

 

[roddyr]

Congratulations.
Now, I hope you DID take away from this at least the lesson of SLOW DOWN

Absolutely.. I actually garaged my bike after this incident. I'm not the typical rice rocket guy. There are a lot of bad apples out there that have given our type a bad name.. but its apples and oranges. There are still some good guys out there. I only started riding more again when the gas prices went up! My consulting contract in that area is over anyway so no more commute for me.

 

[JIMinCA]

Dude!!! That is AWESOME!!!!

I respect your candor in admitting that you were speeding. However, speeding and violating 22348 are VERY different. You were charged with 22348 and you went to court to defend yourself against 22348. Had the cop wrote you for 22349, you may have done differently. I believe you did the right thing and I congratulate you for your win against a bogus charge. I also agree that the trolls on this site do nothing but discourage people who are looking for help. They would have had you simply plead guilty to something you did not do just because you "had no case".

Good for you... and I hope the trolls have learned a lesson!!!

 

[seniorjudge]

...
Maybe it was the lack of competence by the CHP
...

If your recitation of what happened at the trial is correct, then the above is my guess as to why you won.

 

[roddyr]

If your recitation of what happened at the trial is correct, then the above is my guess as to why you won.

Sorry.. but I think we're done with your "GUESSES" and poor advice. You can go now.

 

[seniorjudge]

...
Who knows! The lesson here is that if there is a shadow of a doubt.. then you should try your best to expose it.
...

Well...I have to agree with your guess.

Reasonable doubt is what our system is based on.

 

[roddyr]

Well...I have to agree with your guess.

Reasonable doubt is what our system is based on.

Guess? See.. thats the problem, you keep trying and trying to recover, but you just keep making it easier for me to show others how horrible you are. I never guessed at what it was that helped me.. I simply provided possibilities. Its the angles ponch.. most if which you are too narrow minded to see. Anything else?

 

[seniorjudge]

...
I also asked the officer if he lost sight of me at anytime before he made his way over to the carpool lane and he did say that he was indeed held up by traffic for a short time. ...

Since he alleged he was pacing you, this was a good question to ask.

 

[Zigner]

Absolutely.. I actually garaged my bike after this incident. I'm not the typical rice rocket guy.

Thank you

 

[JIMinCA]

Since he alleged he was pacing you, this was a good question to ask.

So.... are you admiting now that you were WRONG when you told roddy that he "had no case"?