Vermont Laws on challenging speeding tickets

[HankMorgan]

Does anybody know about Vermont law and traffic cases, particularly in Windham County?

All of the stuff I find on the Internet is either on California or on "most states," which as I know from living near the border, Vermont is not.

In this case, because of the dark and bad conditions on the road, I was focused on the road, I missed the sign anyways. I thought I was going about 30 (the speedometer showed about 32) in a 40 mph zone. The officer clocked me at 36, and the limit was 25 (it was a school zone, in Vermont, unlike MA, school zones apply at all hours).

The officer was hiding in the dark with her lights off, and it was clear from the moment she told me my offense, and helpfully told me that she knew it wasn't an offense under Massachusetts law, that the town has set a speed trap for out-of-staters. Unfortunately, I don't think that's a valid defense in any state.

I am appalled, because I had an accident about a year ago with a fellow who was obviously speeding, and have since then made every effort to keep to the speed limit. Also my college will revoke my designated driving privileges if I have a speeding ticket. Unfortunately though I always drive sober, the officer first decided to talk to my slightly-drunken mother in the passenger side, who promptly blurted out "I thought he was going too fast!" (She regularly exceeds the speed limit by 10-15 mph). She then kept talking to my mother, and I never got a chance to talk to her until I got the ticket.

So, some questions:
1. Can the officer grant leniency after granting the ticket in Vermont? I know she's trying to raise money for her department, but it might be worth a shot.

It seems like if I can't get leniency from the officer, I have two options: try to get the ticket dismissed outright by making her prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, or challenging the actual speed. The ticket says that if I contest the ticket and lose, I will probably have $50 dollars in addition tacked onto my fine, which would seem to argue that I should either go all out, or pay the ticket, rather than merely trying to get a reduction (plus a reduction doesn't help me with the college issue any rate).

2. Do most states threaten to tack on an additional penalty for failed challenges? And do they do it?

3. Am I entitled to demand the documents that most sites on speeding tickets seem to ask for (validation that the radar gun's working, etc.) in Vermont? And is radar alone insufficient evidence in Vermont (does she need to have gauged my speed visually first)?

4. The ticket says that I can't ask the court for legal advice. Is deferred adjucation an option in Vermont? And/or can I use the "no contest" option to my advantage in any way.

Thanks,
HM

 

[FlyingRon]

Sometimes you do your best to obey the law and you still break them. If it was so dark and twisty that you had to divert your attention from important traffic control signs, you probably were driving too fast even if you were within the posted speed.

Do not assume that the officers intent is revenue generation. Even if it were, you won't get anywhere arguing this. Sitting in the dark waiting for violators is not bad police behavior. You can make an appeal to the officer, she is the prosecutor in this case, but it's unclear what new leniency she would be inclined to now that she wasn't during the stop.

Generally, traffic tickets are only civil violations and are handled in Vermont by a special judiciary bureau. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is NOT the standard in civil case, only a preponderance of the evidence. The officer's observation in the absence of any other evidence is all that's typically required. By your own admission you WERE speeding so it's doubtful you have any other evidence. There is a additional $50 fee if you lose in "court".

If you want to go the discovery route, you can. Of course, unless you know what you're looking for there may be little in the discovery materials to help (and maybe not even then).

No contest will be the same as pleading guilty in VT. Don't know of any driving school or other dodge.

 

[HankMorgan]

Thanks, still a couple concerns

Thanks very much for responding quickly and helpfully. I've talked with my mother about this. She knows I saved her from a citation for going 45 or 50, so I think she'll pay for the ticket and insurance, and the actual cost is less of an issue now. But being ineligible to drive for my school still really bothers me.

To clarify about the road, I don't know if I didn't see the sign, or simply unconsciously ignored it--I know that I disregard school zone signs (though not crosswalks) late at night in Massachusetts, and I may have done the same without realizing it. The cop told me that's what out of state drivers do, and what I probably did. I also think that waiting in the dark, on a hill, in a brief section where the limit goes from 40 to 25 and is only enforced due to a peculiarity of state law is an obvious speed trap. I know that's not a defense, I was expressing my irritation.

Not being eligible to be a designated driver poses a problem not just for me, but for other people at my school. I designed to take the defensive driving course after I learned that a large number of students at my college see nothing wrong with driving drunk. I didn't mention this to her at the time, but if she's truly interested in safety, this might be worth bringing up to her.

The other question is whether it's worth challenging on the fact that how she clocked my speed was above what my speedometer had it. This could indicate a defect in the radar, or could indicate a defect in the speedometer, or it could indicate that given I had the brake on as I went down the hill, my speed was varying, and she waiting for the highest speed she could clock me at. If it's the former case, I would think I'd be able to challenge the amount of the tickets, if the latter, I'm screwed. However, you mentioned that the standard of evidence is lower for civil suits, so it sounds like I might be screwed any rate if I can't convince the cop?

 

[FlyingRon]

In many places, the speed limit is 25 mph inside city limits even when it isn't posted. Arguing that it is a "trap" again is NOT going to get you anywhere. You seem to have a paranoid complex that the state has ulterior motives in their enactment and enforcement of speeding laws. They set the speeding limits with better motives than that they can catch out of staters who wander into their city.

Your equipment being defective isn't going to mean squat. Further, since you were already preoccupied so much you admit you weren't paying attention to signs means you also weren't probably paying much attention tot he speedometer at all times and you could have at some point in her observation actually be going at the speed you were clocked at.

Of course she could be waiting for your highest speed. Going downhill is not an excuse for even 1 mile over the limit, let alone 11.

You haven't indicated one shred of exculpatory evidence nor even anything that mitigates the offense. You appear to have been violating both the prima facie post speed limit and by your own admission what was safe and prudent.

Let your mommy pay the ticket and hope you learn a lesson from this.

 

[HankMorgan]

Yes, I know it's not going to get me anywhere in court. I was arguing the point with you because you seem to believe that small towns do not use speed limits as a revenue source. The road was otherwise straight, sparsely settled, and clear once I got over the hill. It was in fact in better condition than the section of road where I had passed three 40 mph signs. The only reason that the speed limit was 25 is because VT law handles school zones differently thank MA law (Massachusetts also has the 25 in town center law, but the school is a ways from the town center.) I slow down for school zones in the daytime even when MA law doesn't require it, but generally not late at night, when most children are in bed an no more likely to be at school than at home. At 10:00 at night there is no public-safety reason to enforce it, other than to educate out-of-staters about VT law, or as a revenue source. And for education purposes, a warning would have sufficed.

I do not believe that I was driving at an unsafe speed. I don't know whether I saw the sign, which isn't the same thing as saying I was inattentive. When I look at road signs, I quickly and consciously note the ones that are relevant to what I'm doing, and ignore those that aren't (for example, I never make U-Turns, and only pay explicit attention to those signs if the car in front of me violates the sign). I would have filed the school-zone sign under "not relevant at 10:00," even if I saw it, and would therefore not remember it when she asked me. I also don't pay constant attention to my speedometer, but I glance at it frequently to make sure I'm within the limit, and looked at it as soon as I saw her lights behind me, when it was a notch over 30.

I listed all of the possible reasons that I thought she might have clocked me at well above what I thought I was going, and I know that two of them are not legally exculpatory. I noted that one of them, radar malfunction, is a possibility. I then asked if, under VT law, I can appeal the ticket on the possibility that the speed she clocked me at is too high, given that, as you noted, civil cases require a lower standard of evidence.

Thanks again for your first response, which was polite and helpful.
HM

 

[HighwayMan]

I then asked if, under VT law, I can appeal the ticket on the possibility that the speed she clocked me at is too high

Appeal? You haven't been found guilty yet.

I'm sure she was not out there writing speeds with a defective radar set. That's why they are tested start of tour and after each ticket written.

You feel it's all unfair to you. Oh well, forget about MA and understand that you are bound by VT law when in VT.

Also, how does anyone know when there is not some event at the school off hours - a play, concert, parent-teacher conferences, etc. Unless specified by sign, the speed limit should be assumed to be in effect at all times.

The excuses you give are given by people caught speeding all the time. "I was driving at a safe speed", etc. does not matter. There was a posted limit and you violated it. No other factors are relevant. Merely exceeding the posted limit is prima facie evidence of the violation.

 

[patstew]

I was arguing the point with you because you seem to believe that small towns do not use speed limits as a revenue source...At 10:00 at night there is no public-safety reason to enforce it, other than to educate out-of-staters about VT law, or as a revenue source.

So, do you have a suggestion for an alternative, rather than a fine? Caning, perhaps?