My friend told me something. can anyone varify?

[Xcede]

So yesterday i was talking to my friend he said that if a cop dosent have his radar gun on he cant pull you over and give you a speeding ticket no matter how fast you fly by him.

his reason was that they wont have the proof of your speed.

i was thinking about it and i thought that even if they cant see your exact speed they can still tell your speeding cant they? its not that hard to tell. cant they still pull you over and give you a ticket for like reckless driving or something even tho they wont know your exact speed?

can anyone varify?:confused:

[Ninjabread]

Well, they can write you a ticket, but you can fight it in court.

One of my friends got out of it that way, he was in a 50mph zone in the country, exceeded the speed a bit, and then it turns into a 30mph zone because it's a little town. Well, he had to slow down ALOT because he didn't know, and the cop still nailed him with "you know how fast you were going?" and then my friend asked " did you have your radar gun on me? Because I swear my car said 30mph", so the cop goes " errr, no I didn't ... but I can still write you a ticket."

So my friend took it to court, and won. The cop didn't even show up.

[180sx_Drifter]

^+1 true but if they do have the gun on you they also dont have to show it to you. Your number one thing to do is not admit. Like play stupid so you dont confess cause once you confess you basically turned yourself in.

[h22speed]

though this may be in georgia, it may also answer some questions for you.

http://www.zilvia.net/f/showthread.php?t=165431&highlight=speeding+ticket+georgia

[brndck]

technically its true. but in gestapo cali i have a hard time believing that you could get away with it.

[Xcede]

the whole reason the topic came up with me and my friend was because last week i was racing this MR2 sorta and we were like neck and neck the whole time. it wasnt really long enough to be called a race i guess you could say by the time we hit 60 the cop turned out of the gas station (accross the street) but when i pulled over the mr2 hit the breaks and just kept going (i was on the right side i dont think he saw the mr2).

he asked "Do you know how fast you were going back there?" i said i wasnt sure, he asked for my lic and regestration and came back 5 mins later with 2 fix-its one for my broken tail lamp and one for no front licence plate. so i had my girl friends dad write them off. haha:keke:

[KuhnDawgAK47]

the cop doesnt have to show up to court, the citation is his word and the judge looks at it as such, but in any case if you were speeding and the cops pull you over a trick they try (if they didnt radar you), theyll ask: "do you know how fast you were going?" and if you answer with a speed that puts you in the wrong (i.e. speeding) then they can write you a ticket for the speed you confessed to.

[corriganjoshua]

it couldnt be classified as just...wreckless driving?

[Palmer]

Cops can write you a ticket if they think your speeding wether they have the radar gun out or not. If it looks like your speeding and the cop is a dick or he's just having a bad day, he can write you a ticket if he wants to. Now when you get to court and if the cop even shows up, he will then have to testify that you were actually speeding. I've gone to court for this twice and both times the cop didn't show. Now i'm not exactly sure how they show actual proof that you were speeding in court but, if they don't show you 99.99% of the time win your case.

[jrbump]

It's called "Basic Speed Rule" and yes you can get a ticket for it. At least in Oregon anyway, every state is different.

[Phlip]

I am moving this to off-topic, first of all...

Next, a police officer's visual estimation of your speed is permissible as evidence in court, as the fact is that speed estimate training is part of radar training, and they have to be able to accurately estimate speeds to get certification.

[corriganjoshua]

you sumed it all up i dont think there is need for anymore discussion haha

[opponheimer]

Ulysses S Grant got a speeding ticket for riding his horse too fast through Washington, you think they had radar guns then? Cops can do whatever they want, but without actual proof its fight-able in court.

Some small towns need a certain population for radar guns even to be allowed for use... So you could fight it in that aspect as well.. of course you'd need to look up the laws for your county/state.

[cgtdream]

I am moving this to off-topic, first of all...

Next, a police officer's visual estimation of your speed is permissible as evidence in court, as the fact is that speed estimate training is part of radar training, and they have to be able to accurately estimate speeds to get certification.


+1 heard it from a few state troopers now myself...

[corriganjoshua]

Dang somebody from south dakota haha

[98s14inaz]

So yesterday i was talking to my friend he said that if a cop dosent have his radar gun on he cant pull you over and give you a speeding ticket no matter how fast you fly by him.

his reason was that they wont have the proof of your speed.

i was thinking about it and i thought that even if they cant see your exact speed they can still tell your speeding cant they? its not that hard to tell. cant they still pull you over and give you a ticket for like reckless driving or something even tho they wont know your exact speed?

can anyone varify?:confused:

I didn't read the whole thread but there are many methods for estimating speed. You have a right to ask which one was used and to see it. speed = distance/time. Some police cruisers in AZ have a device that does the math for them. Don't speed and drive like a douche, save it for the track or don't drive at all.

[exitspeed]

A police officer can give you a ticket for "imprudent speeding". I've received one personally. He did not have a gun, but I was obviously speeding.

[98s14inaz]

I am moving this to off-topic, first of all...

Next, a police officer's visual estimation of your speed is permissible as evidence in court, as the fact is that speed estimate training is part of radar training, and they have to be able to accurately estimate speeds to get certification.

He still has the burden of proof. When was his cruiser's speedo last calibrated to assure accuracy? There are several other arguments you can use but I don't remember them off hand.

[drift freaq]

technically its true. but in gestapo cali i have a hard time believing that you could get away with it.

No its not true and you have been smoking to much of that funny stuff beach boy. Its on the books in all states its called basic speed law, they can spot you and say your speeding they can pace you and say your speeding. You do know there were speeding tickets before radar.
How do you think they wrote them? Oh wait you weren't born, so you will just spout ignorance without investigating.

P.S. If you think California is so Gestapo like you can leave. Otherwise lay off the bong hits they are going to your head.

[jackjack]

Cops can do whatever they want, but without actual proof its fight-able in court.


thats pretty much what it comes down too. also depends on the judge.

[Ninjabread]

I am moving this to off-topic, first of all...

Next, a police officer's visual estimation of your speed is permissible as evidence in court, as the fact is that speed estimate training is part of radar training, and they have to be able to accurately estimate speeds to get certification.

You can also use that against them, and ask if they in fact have gone through the training. Alot of times, they haven't.

[Mr.S14]

man i cant wait till i start sheriff academy, im going to bust all of you in so cal lolz jk but i am going to the sheriff academy

[ericcastro]

See, I heard different in WA state. I heard they have to have the gun. they have to show you if asked. And they have to have the proof that they calibrated it in the morning.
And I ALWAYS ask to see the gun. Because I have heard of people getting off because they didn't show the gun. Basically, the cop missed the chance to use the gun, but pulled em over anyways.
And police officers get paid to show up in court, usually overtime. So your just doing them a favor. Do the writen declaration. www.ticketassasin.com
And I think here in California, they do what they want with no consequenses. i got the BS fix it tickets to prove it. (I saw BS, cause i dont fix anything, and get em signed off)

[SC_S13]

its California state law that if you ask for a visual confirmation of their gun and its reading, they have to show it to you. refusal to do so will weigh heavily in your favor in court.

[Aoshi112]

my friend received a ticket for exhibition of speed for flooring his car for a few secs up to the posted speed limit. He saw the cop and hit the brake. Cop pulled him over and gave him exhibition of speed.

[Matej]

My non-working cluster has gotten me out of two speeding tickets, both times I said it just broke that morning, while in reality it hasn't worked in a year. The officers told me to fix it and let me off. If I ever fix my wiring I should install a killswitch for my cluster haha.

[Rob's S14]

Why were you racing an MR2? Seriously how did nobody else say anything about it. Guess what, if you don't street race, you probably won't a speeding ticket.

[blasting_speed]

I say fight it aye, just fight it.

[mRclARK1]

Did you get a ticket? Were you speeding?

Pay it.

No, like driftfreaq said an officer does NOT need a radar reading on you to give you a ticket. If you're speeding excessively and an officer stops you, issues a ticket and you take it to court, the judge will most likely rule in the officers favor if you have no other reason then he had no radar reading. Besides, any officer I know would never tell you at the time he/she didn't radar you.

Ever have an officer say "Do you know how fast you were going?"

[JRas]

http://www.flexyourrights.org/

your friend did the right thing by not admitting he broke the law but he also did lie which is something you really shouldn't do

you can always choose to not answer the question at all

[driftn_silvia]

i heard that california highway patrol officers are trained to catch the speed by eye.... dont know if thats true...but what happed to me was an off duty chp officer followed me to a gas station one time pulled his badge and and told me to slow down.

[airsoft]

An officer in Cali can write you a ticket if he thinks you're speeding.

If you are speeding and he sees it he can give you a ticket.

This WILL NOT hold up in court. A police officer can write you a ticket but CAN NOT approximate your speed.

He must give you a ticket for your ACTUAL speed. An approximation or "eyeball" is not a good reference to your speed.

He can't merely say "I have training, yes hes speeding"

He must have something to determine your speed. He must have some point of reference.

Fact: I was in a rush on the 10fwy east bound passing Rosemead Blvd. I was going about 90mph (stupid yes) but I had to take a shit BADLY and there was hardly traffic.

Cop pulls me over and says you're speeding, I say no I wasn't, and you weren't behind me or next to me.

He said, "You must have been speeding because when you switched lanes to get off you had to brake real hard behind the bus in front of you and I can estimate how fast you were going"

Obviously I was speeding but visualizing/approximating is not a good determination of speed nor is using a bus... due to the fact he was behind me and didn't have the speed of the bus to reference to my speed over the speed limit. Muahhaha.

There is "reasonable doubt" as to the accuracy of the officers judgement. He has to prove you were going the speed he stated with facts, not approximations.

You have to prove there is "reasonable doubt" to the officers accuracy of your speed.

FACT: I was speeding like 95 early in the morning to take my friend to the airport in which I was late. I was in the carpool 110 south just passed downtown los angeles. I ZOOM by a CHP and go OOOOH shit... I see him in my review chasing after me, BUT I know he can not give me a ticket so I slam on my brakes to 65mph. He paces me and then comes next to me, and then drives off.

It wasn't wreckless because there was very light traffic and I was in the carpool lane going straight. Wreckless I believe is over 90mph in which he can not prove my actual speed. So a cop can not give u a ticket, unless he wants to hold you up... waste your time... his time etc.

How I know this?

I've been to court twice and CHP shows up. NOT JUST regular city patrol... CHP.. adn we duke it out in court and I've won.

Worst I've had a judge say to a CHP from Kern County... "Officer I'm disappointed in your 30 second testimony. You can't just come in here with your uniform on and expect to win."

Remember, if you are in court, and I'm going to say this all cops read from notes and papers.

They can not do this. You must immediately OBJECT right when he looks down at them.

He must come to court with clear memory of everything. If he wants to use the notes he must admit to not have any recollection of the event yadda yadda, and must use his notes. Therefor any questions you ask and he answers is thrown out.

So of course he wouldn't do that. You basically just shitted on his testimony.

Next you will need to use your wits and quick thinking to trap the cop into making dumb answers that doesn't make sense, contradictory, etc.

Why the hell am I rambling ...

[airsoft]

Oh yeah I also forgot, Ok for example driving to Vegas... Big dirt in the center for CHP to make U - turns... This is how their radar works...

When they see a few cars the flip it on coming at you in the opposite direction. What happens is the radar catches the "highest speed" for example.. Car 1 = 70mph Car 2 = 88mph Car 3 = 90 mph...

It will show "90mph".. The officer then has to determine which car it is by "eyeballing". But he can NOT give you a ticket for that, notice when cops make a U-turn and then speed up to pace the car?

Any how, if the cop is stationary and zaps your ass with a radar gun, just consider it game over you lose.

[Rayne]

For those in California:

According to CVC 40800(A) If a police office is not in full dress and operating a marked vehicle he or she may not issue anyone a citation for speeding.

Under CVC 40803(a) states that evidence obtained from the use of a "Speed Trap" is inadmissible in a traffic case.

Under CVC 40804(a) Any officer is deemed an incompetent witness for the prosecution of a speeding violation if the violation has any connection to speed traps.

Furthermore under CVC 40805 every court is without jurisdiction to proceed with a case if the case is regarding a citation issued from which a "Speed Trap " was used.

Exact cvc quotes are as follows:
CVC 40800(a) A traffic officer on duty for the exclusive or main
purpose of enforcing the provisions of Division 10 (commencing with
Section 20000) or 11 (commencing with Section 21000) shall wear a
full distinctive uniform, and if the officer while on duty uses a
motor vehicle, it must be painted a distinctive color specified by
the commissioner.

CVC 40803(a) No evidence as to the speed of a vehicle upon a highway
shall be admitted in any court upon the trial of any person in any
prosecution under this code upon a charge involving the speed of a
vehicle when the evidence is based upon or obtained from or by the
maintenance or use of a speed trap.

CVC 40804(a) In any prosecution under this code upon a charge
involving the speed of a vehicle, an officer or other person shall be
incompetent as a witness if the testimony is based upon or obtained
from or by the maintenance or use of a speed trap.

CVC 40805 Every court shall be without jurisdiction to render a
judgment of conviction against any person for a violation of this
code involving the speed of a vehicle if the court admits any
evidence or testimony secured in violation of, or which is
inadmissible under this article.

For everyone: If a police officer issues a citation/court summons for any "Traffic" violation he or she is not allowed to be a witness at the court trial.
See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Chapter 2 Section 4(c)(2)
Any person who is at least 18 years old and not a party may serve a summons and complaint.

The key phrase is "Not a party" meaning they have no interest in or have no involvement in the issue. As it pertains to a police officer he or she is considered party to the prosecution rather than uninvolved.

For those in California: The California rules of civil procedure § 414.10 states: A summons may be served by any person who is at least 18 years of age and not a party to the action. (Added by Stats. 1969, Ch. 1610.)