Forum

How Any Idiot Can Beat a RADAR Speeding Ticket
 

Something I found while I had time on my hands. Shows you how to defend yourself against a radar speeding ticket.

How Any Idiot Can Beat a RADAR Speeding Ticket

HI: Very Good Video-but Really LONG.. 2 hours!!!

Cliffsnote version is for the IQ challenged 'How I learned to walk and never get Speeding tickets':eek:
I guess you did your schooling with them, Modee?

I watched it yesterday when I had some down time (Sundays are great for that) It was very interesting except that it was taped in 1996 and well, it is 2008. So I don't know how much the laws on this have changed since then.

Yes, who has time these days for a 2 hour video. Can some provide the summary?

It is all about the FERENCY law in Michigan. There is a similar law in every state in the US. This is the law in Michigan:

1. The officer operating the device has adequate training and experience in its operation.
2. The radar device was in proper working condition and properly installed in the patrol vehicle at the time of the issuance of the citation.
3. The radar device was used in an area where road conditions are such that there is a minimum possibility of distortion (spurious readings).
4. The input speed of the patrol vehicle was verified. This also means that the speedometer of the patrol vehicle was independently calibrated.

5. The speedmeter (radar) is retested at the end of the shift in the same manner that it was tested prior to the shift and that the speedmeter (radar) be serviced by the manufacturer or other professional as recommended.

6. The radar operator is able to establish that the target vehicle was within the operational area of the beam at the time the reading was displayed.

7. The particular unit has been certified for use by an agency with some demonstrable expertise in the area.

They must have these papers in hand to show the court proving that the radar was installed properly and all that good stuff. And if they don't have one of those to prove it was done, then boom, you are home free.

Also, when you get pulled over and the officer asks you the normal questions such as, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" "Do you know what the speed limit is on this road?" "Do you know how fast you are going?" You need to have a tape recorder on hand recording everything, and after he asks any of these questions you say, "I respecfully decline to answer that question." (You say this after everytime he asks ANY question. And when he asks for the license and registration and goes back to his car and remembers you have recorded everything that was said and never answered one question, you may be off with just a warning also.

Also, during the trial you need to make A LOT of objections because the longer your case is there, the more money they are spending on your case. The officer also doesn't want to be there for 4 hours just for a speeding ticket. Just like the rest of us he wants to go home to his wife and family and just wants to leave.

There is some other info on the video also, but that is the jist of it.

Any other questions, feel free to ask.

A friend of mine was pulled over because the chopper radared him. he went to court and it turns out the officer that uses the radar gun here must also be the same officer to pull you over, so he got out of the ticket.

Yes, you are correct it does have to be the same officer because they have to answer questions also.

I've read testimonies of a real traffic court and basically people do all kinds of defenses like radar tuning and they just finds them guilty. There was a lady who was ticketed for not stopping at a stop sign and she brought in a huge blown up picture showing that the stop sign was obstructed and the cop just lied and claimed there was a second one and guilty. Traffic court is a kangaroo court.

If you're ticketed and dispute it, first you spend hours in court. First waiting in line, then sitting in a court room with 20+ other people with the judge talks to some prisoners on another case for an hour. Then they show you a video and that's it. Then if you want to plead not guilty you wait and later you you meet with a prosecutor who you can plea bargain. Then you get your court date and the cop is notified to show. The first one he does not have to show. The kangaroo court has various illegal things like how the chief witness and prosecutor usually are the same person and how the judge also acts as the second prosecutor and if you mention this fact in court, the judge will find you in contempt of court.

Sometimes you can't plea bargain, but basically if you rarely get a ticket and want a clean record then plea bargain for it to be made a non-moving violation which they might do. If you get a really bad ticket like reckless driving, DUI, or whatever and don't think you can win in court, then plea bargaining will work.

Generally how to win is you do whatever that stuff says, then you go through 2 hours in pre court, hours more in the kangaroo court where the cop shows up. Then you appeal it to a real non-kangaroo court an then you win. Sometimes in both criminal and civil cases, people can do an array of appeals over and over again up to the supreme court and usually get stuff overturned that way.

I also didn't watch the video, but I've read lots of stuff beforehand. The video is 115 minutes and it's google video. Google video buffers 5 seconds and then just won't load anymore usually.

I would like a picture of EXACTLY what having "time on your hands" looks like...please.

All criminal courts are a Kangaroo court. Despite what the constitution says you ARE PRESUMED GUILTY UNTIL YOU CAN PROVE YOURSELF INNOCENT. It is only human nature for a prospective juror to think..."the cops must have had something on him or they wouldn't have charged him...right?"

Sadly, with speeding tickets and minor offenses it is more cost-effective to take a deal and pay a fine than to pay an attorney to prove your innocence. I would like to see a system in place whereas if you are equitted of the charge the state has to pay your attorney fees.

You think that might put an end to their "throw as many charges against the wall and something is bound to stick" way of prosecuting.

For the record I have never been convicted of anything criminally (knock on wood) but have been a victim of the system nonetheless

Why did I have to read this post and respond??? Now I'm all worked up :eek: