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.)

__________________
Do need the Factory Service Manual? Click here.