ok i got booked for speeding the other night and basically i need to know before outlaying 200 bucks to talk to a lawyer about wether or not its worth it.
quick rundown - the cop was on a bike who pulled out behind the bmw who was approx 6 carlengths behind me and then proceeded to pull us both over and said he was doing 75 as i was pulling away from them both and handed me a ticket for 90 in a 60 zone
question: he had no proof i was speeding by means of hand held etc and made further point his motorbikes speedo has been calibrated...
should i take it to court ? and whats the likely outcome
Quote:
Originally Posted by h|ghland
ok i got booked for speeding the other night and basically i need to know before outlaying 200 bucks to talk to a lawyer about wether or not its worth it.
quick rundown - the cop was on a bike who pulled out behind the bmw who was approx 6 carlengths behind me and then proceeded to pull us both over and said he was doing 75 as i was pulling away from them both and handed me a ticket for 90 in a 60 zone
question: he had no proof i was speeding by means of hand held etc and made further point his motorbikes speedo has been calibrated...
should i take it to court ? and whats the likely outcome
first problem is you let him push you around, you want proof on the spot that your guilty its not a guessing game
2nd depends heavily on your driving record
3rd he is by himself so its in your favour he has no back up
firstly you'll get the option to contest to which you can write a letter
if that fails you'll have the option to goto court talk to a lawyer they should give you the info for nothing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke57TT
They have whats called an educated opinion on the speed your doing. I would say if you take it to court you may get it lessened but not removed.
depends on how long he was following you, if he documented it before he pulled you over your nearly 100% ****ed but if he portraits the slightest doubt then he'll reemed, end of the day its his word against yours
i had a cop accuse me off reckless driving, i told him he had no grounds for justifying it and he said if i don't like what he says i can object in court, i replied and said i will be contesting it and i'll see you there mate.
i never heard from him and this was a copper on a motor bike as well
no offence mate but at the end of the day its going to be your word against an officer of the law. mate got done in the same situation. he didnt win
Some original photos have not been recovered yet.
You stuffed up already by admittance.
If you are not done by radar the police will say something along the lines of "Do you know how fast you were travelling?" Or "any reason for speeding?".
They might even try GUESSING that "you were over the limit by such & such" or some other crap along those lines. If you were silly enough to accept this or made up some lame excuse for being over the limit then you are pinged.
HOWEVER if you turn around and say "fark off my speedo never went over 60" you would have got abused etc BUT would recieve nothing more then a simple warning to slow down and been told to go on your way. I have been caught well and truely over the limit but not on radar. As soon as I pulled over I noticed no radar on the cop car and so as usual I denied everything. I refused to accept that I was speeding and was adamant I remained at 60kmph. I never got pinched, was just asked if I think the officer was stupid (I replied yes lol). At the end of the day it is there word against yours, by agreeing with them or accepting a ticket you are admitting to breaking the law. Remain solid that you never went over the limit and they can not pinch you without proof.
I never speed even when the radar says so. NEVER ADMIT ****!
Just spoke to a Friend who is a Police officer. He just told me thatthe best thing to do is elect to take it to court and get a copy of is evidence and when you get to court you can still plead guilty to the charge at no extra cost but plead guilty to a lessor speed, in which the Judge will give you a lessor penalty, IE. 70 in a 60 zone, there is no way you can claim you wern't speeding but 70 in a 60 is better charge than 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by INMATE
You stuffed up already by admittance.
If you are not done by radar the police will say something along the lines of "Do you know how fast you were travelling?" Or "any reason for speeding?".
They might even try GUESSING that "you were over the limit by such & such" or some other crap along those lines. If you were silly enough to accept this or made up some lame excuse for being over the limit then you are pinged.
HOWEVER if you turn around and say "fark off my speedo never went over 60" you would have got abused etc BUT would recieve nothing more then a simple warning to slow down and been told to go on your way. I have been caught well and truely over the limit but not on radar. As soon as I pulled over I noticed no radar on the cop car and so as usual I denied everything. I refused to accept that I was speeding and was adamant I remained at 60kmph. I never got pinched, was just asked if I think the officer was stupid (I replied yes lol). At the end of the day it is there word against yours, by agreeing with them or accepting a ticket you are admitting to breaking the law. Remain solid that you never went over the limit and they can not pinch you without proof.
I never speed even when the radar says so. NEVER ADMIT ****!
100% correct its all in the first 5 seconds if your getting fined or not
never own up to anything even if you are guilty
i didnt actually admit i was speeding, ive had coppers try and do that to me before... i asked him to justify my speed if he didnt have an official measuring device, he got quite short with me and pointed to the election option inside the fine and promptly handed it to me then left
you're gone
you say that he said he was doing 75 on a calibrated police speedo and you were pulling away
he can expertly judge speed, he doesn't have to use radar
you were well and truly speeding, don't lie about it
Quote:
Originally Posted by aus880
you're gone... he can expertly judge speed, he doesn't have to use radar
Guilty or not they've still got to prove it, a stab in the dark can not possibly stand up in court.
What happened to innocent untill PROVEN guilty????
AUS880 you're saying that you doesn't need proof.... and your gut feeling is simply good enough???
you better go defend him then
ah you edited so i'll answer the new q
he has 'proof' by him being an expert at judging speed, esp based on his calibrated speedo already indicating 75
he then estimated the speed at 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by aus880
you better go defend him then
ah you edited so i'll answer the new q
he has 'proof' by him being an expert at judging speed, esp based on his calibrated speedo already indicating 75
he then estimated the speed at 90
Lol you may as well run around with one of those toy speed guns... if anyone questions your authority you can kindly remind them that you're an expert in judging speed... you dont need proof after all hey?
p.s sorry to wreak your thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aus880
i have no idea what you mean by that statement
An intelligent person like yourself? im sure you can figure it out...
As for the fine, im sure he's got a laywer.
all that stuff about officers 'judging speed' doesnt hold up in court, as i have had lawyers tell me that the judges dont except it. they need to have computerised proof.
Quote:
Originally Posted by innez
all that stuff about officers 'judging speed' doesnt hold up in court, as i have had lawyers tell me that the judges dont except it. they need to have computerised proof.
thats pretty well all i need to know before going and talking to someone
not someone on their police soapdish telling me "im gone" and police have the ability to "expertly judge speed" if thats the case why dont they scratch radars on the side of the road and have them sit in the car and estimate speeds recorded.
