DBLTKE

iTrader: (1)

Well folks I just got home about 10 minutes ago after receiving a speeding ticket, marked as a 50 in a 35.

The violation was at TV Highway and SW 178th Ave. There is an overpass that goes over some railroad tracks so naturally there is a downward slope. I always like to put my car into neutral when going downhill to try and save a little bit on gas so I must have picked up a little speed. However I did not realize that I was speeding nor that the speed limit changed to 35mph in that area.

I thought the speed limit stayed at 45mph the whole way through. I realize that it is my fault as I neglected to notice the speed sign but I need any help I can get. I do have a bad driving record already but is there any way of fighting this? He got me with radar, got my hair color, and my car color wrong. he marked brown and black when they are actually blonde and blue.

I really need help as I can't afford another ticket. I vaguely remember reading somewhere about asking them to show evidence of radar calibration or something along the lines of that and if something is marked wrong on the ticket it may void it.

ekoller

Your pretty much stuck, the only thing you can do is wait for the dispute court date and hope the officer doesn't show up. Otherwise they've heard your story from a hundred other people and with youre driving record you have no chance- sorry man

Street Lethal

iTrader: (16)

Similar thing happened to me, as the police officer marked down that I was doing 83-mph in a 65-mph zone. The funny thing was, out of the three choices he marked off "Heavy Traffic". When I got to the court house, I looked at the judge sarcasticly and said, "if I was doing 83-mph in Heavy Traffic, don't you think EVERYONE was doing 83-mph in Heavy Traffic as well lol". Judge didn't find my comment that funny (although he did grin a little), but in the end I had to pay it regardless. If you can't afford it all upfront, they will accept a payment plan, so don't worry....

EvilCartman

iTrader: (1)

I'd love to make a movie quote from Liar Liar right about now but the mods wouldn't appreciated it

Bigseth

iTrader: (11)

Ask for a trial by jury. It will take so long for them to schedule it that your statue of limitaions for the charge will probably be up before it goes to trial. If not you will atleast have a chance fora jury to find you innocent, instead of a judge that will find you guilty no matter what.

Seth

atc3434

iTrader: (4)

And people actually think this saves gas...

Jproz1167

iTrader: (3)

next time use your brakes not nuetral lolol .... pay the fine you wont get out of it, just be glad it wasn't a double fine zone!

Saculia

iTrader: (1)

Pay a little bit of money, and hire a good traffic lawyer. He can plead your case down to a non moving violation. It will not affect your driving record, and you probably wouldn't have to pay too hefty of a fine. It might cost you a little bit more money now than to have to pay the fine, but it will save you money in the long run.
There must be an attorney referal service where you live. They normally charge 20 bucks. Get a few names for lawyers that specialize in traffic law. Talk to a few of them, and ask them how they might think the the case will be disposed of. You don't want that on your record, if you already have a crippled one.
Quite frankly, your situation is not that bad. I have seen a lot worse.
Good luck

rideon1200

What you asked for. Ask for a continous, tell them you have to go out of town ect. When the cop shows for new trial, ask for cert. of calibration for that morning. Unless you have GI patrol officer it is long gone and case is dismissed

rx7speed

I'm not even sure he would have a right to a trial by jury as it isn't a criminal case.

Bigseth

iTrader: (11)

You always have the right to a trial by jury, it is your CONSTITUTIONAL right. They cant take that away from you no matter what your charged with. How is it not criminal anyway? He broke the law, therefore he committed a crime. So he has the right to a trial by jury where they will have to prove him guilty. Which in most cases they cant do. In a trial they will have to have hard evidence to prove you were speeding. The officers word isnt good enough because your word against his is contradictory, so he would have to have another witness or something showing that you were speeding. That is your best bet, unless you have the money to pay a lawyer that will get it throw out of court.
The reason no one asks for trial by jury is because they think they dont have that right. Thats the problem now days no one thinks they have rights because cops and government trample all over them with total disregard to the constitution, which they are supposed to uphold.


Seth

Saculia

iTrader: (1)

I don't know how it is in his state, but in the state of MO he will stand before a judge and be asked how he pleads guilty, or not guilty. If he pleads not guilty, the case will be set for trial. At that point all data, videotape, radar certifications and also dispatch tapes will become evidence for the trial.
Now, a speeding ticket up to 25 mph is not a criminal offense, it is a traffic infraction that is a misdemeanor.
Chances are you will get a trial date if you go that way and by then, you better have a lawyer that can prove that you are not guilty before that judge or a jury.
Or,
The other think you can do is:
Pay 100 bucks to retail a lawyer,
He can get the case continued for you.
He can plea bargain his violation to a non-moving violation, such as
excessive noise or something like that.
He pays a fine for the excessive noise violation, let's say 200 bucks.
The speeding ticket does not go on his record = no points on license = no insurance rate hicke

rx7speed

on the last ticket if I remember right it said I can not take it before a jury. From what I find with the idaho laws it seems to back that up. http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newi...id=190190002.K
also take a look at the case of blanton vs north las vegas. this was a case by the US supreme court. more or less it is saying due to the nature of the offence it was deemed petty and so with that he was not subject to trial by jury laws. only way around it would be to show that other penalties are harsh enough to warrant a trial by jury.

reading the oregon laws it almost seems that he wouldn't have a right to trial by jury as is from what I gathered here http://www.leg.state.or.us/orcons/orcons.html as it seems that the fines need to be in excess of 750. though granted there is a lot of legal mubo in there and I might of misread it so I found another one for junction city oregon. http://www.ci.junction-city.or.us/or...1_11.main.html
the punishment there has to be punishable by imprisonment and/or $1000 in fines. granted this isn't aplicable for him but it shows that right to trial by jury is not promised for every time you need to go in front of a judge.
so yes the constitution does provide means for a trial by jury. but not for every single case out there. and this of all things I doubt would qualify. from my understanding to be tried as a criminal case it would need to be more along the lines of a felony or misdermeaner rather then a simple fine anyway.


With him breaking the law and going to court. think about everytime you go to the courts just about it is due to breaking of some law. even if I get sued for some reason that would be for me not fulfilling my legal contracted duties. that does not make it a criminal case though.


and just curious and I'm not trying to start a fight by this but how much do you really understand and know of the constitution? as I said this isn't a slam because I myself don't know a whole lot about all of our laws.

Bigseth

iTrader: (11)

Well, first of no other laws can go against the constitution, it is the supreme law. Speeding is a crime, therefore it is criminal. They will love to tell you you dont have that right, cause all they want is money. Getting sued is a different story. He has the constitutional right to trial by jury no matter what any law says, no law can take your rights away. I know people that do this everytime they get a ticket. All you gotta have is time.
Also everytime you get charged with anything you have the right to a trial by jury, even if its littering or something stupid. You dont have to prove yourself innocent, I dont know why people think that, they have to prove you Guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. The reason you have this right is to protect yourself from wrongful incrimination. Them telling you that this isnt your right is Fascist and wrong. We live in a Republic where people hold the power over the government, not a democracy, where this would probably fly. Just ask for a trial by jury, but be prepared cause when they tell you your date you will have to be there. It will be really have to change it if your not a lawyer, cause it usually makes them mad when you dont bow down to them and do what they say, and actually exercise your rights. Give it a try.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.


Note it says counsel not lawyer, you can have anyone you want represent you, dont let them tell you otherwise.


Seth

Rayzor32

iTrader: (1)

what are you saying that it doesnt? because it does

rx7speed

on a fuel injection car it usually doesn't. when you put the car in N and just let it coast down a hill it is still feeding gas to keep the car idling. if you leave the car in gear and engine brake the car sees that and then shuts fuel off to the engine. no fuel to the engine saves more fuel then using enough fuel to keep the engine idling.

bigseth you might want to read that case I brought up to you in my last post. it is a direct ruling from the US supreme court. as you know I'm sure they are the ones who say how the laws from the constitution should read. from what it seems in that case they saw things a little different then you do. also you might actually want to click on some of those links I gave you.

brodyscamaro

No it doesn't. End of story. And you're stuck with the ticket.

Bigseth

iTrader: (11)

None of those links have a US supreme court ruling, there Idaho state law, Oregon state constitution, and a junction city ordinance. All of them read to that he has the right to a trial by jury as long as he notifies them 6 days ahead of his court date by writing. He has broken a crime (SPEEDING) wether he wants to pursue it in trial or get a laywer to get it dropped is up to him, but he certianly has every right to a speedy trial my and impartial jury of his peers, wether they say so or not. The US Constitution will always be the supreme law of the land and nothing or no one can go against it.

Seth

rx7speed

the links your right don't have any us supreme court cases linked but I did give you information of a case regarding "blanton vs north las vegas" you will have to google this one. or heck even wiki it. I'm sure they have something there regarding this.
also the links I gave you give more stipulations other then just 6 days notice.

the idaho requirements to get a trial by jury a speeding ticket wouldn't qualify here as it is only a 52 charge if I remember right and does not have any jail time to it.

for teh second link it quotes and the last one states quite a bit more then just a 6 day notice. read the part I put in bold
what if the offence was under 1000 bucks and no jail time?

and breaking a traffic ordinance is not the same as commiting a crime. yes both are illegal but they are quite different.

atc3434

iTrader: (4)

No, it doesn't. It actually consume's more fuel than when decelerating in gear. If you're car is in neutral, it requires fuel to keep the engine idling. When you are coasting, a fuel injected car will look at rpm, mph, and manifold vacuum, when appropriate the computer will allow just the drive-train to keep the engine spinning and reduce the injector pulse width, to the point where the computer will actually shut the fuel injectors completely off. So, coasting in neutral uses fuel to idle the motor, coasting in gear will actually use zero fuel.


And only now after typing that whole thing do I see RX7's already backed me up...

Bigseth

iTrader: (11)

Well according to the supreme court its up to the states, but the Oregon constitution allows him to have a trial by jury, also NC and SC do too.

Section 17. Jury trial in civil cases. In all civil cases the right of Trial by Jury shall remain inviolate.

Inviolate = intact

Seth

Rayzor32

iTrader: (1)

No i think it does cos my brothers buicks got a instant mpg computer and we proved that t does with that. Its a wide known fact that coasting in neutral saves gas, what you said doesnt make any sense. How does the engine stay running if the fuel injectors are completely off, and how does it magically start up again when you accelerate? If what you said "coasting in gear will actually use zero fuel" then the engine would shut off and you would lose power steering etc and have to restart the car. makes no sense..

brodyscamaro

Man it doesn't help MPG to do that, plus it's a way bigger hassle then it would be worth (if it worked). Listen to the more knowledgeable people and learn...

one wheel peel

and why are the courts backed so long in the first place? yep, because of people like you.just pay it.you obviously havent learned your lesson yet if your driving record is in sad shape,

Apeiron

Traffic law isn't a civil matter. Since he's charged with a misdemeanor and not a felony, it's also not a criminal manner, so there's no right to trial by jury guaranteed by the constitution. The right to trial by jury is only guaranteed for offenses which are punishable by imprisonment greater than six months.

rx7speed

easy to answer the question as to how the motor stays running. it doesn't "run" but it still rotates. ever put the car in gear while coasting and shut the car off. you car doesn't stop dead in it's track it keeps on moving because of the weight of the car. because the rear end is connected to the transmission which then is connected to the motor it will still spin the motor. this will answer your other question about the power steering. since the motor still rotates your power steering pump will still turn as well. just because you shut the fuel off doesn't stop the motor dead in it's tracks if it did while you where in gear your transmission would stock would which would stop your rear end which would stop your tires from rotating and I'm sure you know what would happen there. this can be done with no fuel going to the motor at all.



and thank you apeiron with your statement there. funny though that a Canadian has to talk about US laws though .

Apeiron

If you want supreme court rulings, try a few of these:

D.C. v. Clawans, 300 US 617 (1937)
Schick v. U.S., 195 US 65 (1904)
Callan v. Wilson, 127 US 540 (1888)
D.C. v. Colts, 282 US 63 (1930)

application of federal standards to states:

Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 US 145, 159-62 (1968)
Dyke v. Taylor Implement Mfg. Co., 391 U.S. 216 (1968)

or for the 6 month imprisonment and other limitations:

Baldwin v. New York, 399 US 66, 69 (1970)
Cheff v. Schnackenberg, 384 U.S. 373, 384, 386 (1966)
Williams v. Florida, 399 U.S. 78, 117, 143 (1970)
Frank v. United States, 395 U.S. 147 (1969)
Blanton v. City of North Las Vegas, 489 U.S. 538, 542–44 (1989)
----------
When I was a kid, one of the only TV stations I was allowed to watch was the Seattle PBS affiliate, KCTS.

Sonix

iTrader: (1)

Ouch.
Usually judges are so lenient when you go to argue it anyway that you don't really need to try that hard. Just say, "whoops, my bad" basically and they'll lower the fine or reduce the demerits. I didn't even get to SAY ANYTHING when I went to fight my PHOTO RADAR ticket, they just tossed it out. Just look your best, act super polite, and give some story about not noticing the sign, never happen again, saving money for your grandmothers operation

For me it helped that everyone before me that morning was charged with drunk driving without a license, and was *not fit to be in a court room* (ie. dirty, unkempt, baggy G-thug jeans etc), whereas I was wearing my best sunday-whites sorta thing, and was sitting up straight pulling out all my best sirs and ma'ams, and I was only arguing 20kms over the limit. (ps dress for a funeral). Judges love to see youth showing respect.

Here's a pop quiz for Apeiron - what do they call a "judge" or JP or whatever they are in traffic court, in Canada? I remember it was another one of those oddball Canadian things, but I don't remember what it was... Not "your honor" or "your highness", more along the lines of "your mediocrity" or something dumb.... (like lieutenant being pronounced "left-tenant" in Canada....sigh...)

Apeiron

Anyone below the level of a circuit judge is "Sir" or "Madam", although some people still use the traditional "Your Worship".

And by the way, the pronunciation of "lieutenant" as "leftenant" is actually older and more correct, coming from the Old French "leuf-tenant" or "place-holder".

Rayzor32

iTrader: (1)

so if i was to test this and take a FI car find a hill and coast down it, there would be no fuel going to the cylinders and no explosions occuring. So if I were to do this with open headers im not gonna hear anything from the engine? Are you sure this isnt some new thing thats available in newer high tech engines or even '96 and up?

Sonix

iTrader: (1)

ah, that mighta been it, your worship...
Yea, I know "leftenant" is technically older and more correct, but the fact that Canada is one of few places who actually uses it, where as the "normal" countries have changed it - makes it seem weird.

Apeiron

Actually, only one and a half countries have changed it. The only reason you think it's "normal" is because your TV comes from there.

rx7speed

no you would still hear stuff going on being it still is going to suck air in and push air out. it doesn't stop your valves from opening and closing. Actually with my 78 celica (carbed so it at least still sucked fuel though) or my rx7 (EFI) if I just flat out shut the motor off while coasting downhill and then opened the throttle it was fairly loud due to the amount of air it was still sucking in and out, and you know with ignition to off there is no ignition going on.

and yes I'm sure. my rx7 does this which is an 87 and I have verified as close as I can with that thing by getting an o2 reading. -.07v. I would say that is fairly lean. though granted not quite a thirdgen, but still it is applicable to most any EFI car. unless the auto maker is just flat out dumb. I don't think GM is quite that dumb.

iroc22

Sorry guys, this is a little unrelated to the forum and I have to lock it. If you have further discussions, just take them to PM's