going to try to fight speeding ticket with "innocent until proven guilty" (tips pls)

[drFEEL]

For those of you still dumb enough to think that an officers word trumps yours just because he is a police officer, please refrain from giving me advice.

as far as i know, the only real proof an officer can have with a speeding ticket is if he radar clocked you.

i am not 100% sure if this officer did or not. he was just in his car and on the ticket it says "approximate speed".


this cop was a douche and actually made me feel unsafe and i was not going 90 mph as he says i was.


tips bros.

[memcop]

For those of you still dumb enough to think that an officers word trumps yours just because he is a police officer, please refrain from giving me advice.

as far as i know, the only real proof an officer can have with a speeding ticket is if he radar clocked you.

i am not 100% sure if this officer did or not. he was just in his car and on the ticket it says "approximate speed".


this cop was a douche and actually made me feel unsafe and i was not going 90 mph as he says i was.


tips bros.

tip slow down

You might have figured out the perfect defense, all these years, all these speeding trials, all these tickets.




























Cops hate him.

[WizardBoy1986]

the legal system hates him

[OPISAPHA]

if you get a good lawyer they'll ask when the equipment was last calibrated, etc

If you argue it yourself the cop is going to say "I was going 70 mph and he passed me quite quickly" or something. Eyewitness testimony is evidence that can be used to prove you guilty and cops are qualified to estimate your speed so you're basically screwed brah.

best case, the cop has something better to do.

[SkateAndDestroy]

OP I have this bookmarked from another thread maybe it will help you. Its supposed to be a 100% guarantee to get out of a ticket according to the OP. Who knows if it works.

To Whom It May Concern,
I received a letter claiming I committed a violation of a speeding law in the District of Columbia on 07/17/2012. As per the instructions, I am writing to plead ‘not guilty’ to this charge. Although this option is said to result in this matter going to court; it is my suggestion that the charges simply be dropped. This suggestion comes out of respect for tax payers, and my request that their hard earned money not be wasted in such proceedings. As there is no evidence of my involvement with this alleged ‘crime’, as well as the fact that I am not granted my 4th amendment right to face my ‘accuser’ (a camera); I see no way the government could prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I also see find no legal requirement for me to implicate someone else in this process, as it is the government’s responsibility to prove a person’s guilt. It is also my 5th amendment right to remain silent on the matter.
If it is the government’s decision to move forward in this matter, I would request copies of any evidence the prosecution may have of my involvement in the “offense”; as well as, all maintenance records for the camera(s) involved.
Sincerely,
(Your Name Here)

BTW How fast were you going and what was the speed limit? Interested to see what cops in your city consider "speeding".

[lebowski951]

there are attorneys that handle this kind of thing, well worth the fee from my experience

[Mobraelite]

good luck OP

when the prosecutor examines the officer he will ask what kind of qualifications he has in using the radar/laser he is equipped with and if they are all calibrated and accurate at the time that YOU were issued your ticket.. which they always are and they have it documented on paper

next they will ask the officer if how much training he received in traffic control and speed enforcement and if it still up to date .. which again is all up to date and in the officers favor that he is right in what he did


next you will lose any case you think you have because the officers training and qualification have more value than an ordinary citizen who "thinks" they can prove what the officer did was wrong

you will lose, the court backs the officer because he has all the credentials and can prove that you were speeding while you stand there looking like an idiot because you have no solid evidence or factual finding to prove in court

[FSUFAN11]

Good luck. Have fun in the bench trial where the officer's sworn testimony will the day.

[Who?]

May the force be with you.

[natypes]

good luck OP

when the prosecutor examines the officer he will ask what kind of qualifications he has in using the radar/laser he is equipped with and if they are all calibrated and accurate at the time that YOU were issued your ticket.. which they always are and they have it documented on paper

next they will ask the officer if how much training he received in traffic control and speed enforcement and if it still up to date .. which again is all up to date and in the officers favor that he is right in what he did


next you will lose any case you think you have because the officers training and qualification have more value than an ordinary citizen who "thinks" they can prove what the officer did was wrong

you will lose, the court backs the officer because he has all the credentials and can prove that you were speeding while you stand there looking like an idiot because you have no solid evidence or factual finding to prove in court

great post red

[thsker]

good luck OP

when the prosecutor examines the officer he will ask what kind of qualifications he has in using the radar/laser he is equipped with and if they are all calibrated and accurate at the time that YOU were issued your ticket.. which they always are and they have it documented on paper

next they will ask the officer if how much training he received in traffic control and speed enforcement and if it still up to date .. which again is all up to date and in the officers favor that he is right in what he did


next you will lose any case you think you have because the officers training and qualification have more value than an ordinary citizen who "thinks" they can prove what the officer did was wrong

you will lose, the court backs the officer because he has all the credentials and can prove that you were speeding while you stand there looking like an idiot because you have no solid evidence or factual finding to prove in court

As always, it just comes down to showing your credentials.

[memcop]

OP I have this bookmarked from another thread maybe it will help you. Its supposed to be a 100% guarantee to get out of a ticket according to the OP. Who knows if it works.

BTW How fast were you going and what was the speed limit? Interested to see what cops in your city consider "speeding".

Statement is ridiculous and speeding is going faster than the posted speed limit.

Not sure if room ventilated and a hazardous material has spilled.

[13nick31]

Statement is ridiculous and speeding is going faster than the posted speed limit.

Not sure if room ventilated and a hazardous material has spilled.

Or going under the posted limit.

Once saw a citation for 17 in a 35 mph zone.

[memcop]

Or going under the posted limit.

Once saw a citation for 17 in a 35 mph zone.

Sure, impeding traffic

[drFEEL]

good luck OP

when the prosecutor examines the officer he will ask what kind of qualifications he has in using the radar/laser he is equipped with and if they are all calibrated and accurate at the time that YOU were issued your ticket.. which they always are and they have it documented on paper

next they will ask the officer if how much training he received in traffic control and speed enforcement and if it still up to date .. which again is all up to date and in the officers favor that he is right in what he did


next you will lose any case you think you have because the officers training and qualification have more value than an ordinary citizen who "thinks" they can prove what the officer did was wrong

you will lose, the court backs the officer because he has all the credentials and can prove that you were speeding while you stand there looking like an idiot because you have no solid evidence or factual finding to prove in court

its not up to me to prove the officer is wrong, its up to him to prove he is right.

the burden of proof is on the state.

"qualifications" and "training" do not prove something beyond a reasonable doubt because humans make mistakes. like when he didnt put my damn address on my ticket and wrote that it was a 4 door and not a 2 door.

his grade school qualifications are supposed to ensure that he doesnt make those mistakes but look at that. intradesting

[memcop]

its not up to me to prove the officer is wrong, its up to him to prove he is right.

the burden of proof is on the state.

"qualifications" and "training" do not prove something beyond a reasonable doubt because humans make mistakes. like when he didnt put my damn address on my ticket and wrote that it was a 4 door and not a 2 door.

his grade school qualifications are supposed to ensure that he doesnt make those mistakes but look at that. intradesting

Its traffic court, a civil function

preponderance of evidence (51%) not beyond a reasonable doubt

Insult away but your the one going to court. What you "think" is irrelevant.

[drFEEL]

Statement is ridiculous and speeding is going faster than the posted speed limit.

Not sure if room ventilated and a hazardous material has spilled.

what is ridiculous about it? these are all things that need to be in order for a police officer to have a solid case.

im willing to bet the majority of traffic violations could easily be fought with "innocent until proven guilty" because most traffic tickets are just what the officer sees. most officers dont even know the damn laws and are uneducated emotional *******s like the one i got.

an officer can write a ticket for anything. doesnt mean its true. there has to be a balance to protect from this. hence "innocent until proven guilty".

[thsker]

its not up to me to prove the officer is wrong, its up to him to prove he is right.

the burden of proof is on the state.

"qualifications" and "training" do not prove something beyond a reasonable doubt because humans make mistakes. like when he didnt put my damn address on my ticket and wrote that it was a 4 door and not a 2 door.

his grade school qualifications are supposed to ensure that he doesnt make those mistakes but look at that. intradesting

srs question, were you going above the speed limit?

[drFEEL]

Its traffic court, a civil function

preponderance of evidence (51%) not beyond a reasonable doubt

Insult away but your the one going to court. What you "think" is irrelevant.

explain this

[DTreats]

Its traffic court, a civil function

preponderance of evidence (51%) not beyond a reasonable doubt

Insult away but your the one going to court. What you "think" is irrelevant.

Lettuce be cereal here sheriff, traffic court is a joke and is only to make money for the state.

Fight it OP, iv been to court 6 times, won 3 lost 3, good luck.

[mentalist72]

It isn't criminal court. You don't have to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

[memcop]

explain this

speeding is not criminal

it is not a criminal court

it is a civil court

"Officer was he speeding?" Yes

just highlight and google preponderance of evidence

[Lamborg]

do u have a red car op cuz i herd cops are racist against red cars

especially so if u have a spoiler and non-OEM wheels

[mentalist72]

speeding is not criminal

it is not a criminal court

it is a civil court

"Officer was he speeding?" Yes

just highlight and google preponderance of evidence

^ memcop knows the scoop.

[dcbone30]

explain this

It's not a criminal proceeding, the OPs guilt in this traffic violation takes less doubt to prove guilty/innocent. The burden of proof isn't as heavy, basically the judge will ask the officer what happened and his testimony is good enough.

As long as his testimony hits the elements of a speeding violation there's not much OP can do except show up and be respectful. It'll prob be lowered anyway.

[SheriffBrah]

Lettuce be cereal here sheriff, traffic court is a joke and is only to make money for the state.

Fight it OP, iv been to court 6 times, won 3 lost 3, good luck.

Call it a joke all you want.

Tell me what you think of traffic enforcement after a child in your family gets killed by a speeder in a school zone, by someone with your very same perspective.

[memcop]

Right about now OP is saying Oh **** fml.

[RickTrolled]

Bro, the cop was just mad because you weren't going fast enough. Should have been doing at least 100. Trust me, Cops is my favorite show.

[drFEEL]

"Officer was he speeding?" Yes

what makes you believe that an officers word trumps mine? because he has special "training"?

[DiddlemeDrogba]

Dude the trick is to go 185+ so the police don't bother