From: jreiser@scott.skidmore.edu (jason reiser)
Subject: Re: Advice on going to court for speeding
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Distribution: ne
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 21:29:05 GMT

jak@cs.brown.edu (Jak Kirman) writes:
> I apologize for posting what must be a frequently asked question, but I
> don't see any kind of answer in the rec-autos faqs, nor are there any
> articles on the subject in our news-feed's articles now.

-- I think this is the right place.

> 
> I was stopped a few days ago for speeding in Massachussets, and I am
> considering pleading not guilty.  Let me briefly recount the details; I
> am interested in advice about whether to go to court, what to say if I
> do, and also about the chances that my Rhode Island insurance company
> will learn about the ticket and how much they are likely to raise my
> insurance if they do.
> 
> I was driving from Worcester to Providence on Route 146 at 1:15am on the
> night of the 1st/2nd September.  I was approaching two cars from behind,
> with a speed differential of under 5mph, going downhill, when a police
> car appeared behind me with his lights on.  The road was well-surfaced,
> the weather conditions were perfect, and the traffic was very light (I
> had not seen another car for some minutes).  The road at this point
> (near Purgatory) is a two-lane divided highway with a posted limit of
> 55.  I thought I was driving around 70mph, but I am used to my 79
> Rabbit, and was driving my wife's almost new Corolla, so with the
> difference in feel and sound I may well have been going faster.  When I
> looked at my speedometer as I saw the lights, it read 75.
> 
> The policeman said he had stopped me as I was doing 80mph.  I didn't
> have the presence of mind to dispute this, since I was not really sure
> how fast I had been going when he clocked me -- I still don't know
> exactly how far before where he stopped me he had clocked me.  He asked
> if I had been drinking, to which I replied no (I don't drink), and he
> asked me whether I was in a rush.  I said that I was just going home
> after visiting a friend, but again didn't bring out all the excuses that
> I should have.  I was hoping that if I just acted very contrite he would
> at least ticket me for less than 80.  He went back to his car for a long
> time, at least 5 minutes, and then came back and gave me a ticket for
> 80mph, for $200.
> 
> I would very much appreciate any advice you could give me, especially if
> you have been to court for speeding in Massachusetts.  If it makes any
> difference, the ticket says: Massachussetts Uniform Citation, the
> officer was from the Sutton police department, and the ticket has both
> "radar" and "estimated" ticked off.


	I was just about to pass over this question when I spotted
that last statement about both radar and estimated being checked off.
If in fact the officer had used radar, this is a properly marked
ticket.  (They are supposed to estimate prior to the use of radar).
BUT, to the best of my knowledge, there is not presently a radar unit
on the market, nor has there ever been, a unit that can operate while
moving in the SAME direction as the target vehicle.  If he clocked you
from behind uning radar while moving, the reading is completely
invalid.  Before going to court, suppena (sp?) evidence from the
police department as to the make and model of radar used.  Check with
the manufacturer and see if you can acquire a manual or statement as
to the way in which it is to be used.  Before going to court you
should automatically receive the officer's statement and this may give
some insight into the way he go you.  Also, every Mass. police car I
have seen has the radar unit's antenna mounted to the rear ddriver
side window facing rearward.  ie. in order to get you, you would have
blown by him on the side of the road.  If you didn't see him, maybe he
used it by hand.  Does his department recommend this?  Probably not.
(There has been SOME evidence that this may be dangerous to the
officer), butif it isn't recommended, you can point out that perhaps
the reason is a lack of accuracy.  You don't have to prove your case,
just leave some significant doubt in the prosecution's case.  
If you get an attorney, you can usually get a reduction to illegal
parking (fine but no points) or something along those lines.  You
don't really need a reason, but the courts appreciate your hiring an
attorney as it speeds the court time and usually brings the state
money.  They don't really care about the points, but every state needs
income.  This will probably take just about a half hour in court as
opposed to up to several hours.  Look around.  Lots of good attorneys
can be had for $100 to $150, and that's probably less than the
potential increase in your insurance.
As far as them finding out about the ticket, often it just doesn't
happen because the DMV DOES NOT just tell insurance companies about
their policy holder's driving record.  The company has to request that
information.  And it costs money.  So they usually only check on new
policy holders to keep the finances and paperwork to a minimum.

Best of Luck.
				- Jason Reiser




> 
> Thanks.
>                          Jak Kirman                        jak@cs.brown.edu
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> When I started, flying was dangerous and sex was safe.
>                                  -- Her Lingus pilot at his retirement party


Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving