Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
No I said they set it at 35 due to people who will go over (read margin or error).
We are not talking about setting rural interstate highway speeds to 45.
They could post yellow speed limits in the zone advising drivers of an oncoming section where the defacto speed limit might be too high for some.
Thoe yellow signs are not speed limit signs but advisory signs. But if they were again you would be changing the speed limit 6 times in under 3 miles. Again thats not reasonable nor prudent.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
And your speedo was last calibrated when?
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
And don't you just love those brain-dead imbeciles who -in broad daylight and dry conditions- slow down to 50% of the advisory speed and STILL ride their brakes through the entire corner?
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
Not, as you would have it, on the accused to prove his innocence.
Please remember that this is America, not someplace like China.
Andres defense is that the speed limit is set to low, he has the burden of proof to prove that the speed limit is to low.
The post that I was responding to andres was stating that the police may not have used proper calibration of the Radar gun. If wishes to use that as a defense the burden of proof of that is on andres.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Well, that might be going too far. The way the maximum speed law is written, almost everyone is breaking the law at some point or another on the San Diego Country Freeways and Interstates.
That could easily be done by not speeding.
Not possible in CA. They will ticket you for other reasons/Vehicle codes at-will, false allegations routinely thrown around in the name in revenue. There is no way to avoid Southern California's traffic enforcement for long unless you are 40 or older and drive a Camry or something equally boring.
In Kentucky the Commonwealth must prove that:
1. The operator of the speed measuring device was properly trained
2. The operator's certification is current
3. The speed measuring device was properly maintained and calibrated
4. The device was operated properly(pursuant to any state regulations and/or manufacturer's instructions)
As an aside, in Jefferson County(Louisville Metro) the Commonwealth is probably looking at losing as many as 600 DUI cases because several of the technicians who inspect the Intoxilyzer 5000 machines on a monthly basis allowed their certifications to lapse. No proof of inspection by a currently certified tech=suppression of the BA result.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport-2020 C43-1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica
Wife's: 2021 Sahara 4xe
Son's: 2018 330i xDrive
You forgot that in CA the legal speed limit is always 65 MPH unless conditions otherwise prevent it from being safe, reasonable, and prudent. The posted 35 is merely a guideline, and a prima facie speed guideline, note that the sign doesn't say "MAXIMUM speed limit."
Exceptions include school zones (when children are present), construction zones, and residential "local roads."
Okay, so just post 6 advisory signs and don't change the speed limit at all.
Works wonders when people use common sense.
I probably check my Garmin GPS navigation unit approximately on a monthly basis to correspond within + or - 2 MPH to my speedo. As good as any tuning fork in my opinion!
Advantages include being able to test and compare at more than one speed, whereas the forks are usually tuned to some slow speed that doesn't prove anything at higher speeds.
Unfortunately that is wrong. It is not enough. The officer must prove in court beyond a reasonable doubt that I've violated each and EVERY element of the crime. As the vehicle code is currently written, safety violation is an element of the crime. It is not enough for him to show I was going over 35. He must also prove that my speed was unreasonable, unsafe, and unprudent given the conditions present that day.
As to improper calibration and proving the speed limit was set too low by traffic engineering survey, that can all be obtained in the discovery process, and records will be checked, and if favorable to my defense, they will be mentioned in court. This is IN ADDITION too my defense testimony, but the burden of proof for unsafe driving is on the officer. If the officer during his testimony forgets to mention that my driving was unsafe somehow, I could move for dismissal right then and there without presenting a single word or picture for my defense, as the "prosecution - which is the officer only in CA, no DA) has failed to provide evidence of every element of the infraction. I guess you could call that lack of prosecution.
P.S. The radar reading isn't enough to establish speed. The correct procedure for HOLDING up in court is that the officer should first visually estimate my speed, then use the radar to verify his estimate.
I agree. I think the article is poorly worded stating that they are now allowed to "run" red lights. Running a red light is failing to stop and just driving on through the intersection. Stopping for the light, then proceeding through when safe to do so is not running the light.
Strongly disagree. If an intersection warrants a red light traffic signal, then it was already deemed busy/dangerous enough to not be controlled by a simple stop sign. And, of course, a stop sign allows a driver to proceed through the intersection after a complete stop and a visual scan indicating it is safe to move ahead.
Reliance on hard controls like lights just breeds inattention, IMO. Lights are the laziest form of traffic control, no matter who might deem it to be needed.
I wonder if it's not just a matter of more effort, but money... your tax money. Money to rig the signals so they'll blink at off-hours (can they do that w/o any refit?), and at minimum to pay someone to do the set-up work... assuming it can't be done in someone's "spare time".
Also the city would need to know it's a problem worth fixing. Have you complained to your city about the signals being active at all hours? Have you encouraged others in your city to do the same, so the city knows the extent of the problem?
On the inconsiderate driver topic, about 30 mins ago about a half a block from where I sit, a mid 00s Civic apparently smacked a Pilot (I think, dark) from behind - I had a window open and heard the tires screech and the smash. Damage didn't look terrible, but all manner of aid cars including a ladder truck showed up. Yapper, texter, drinker, eater, child-minder, who knows.
http://www.helpigotaticket.com/speed/basic.html
Good enough for you?
ON another page/link from that same website sourced above, I found this:
Iggy Awards
Judge Gary K. Barrett
Defendant was cited for violation of Vehicle Code section 22350. The officer checked radar on the ticket.
The case went to trial in the Superior Court, Ventura County, where the defendant cited People v Goulet and pointed out that the survey had a critical speed of 46 mph which could in no way justify the posted limit of 35 mph. Further, the 35 mph limit made violators out of 96% of all of the drivers in the survey.
Judge Barrett noted that he knows the judges who wrote the Goulet decision, and then proceeded to ignore it and find the defendant guilty.
The DA did not file a Response Brief; the Appellate Division affirmed their findings in Goulet and reversed Judge Barrett.
____
This definitely helps me to feel confident should I be found guilty at trial I will win on appeal.
Certainly not this LT. Governor !!
Your argument does not hold water. It doesn't even hold air, and here's why:
1) Officers routinely write tickets that won't hold up in court. Why? Because 95% of people are too lazy to fight their ticket and just pay up anyway.
2) Of the 5% or so that do fight their ticket, a huge percentage, around 90%+ are found guilty anyway when the officers show up and tesitfies. This conviction rate in traffic court shows an unfair discrepancy for "real" "fair" trials with a jury present.
3) It is very time consuming and costly to file an appeal. Even I have never filed an appeal, and I had one case were I'm mad I myself for not doing so. I had a perfectly appealable conviction, and my time resources were simply too limited at the time to take it further. I won't make that mistake again.
4) Per the above, that is the reason people do not flock to CA to drive. You can drive perfectly safely and legally, but you'll waste a whole lot of time in traffic court to do so! And you may or may not win depending on how fair and knowledgeable your judge is.
Interesting that he asked for the breathalyser at the scene and then requested that the black box info be made public. (masslive.com)
1) Basic speed law requires prosecution the burden and duty to establish the driver was unsafe and posed a hazard somehow to person or property.
2) Burden of providing a valid certified traffic and engineering survey validating the posted speed limit to show it was not a speed trap is on the prosecution.
3) http://www.helpigotaticket.com/cases/index.html
No seat belt, too. I'm a little surprised he survived; I guess he's just lucky he didn't get ejected from the car.
I find that hard to believe. I really don't believe that the police are pulling people over for no real reason at all and issuing tickets without a cause. I have been driving for some 35 years and have been pulled over exactly three times for non speed related issues. Twice for a burned out bulb (given warnings) and once due to the officer thinking that my plate had expired (the officer admitted his mistake, apologized and let me go).
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Now if you were stating that you were not going past the posted speed limit you would have nothing to prove, the total burden would be on the state.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Well since the law states that you may not proceed through a red light excpet to make a right turn after a complete stop when traffic is clear from both directions or under direction from a law enforcement officer going through a red light is running a red light.
Now if you want something that allows you to stop and the proceed when traffic is clear they have that. It's called a stop sign.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The lights around here will stay green for the main street and will only turn if a vehicle approaches on the lightly used street. Seems better than blinking lights.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The truth is, if you review the case law I provided a link to, time and time again the Basic speed law interpretation has been upheld to require the officer to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:
1) you were going over the posted speed limit
AND, not or
2) you were a hazard and unsafe in some way
If he fails to do both sufficiently, his prosecution is INSUFFICIENT, case closed.
The burden in this country is always on the prosecution.
As soon as I raise the speed trap defense, it is accepted since the citation already shows radar was used, and the burden is on the prosecution to prove it wasn't a speed trap. I hope they bring a valid traffic engineering survey with them to court!
Of course, since I already know the survey will favor me, I'll make sure I have my copy just in case! And to avoid having to win on an appeal with a bum judge.
Try living and moving to southern CA, land of the walk-up pay-through window for traffic payments.
Now if you want something that allows you to stop and the proceed when traffic is clear they have that. It's called a stop sign.
You are right.. This is where we need the law changed nationally State by State.
Running a red light at full speed should not be the same penalty, same law, and same fine as making say, a right turn at 1 MPH.
Legalizing right turn "yielding" rather than "stopping" would save billions of gallons of gas and manhours over a period of time.
Ah of course the link to the site that tells people how to beat a ticket. You read it on the internet so it must be true.
I am going to start to run into that myself real soon.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The law doesn't need changing. If you want an intersection where you can go through once it is clear lobby your city council to remove the traffic light and install a stop sign.
Running a red light at full speed should not be the same penalty, same law, and same fine as making say, a right turn at 1 MPH.
I disagree it's the action not the speed that is the infraction. Should the mugger who only gets $5 get a lesser sentence than the mugger who got $100 simply because he got less money?
Legalizing right turn "yielding" rather than "stopping" would save billions of gallons of gas and manhours over a period of time.
Again I disagree, what is a yeild? How fast can you make that turn? 1MPH? 2? 5? I simply don't believe that slowing down and making the turn gives you enough time to adequitly assess the situation and determine if it is safe to proceed.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Or just put it on a timer and have it go to flashing red in light traffic times.
As I had said the lights here will stay on green for the main road and will only change when cross traffic approaches.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
"A police officer from a Chicago suburb issued a $132 speeding ticket to a woman and was so smitten that he used motor vehicle records to locate her address and ask her out via a note left on her windshield."
Cop Issues Ticket, Asks For Date, Gets Sued (Straightline)
Yes, it's on the internet, but just cause you see it printed in a magazine makes it no less or more true. Newspapers are no more or less true.
The fact of the matter is the website links to case law. These are known published cases, filled with complete records so you can find the case yourself at the local law library if you wish.
These cases were already familiar to me from other sources, so I can vouch for them without having to look into the library. I'm knowledgeable enough to have written my own "fight your ticket website." So I can vouch that the one I linked to knows what he's doing, and has accurate relevant and truthful information. I wish I was web savvy enough to have thought of making a website like that years ago.
Sometimes even case numbers are listed. But the appellate court decisions have full references. The author of that website verifies his sources, but does not always divulge personal information.
You can also buy a lawyer's book, from NOLO PRESSES, called "How to fight your ticket" or "how to fight your ticket and win," or "how to fight your ticket in CA" If you prefer a published book to internet sources.
I happen to own the 11th edition of "fight your ticket & win in California" by Attorney David. W. Brown.
90% of my information comes from him and that series of books. Excellent Law for All Help books.
At least when your sued the judge theoretically doesn't have a bias.
Some by lawyers, CPA's and ex-IRS agents.
All will land you in hot water if you try to use a lot of what they suggest.
They are just trying to squeeze nickles out of the gullible.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Thank you.