Speeding ticket by pacing

[RobertPaulson]

Originally Posted by slyphen

as in just pay it?

If you have received a traffic infraction, you may be eligible for a deferral. By successfully completing a deferral, the Court will not report your ticket to the Department of Licensing.

You may defer only one moving and one non-moving infraction every seven years.
The length of the deferral is one year.
To complete your deferral, you must pay an administrative fee and not commit a new traffic
violation for one year.
If you commit a new traffic infraction during your deferral or fail to pay the administrative
fee, the Court will report your deferred ticket as a conviction to Department of Licensing.

source: http://www.douglascountywa.net/depar...ferral_faq.asp

this will differ between counties but the general idea is the same.

[PNW FRS]

If you truly believe you were not speeding (i.e., I was doing the speed limit" -- NOT "well, I was going as fast as everyone else... blah, blah, blah...") then fight the ticket. Do what it takes to notify the court that you wish to contest the ticket. They will contact you with a court date. I would suggest immediately asking for an alternative date - b/c the court picks a date that jives with the officer's schedule so s/he can make the court appearance. Getting an alternative date (b/c, "I'll be out of town" etc.) increases the chance that the LEO will not show up.... and bing! Case Dismissed. However, if the LEO does show up... simply stand by the statement, "I was not speeding." Make the officer PROVE that you were. You have the right to ask questions like, "When was the last time your speedometer was calibrated?" (Which might cast doubt on accuracy of the "pace.")

Whatever you do, do not say words to the effect of, "Well, I might have been 5 over.. but every other car was doing so too....." You have just admitted you were speeding. Period. You're either Guilty or Not Guilty. "Extenuating Circumstances" rarely work... and only when they are bona fide winners that will turn a judge's or commissioner's mind around enough to cut you a break.... "I was bleeding and trying to get to a hospital..."

All this said... if you don't have the stomach to go to battle with the LEO... or go the Deferral Route... just "do the time" and chalk it up to "This makes up for all the other times I KNEW I was speeding and didn't get caught..."

Good luck!

[Djratrap]

I'd go with this guy, he has gotten me out of a few speeding tickets. He typically charges 250-300. A lot of the car forums recommend this guy. Say you were referred by a car forum and ask for a discount.

http://www.obrienlawfirm.net/attorne.../fred-hopkins/

[RobertPaulson]

Originally Posted by PNW FRS

I would suggest immediately asking for an alternative date - b/c the court picks a date that jives with the officer's schedule so s/he can make the court appearance. Getting an alternative date (b/c, "I'll be out of town" etc.) increases the chance that the LEO will not show up.... and bing! Case Dismissed.

when i was in Arlington the officer was not there, and the judge said they're not required to waste their time to come because he has all the proof he needs on the ticket.

i srs hate that judge.

[brandonblt2]

I would definitely try to push the court date back if you try to fight it, try to make it inconvenient for the officer to show up. If the officer does not show, you can ask the judge to dismiss the case. Since the officer is the only witness to the violation they can't prove behind responsible doubt that you committed a violation also you have a right to face your accuser to cross-examine them.

Also pacing has guidelines that have to be followed they have to do it for a certain distance or time and they must be a reasonable distance from you in order to pace you with a clear line of sight. If he is to far back you can claim he was playing catch up and didn't pace you properly.

The officer is automatically going to have more creditability than you when talking to the judge, so if it ends up being your word vs his he will most likely win. You can try to build some creditability when the cop says he was traveling about 60 to 65 mph don't give a range like him. Say your exact speed, try to start to cast a some shadow of doubt about the officer not being as precise about his answers.

[PNW FRS]

Originally Posted by RobertPaulson

when i was in Arlington the officer was not there, and the judge said they're not required to waste their time to come because he has all the proof he needs on the ticket.

i srs hate that judge.

The law says you have the right to face your accuser and ask pertinent questions! If the LEO doesn't show up.. that's not your problem.. that's the court's problem. For the judge to say that... s/he is making a mistake, or there was something VERY unique about the citation. I'll go out on a limb and say that HAD you pushed the point, s/he would have had to schedule a follow-up court date so the LEO could appear... or dismiss the ticket outright. If you were convicted w/o the opportunity to face the LEO...I guess we need a bit more insight on what the citation was for... .maybe there are some level of infractions/citations that don't require LEO presence (kind of like "Photo Radar").

[RobertPaulson]

Originally Posted by PNW FRS

The law says you have the right to face your accuser and ask pertinent questions! If the LEO doesn't show up.. that's not your problem.. that's the court's problem. For the judge to say that... s/he is making a mistake, or there was something VERY unique about the citation. I'll go out on a limb and say that HAD you pushed the point, s/he would have had to schedule a follow-up court date so the LEO could appear... or dismiss the ticket outright. If you were convicted w/o the opportunity to face the LEO...I guess we need a bit more insight on what the citation was for... .maybe there are some level of infractions/citations that don't require LEO presence (kind of like "Photo Radar").

I'm aware of this, and my ticket was nothing special, 84 in a 70 caught by laser. No mention of how much traffic there was, where i was in the pack. when i pressed the judge about it he lifted the ticket pointed to the LEO signature and statement on the ticket and said this was all the evidence he needed. The tone in his voice made it very clear he wasn't going to budge and I wasn't feeling up to adding contempt of court charge on my day so i accepted the ticket and learned to just lawyer up from now on.

[2PINOY1]

I would go with the Lawyer route - peace.

[PNW FRS]

Originally Posted by RobertPaulson

I'm aware of this, and my ticket was nothing special, 84 in a 70 caught by laser. No mention of how much traffic there was, where i was in the pack. when i pressed the judge about it he lifted the ticket pointed to the LEO signature and statement on the ticket and said this was all the evidence he needed. The tone in his voice made it very clear he wasn't going to budge and I wasn't feeling up to adding contempt of court charge on my day so i accepted the ticket and learned to just lawyer up from now on.

Discretion was the better part of valor on your part... good read on the judge. In a perfect world, the right to question the officer is a right... and the judge (or commissioner) needs to allow that right to be exercised regardless of whether the final arbitrator of the decision has already made his/her mind up about guilt or innocence. It's a game... you might have pressed the point... a 2nd court date may have been set... the LEO might have showed up... and you may have been able to prove "reasonable doubt" and STILL ended up losing (guilty) just b/c the judge wanted to "make a point." Just bugs me when people in that role take advantage of the fact that "the people" don't know (or understand) their rights... As you point out... if you had a lawyer at your side... the judge probably would have acted differently.

[gtslow]

The state doesn't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt for traffic infractions, the burden of proof is only "by a preponderance of the evidence" meaning that if an officer of the law says you are speeding and has a shred of evidence such as pacing or a radar gun you are going to be SOL when it comes time to see a judge. In this case it is better just to let a traffic lawyer deal with it. In a perfect world we wouldn't need lawyers for speeding tickets or accountants to do our taxes, but our government is quite a mess.

Unfortunately the excuse that "everyone else was speeding" or all the muscle cars have loud mufflers doesn't really carry much weight. The judge will just point to the WAC and uphold the ticket.

[slyphen]

I will consider the lawyer route. but if i have to fight it myself, here are my questions/defense for the officer.

The ticket was clocked at 70mph in a 60 zone on I-5.

1. Is your speedometer up to calibration date, if so, please provide calibration certificate and prove that it is.

2. The officer did not pace me properly, he immediately pulled me over as i passed him and did not maintain constant distance or speed as he caught up to me for a reasonable amount of time (usually at minimum 1/8-1/4 mile, i'll have to look a little more into it for washington).

3. According to title 45 article XX, I am allowed to pass on the right provided the condition is safe and the left lane vehicle is going below reasonable speed.

[gtslow]

Originally Posted by slyphen

I will consider the lawyer route. but if i have to fight it myself, here are my questions/defense for the officer.

The ticket was clocked at 70mph in a 60 zone on I-5.

1. Is your speedometer up to calibration date, if so, please provide calibration certificate and prove that it is.

2. The officer did not pace me properly, he immediately pulled me over as i passed him and did not maintain constant distance or speed as he caught up to me for a reasonable amount of time (usually at minimum 1/8-1/4 mile, i'll have to look a little more into it for washington).

3. According to title 45 article XX, I am allowed to pass on the right provided the condition is safe and the left lane vehicle is going below reasonable speed.

Good luck. My experiences with judges is that they have heard it all before, and don't want to hear it from us. They may offer to reduce or let you use your deferral on it. I'd definitely be interested to see how your defense goes, however I feel your chances of getting out of are slim to none.

[PNW FRS]

Originally Posted by gtslow

Good luck. My experiences with judges is that they have heard it all before, and don't want to hear it from us. They may offer to reduce or let you use your deferral on it. I'd definitely be interested to see how your defense goes, however I feel your chances of getting out of are slim to none.

#2 is the only one that MIGHT work in your favor. As pointed out, the judges and commissioners have heard it all... so your point will be falling on semi-deaf ears. FACTS work... so you'll need bona fide facts about the lack of pacing distance.. .not guesses. When I fought a "yellow-to-red" ticket years ago, I had to actually go to the signal, time the yellow with a stop watch (2.5 sec) to prove that it was shorter than the prescribed 3.0 seconds that the yellow light was supposed to be on. Had I simply said, "I felt the yellow was fast...." I would have been toast.

Good luck... looking fwd to a report on the outcome!

[slyphen]

i'm doing a lot of research into traffic law articles. i'll let you guys know what happens.