Speeding Defense?

60 in a 30? Ouch!

Sorry to read that my friend!

Ouch is right....
That's going to hurt....

If that had been here in Arizona, it would be criminal speeding...Anything over 17 mph over the speed limit is criminal in Arizona...

Should have told him you were just trying to maintain a safe distance between you and the cars behind you....

i've ben lucky so far! My car is faster than a speeding ticket!
Tim

Beautifuly in-car shot Deeb. The new high-tech interior looks great.

As far as fighting the ticket goes ... There is a book available called "Fight that ticket in the province of Ontario" (paperback). It may be for the Province of Ontario but the tips could be equally applicable in Quebec.

I have successfully fought all my tickets using the techniques described in the book. For example: Normally, exceeding the speed limit must be substantiated over a fixed distance at a constant speed. (The accepted norm is 1/4 mile). This is done, so as to remove the defence argument of errors in the police measurement technique. eg. You can ask the policeman over what distance was the measurement and how many measurements were taken. You can argue that the movement by the radar, policecar, etc. in a non-steady state may have contributed to an erroneous reading on the part of the police (more and other details in the book).

In all cases it is worth while to take it to court. Usually the prosecutors would rather save the courts' time and offer you a plea-bargain. You can then negotiate a more acceptable penatly if you pled guilty.

I wish you luck.

Bohdan

Deeb,

Definitely worth fighting these things, my recent 'Exhibition of Speed' for breaking the wheels loose pulling away from a junction carried a $220 fine and a whopping 8 demerits. The lawyer got it reduced down to $90 and a speeding 5-10 over the limit (1 demerit). Yes it cost me $1,500 in Lawyers fees, but the alternative insurance increases on 5 cars would likely have been worse, besides which it was just plain wrong and you can't let the bastards beat you.

My experience is to get anywhere you need to work within the system (i.e. feed the system, it eats $$) and get a lawyer. On a previous passing in a 'no passing zone'. I tried to fight it myself and the cop just plain lied on the stand. Guess who the Judge beleived

Julian

Tell him your cruise controll was malfunctioning. Or that your speedo read kph not mph. Or that the light was in your eyes. A Pantera firend of mine was driving his car in SoCal, years ago. A couple too many "pops" at the local stand. He had just installed his Euro Speedometer because it is cool and reads 300kph. Bad if you have been drinking...

I just got caught 76 in a 60. It was a trap, the limit dropped and the Trooper was waiting. There were lots of tracks in the median where they were working the area. he said I HAD to come to court or have a lawyer there for me. It was 4 hours from home. 3 days later I got a letter from a law office. It seems if I send $350 to 450 they can get it reduced to a non moving violation. It ain't fair.....

Well, I have successfully defended many tickets. This video was just a first test of how to shoot in car. I plan to win this one. I just posted it because I loved the sound!

Anyhow, here's my planned presentation I will make to the court, whenever I get there:

SLIDE ONE
I have a google earth shot of the exact location where I was tricketed. I indicate my path, TURNING left onto this street, after stopping for a red light.

SLIDE 2
Here I show the location of the radar cop and indicate where I got stopped and ticketed by different cop down the road. All these are laid out correctly.

SLIDE 3
Now I indicate the google earth measuring tool to show the area that could possibly have been captured by radar, based on his position. I detail the area and define the minimum and maximum distance I could have travelled in this area.

SLIDE 4
Using the maximum distance, I then show a linear acceleration calculation formula to determine how fast I could possibly be going after turning onto the street until the furthest possible location where he could have got me on radar. The unknown is my speed at the end of the distance. The known factors I use are the max distance I could have travelled and the max speed possible.

SLIDE 5
To show the maximum speed possible, I refer to a Road and Track Test of a Detomaso GT5 - with a 0-60 time of 5.5. Based on the formula I use, it shows I would have needed another 150+ feet to reach the speed shown on radar.

SLIDE 6
Now all I have to do is show a video of my nav screen, as I travel that same maximum distance, with some decent engine noise, yet never reach the ticketd speed. That's the hard part. Based on initial tests yesterday, my car destroys the Road and Track 0-60 times, so it looks like I will have to use 1/4 throttle and add the sound effects later.

CLOSING:
In the end I will simply say, "Your honour, yes I was over the 30 mph speed limit. But not even a Ferrari could have reached 60 mph in that distance. As my screen indicates I was only going about 40, which is exactly what I claimed to the officer when he ticketed me. But he refused to look at my screen."

"This was the first time out with the car, and the first time I had used the new nav system. I tried to show the officer the recorded data which clearly indicated "Maximum Speed Recorded" which was only 45 mph but he ignored it claiming the other officer gave him a speed of 60 and that's all he knows. Clearly there is something wrong here."

THE VERDICT:
Assuming the judge never heard of a Detomaso, and the two cops who will be in court have never visited this PIBB, and no one else in court knows anything about physics or linear acceleration, I should walk away with 1 or 2 points and $150 instead of 5 and $400. And no legal fees either."

Don't worry. I'll come visit every now and then. Heck, I'll even look after your car for a few years.

$20.00 bucks and I'll keep my mouth SHUT!

So, that's your defense, huh?

I picked up a ticket yesterday, and am thinking about fighting it. I was at least 1 km from the cop, maybe more, when he zapped me with instant-on. The Valentine One went off and I slammed on the brakes, immediately bleeding off the 40 kph that I was over. I was convinced there was no way he could have gotten a reading on me from that distance. However, obviously I was wrong because he did pull me over and write me up. After he handed me the ticket, he asked if I have a radar detector. I answered "yes" and he said, "I thought so, because you slowed down quite a distance away." He could not have measured my (rapidly declining) speed for more than a second or two at a kilometer's distance.

Do I have a chance?

Peter I have no experience with cases involving laser, but you could easily win a case based on radar. Here's why....

ALL manufacturers of radar equipment specify that the police agency must run so many seconds of "history" on your speed in order to verify the readings were not erroneous. If you reduced your speed quick enough and the officer was unable to collect data for the time specified by the radar manufacturer, you have the ticket beat. If memory serves me, that time is normally around 20 to 30 seconds, but it varies a bit from manufacturer to manufacturer.

So you contact the police agency and find out what make and model of radar equipment they use. Bring the written instructions from the manufacturer to court, specifying data must be collected for a certain number of seconds. Present this to the judge. You then ask the arresting officer to present his history for your speed. Case closed, you win.

There are books and web sites that cover this in much more detail.

Here in California another method used to beat speeding tickets involves the "radar survey" for the road in question. The law stipulates that in order for the police to use radar, the road must be "surveyed" every so many months to insure that radar can be operated withour interference on that section of road. Governments being what they are, there is never enough budget to keep up with those road surveys, they are almost always out of date. So you pull the survey records for the road in question, bring a copy of the vehicle code specifying the road must be surveyed every so many months, and prove to the judge the road's survey is out of date, by law, they have no case against you. I have no idea if similar laws are in force in British Columbia.

Whatever you do, never ever admit to an officer how fast you were going, if asked just tell them you're not sure. They take notes and record your replies to their questions, and will use them against you in court.

George

In New York ..they only want the money .. If you go to your court date and see the cop before the court ... they always show up before court and meet with the people. He will negociate the ticket for no points ... but you have to pay the FULL BOAT on the fines ... unless you have a curtouesy card ... then your free to go when he pulls you over.

Mr. Berman, Very interesting senerio you describe to the court. We all understand the perfrmance ratings of the GT5S. However the car that was tested in Road and Track is fitted with model year factory installed engine. It would so please the court if you could describe any modifications that your car may have. It is obvious to the court that in 1985 cars were not equipped with GPS systems. Perhaps someone has changed your BORE, STROKE, and COMPRESSION RATIO! IS THIS THE CASE MR. BERMAN! Can't you just cop a plea bargin and not have to appear? Your gonners man!

quote:

Mr. Berman, ...It would so please the court if you could describe any modifications that your car may have.

"MODIFICATIONS??? Why, my car is totally stock! - Well, OK, the gas cap is totally stock..."

So long, Dude.

Deeb,
Was it radar or laser? What were the road conditions (drizzle, clear)? Same questions for you Peter.

Blaine

In NY, even with Ladar, the officer is required to observe the vehicle for a minimum distance.

I'm thinking 1/4 mile but I wanna say 1/2 mile.

This is another technicalaty where if you can prove that the distance was lessthen required, then it is a dismissal.

The problem in NY is that some of these infractions become misdomeanors because of the extent of the violation. The term is aggrevated violation. Those the DA gets involved in and doesn't want to negotiate anything and you are better off with an attorney.

Try $600 for the attorneys appearance to plead, $1,800 to represent you before trial and $2800 if it goes to trial. Plus expenses, cost of expert whitnesses, etc.

It gets a little pricey. If you can get it for no points and 6 hours of safety classes, take the deal.

Incidentally, F.Lee Bailey has gotten himself off, read as case dismissed, on three DWI cases that I know of. It isn't really that hard to do, but there are pitfalls all ova da place!

Peter, David - I too was zapped the other day .. except mine was with a camera. A measly 6 kph over the city street limit netted me a 15 euro fine and no points. Then, for the ride home ... I'm cruising the autobahn at 130mph in the Bimmer..and it was completely legal. Go figure.

No matter what they say, it's not about justice...It's about your money and that's all they want. Someone has to continually feed the big machine.

quote:

Originally posted by lastpushbutton:
I just got caught 76 in a 60. It was a trap, the limit dropped and the Trooper was waiting. There were lots of tracks in the median where they were working the area. he said I HAD to come to court or have a lawyer there for me. It was 4 hours from home. 3 days later I got a letter from a law office. It seems if I send $350 to 450 they can get it reduced to a non moving violation. It ain't fair.....

Man... that's pretty David...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Charlton:
"MODIFICATIONS??? Why, my car is totally stock! - Well, OK, the gas cap is totally stock..."

quote:

ALL manufacturers of radar equipment specify that the police agency must run so many seconds of "history" on your speed in order to verify the readings were not erroneous. If you reduced your speed quick enough and the officer was unable to collect data for the time specified by the radar manufacturer, you have the ticket beat. If memory serves me, that time is normally around 20 to 30 seconds, but it varies a bit from manufacturer to manufacturer.

I was told if you slam on the brakes and slow to well below the speed limit, it will cause the radar to throw a 'false' as it is trying to determine a speed over a fixed time.

I haven't put it to the test, YMMV.

George
Thats interesting info.

I got a ticket a number of months ago (89 in a 55). I came over an off camber sweeping left as he was coming up the opposite way so he was pointing right at me and bam...all over but the crying. I immediately scrubbed speed but he flipped a "U" turn right away and on came the lights.

Based on what you were saying about history should I have fought it?

Miles

Blaine - It was sunny and clear. The ticket says RADAR - 101.5 kph in a 50 kph zone.

Coz - Yes, that pic Mark posted sure is pretty. Things always look great in pictures. But when I open up the rear deck all I see is hours of work to do along with a sore back and many bleeding knuckles. So I just close it up, get in and put the hammer down (and sometimes get speeding tickets).

LPB - C'mon, do you really think my defense is weak? Any (ex)police dept folks here wanna give me an expert opinion on my defense strategy?

quote:

Originally posted by Fahrenheit351:
...should I have fought it...

Yes. Buy one of the books or go to one of the web sites, the message is unanimous, most speeding tickets based on radar are beat-able. Law enforcement does not use the radar equipment as specified by the manufacturer. They rely on the ignorance of the public to pay up without a fight.

cowboy from hell

Every time I have shown up in court to try and beat or reduce a speeding offence, the case begins with the prosecution coming over and showing me their detailed record of calibration dates, times, prep and specs. Then smugly grinning and asking if I want to proceed with a defense.

I have never attacked the equipment. I use logical arguments to put doubt in the judge's mind.

They are intentionally intimidating you.

Even if the officer didn't really calibrate the radar equipment the day you were cited, the calibration documentation could have been falsified the morning of the court date. There's really no way to beat them based on calibration. People used to beat them that way 20 years ago, they learned their lessons in that respect.

Just tell them you hope they are prepared to present a history of your speed for the time specified by the manufacturer.

In this case, there's no way that could have happened, since you only peaked at that speed for moment, right?

Perfect Cowboy! Thanks. That is just what I need to add...

That sounds good but how do radar guns manage to catch the speed of a baseball in mere seconds?

The requirement to take readings for several seconds (a history) is based upon the manufacturer's ability to guarantee the accuracy of the measurement. The devices can measure speed instantaneously, but the accuracy of the measurement is based upon many factors, like the relative motion of the radar device compared to the vehicle its measuring, the angle at which the radar device is relative to the motion of the vehicle, etc. Conditions for measurement are not ideal and quite variable. So the manufacturers specify that the measurement is reliable ONLY if the cops get so many seconds of consistent reading.

The radar at the baseball game is tri-pod mounted, immobile, and the moving object is traveling almost directly toward the instrument. The conditions are almost ideal.

cowboy from hell

quote:

Originally posted by PanteraTurbo:
Deeb,
Was it radar or laser? What were the road conditions (drizzle, clear)? Same questions for you Peter.

Blaine

Blaine:

It was clear and sunny, so no mitigating factor there. Also, there was no other traffic. It was just me and the cop going the opposite direction on a straight section of a two lane country road.

quote:
ALL manufacturers of radar equipment specify that the police agency must run so many seconds of "history" on your speed in order to verify the readings were not erroneous. If you reduced your speed quick enough and the officer was unable to collect data for the time specified by the radar manufacturer, you have the ticket beat. If memory serves me, that time is normally around 20 to 30 seconds, but it varies a bit from manufacturer to manufacturer.


"I was told if you slam on the brakes and slow to well below the speed limit, it will cause the radar to throw a 'false' as it is trying to determine a speed over a fixed time."

Guys:

I have a Valentine One. I hit the brakes as hard as I could the instant it went off, and was concentrating on staying straight under such extreme braking so I actually slowed to below the limit before realizing it and then coming back up. My guess is that he had me for less than two or three seconds before I was at or below the limit. I will ask the detachment for the make of the radar gun and see if there is a requirement for a minimum time or distance that I should have been observed for. Unless the cop lies, then I should be good to go. I will also check to see if there is a requirement here in BC for them to check the road for interference.

Curiously, tickets here in BC do not state what speed they clocked you at, and the cop did not tell me. I wonder if that makes any difference? This is the first time I have ever received a ticket and not been informed of the speed I was clocked at. I wonder if he got a "false" and did not want to admit it.

He did ask me if I had a radar detector, which I admitted because they are legal here, and that will come out in court. I worry that I will lose any sympathy the judge may have because of it. However, it could also work for me, because he then went on to say, "I thought so, because you slowed down quite a distance away."

I have one remaining question. Is there a maximum range for the typical radar gun? As I wrote previously, I was at least one kilometer away from the cop when he zapped me. He was barely a spec on the horizon. I really wonder if he could have sorted me out from the clutter at that range. Does anybody know how these guns work and if they can reliably get a reading at that range? Can I somehow prove how far he was away or do I have to rely on his honesty?

If there was more than one moving object (car) on the road, the radar equipment would not have been able to sort your car out from amongst the others at that range. Laser can be pin point accurate, not radar. If there is more than one vehicle on the road the cops assume the radar is detecting the speed of the closest vehicle, or the vehicle that enters the range of the radar first. In reality, it can be the largest or flattest vehicle (think Peterbuilt) that gets detected. The shape of a Pantera, or any exotic, is not very radar friendly from the front. Its all very "iffy" and that's why it is easy to beat if you come to court equipped with the proper info for the judge.

I've never heard of anyone being tagged 1/2 mile away with radar. You'll need to consult the manufacturer's spec, and the books or web sites on the subject. There are experts out there who can give you the straight dope. I've shared about as much as I know on the subject. One point I want to get across to everyone, law enforcement relies upon the ignorance of the public in regards to their use of radar based speed measurement. If you call them on their methods, you're case will most likely be dismissed.

I'm sure the best defense will vary state by state and provence by provence, depending upon how their laws are written and how their legal systems view the subjects of speeding and radar.

cowboy from hell

The Stalker Pro Radar gun will acquire a reading from a car at 6000 ft in about 1/100th of a second. These are the manufacturer specs under "ideal" conditions, but even if they are optimistic, I can't see how any radar unit would require more than half a second to get a reading.

I think the best way to fight this one is to prove (as DEEB plans) using math and specs that the car could not have reached the ticketed speed in the distance available.

Police here use LTI Marksman or the UltraLyte laser speed guns. These two only requre one shot to give an accurate reading as they take 42 readings and average them. If 5 or more pulses are invalid the device errors out which is why the quick deccel might help as this would throw off the measurement. However, all of this happens in .3 seconds so unless you see him before he shoots you youre not going to have time to brake. As the gun can take a reading in .3 seconds this would in fact allow an officer to get three separate reading in under a second. Pretty hard to beat in court. These units can also take a reading up to 3500 feet away but the laser size at 1000 feet is 3 feet in diameter so I imagine with that math it would be 9 feet at 3000 feet which might be an argumnt point if there were other cars on the road. All units are tested before and after shifts as per MFG specs and case law states that as long as these tests are done the reading is acceptable in court. Once again good luck. Radar equpment is rarely used anymore because of the time it takes and the large inacuracy if any other cars are on the road.

P.S. Im not a cop but am quite intimate with one.

Blaine

I've beat 5 radar speeding tickets. I understand laser is a whole new ball game, and more difficult to beat. I've only recently observed the California Highway Patrol parked and using laser, twice so far this year, once I almost got busted. Up to this point the CHP always had the little cone shaped radar sensor mounted on their front bumper, and the majority are still using that system.

Fun laser story (this happened about 2 months ago):

I came around a blind corner on the freeway I drive daily to work, exceeding the speed limit by a "bit". Parked on the side of the road, standing outside their patrol car was a CHP officer aiming a laser gun right at me. I passed by and looked in the rear view mirror, I observed the officer open the door of their patrol car, throw the laser gun on the seat and enter the vehicle. The chase was on!

Not too far beyond where the officer was standing was another blind corner in the freeway, and just around the blind corner was an off ramp. So instead of slowing down, I put the pedal to the metal and headed for the off ramp. I exited the freeway, and entered onto the road that parallels the freeway. Out my window I observed the CHP officer speed by, still on the freeway, beyond the off ramp, lights flashing, trying to catch up with me.

Go to the web site of your favorite Radar or Lidar speed measuring devices and try to download the owners manual. You won't be able to because you needed a password that is only given to law enforcement. The whole system relies upon the ignorance of the public.

In David's & Peter's situation the speed measurements were based on radar, not lidar.

The only radar speed detector "spec" of any consequence is how much history is specified by the manufacturer. That information is in the users manual, the manual they won't allow you to view or download without a law enforcement password. It may be that the new radar stuff won't give the officer a "pass" until a sufficient amount of good data (i.e. stable measurements) have been collected. So the history defense may be a thing of the past with the newest equipment.

Do you know why the law enforcement agencies are switching to laser? Because its harder to fight the tickets. More revenue! That's the only reason. There is no evidence that the incidents of speeding are on the rise, requiring an expenditure for better equipment. It just bothers them that a few people fight and win each year, they consider that lost revenue. They don't like to loose court cases against everyday Joes. If the goal was simply to get people to slow down and obey the speed laws, all they would have to do is increase visibility, get more officers on the road where they can be seen. When they are hiding, waiting to catch speeders, the intention is not to enforce law, but to write tickets, generate revenue. Its not the officers fault, they are doing what they've been told to do. Its the policy makers, the politicians.

My recommendation is still to go to the web sites that specialize in beating speeding tickets:

http://myspeedticket.com/

http://www.laserveil.com/speeding/ticket/how-to-beat/

http://www.tipmra.com/

http://www.beatmyspeedingticket.com/

http://www.magma.ca/~fyst/

http://www.beattheticket.net/

http://www.xcopper.com/

http://www.motorists.org/info/speeding_tickets.html

http://www.worldlawdirect.com/article/903/Fighting_a_speeding_ticket.html

http://www.paynoticket.com/

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/traffic_tickets/speeding_ticket.html

http://www.roadwarriors.ca/

The internet is loaded with web sites like these.

cowboy from hell

Deeb, Peter

Peter

You probably know already that it is not a good idea to admit you have a radar detector in your car whether it is legal or not. The reason the officer asked this of you was because he could not get a constant speed reading over some time to support his position. You confounded that by putting on the brakes after your detector went off. As a counter point, the prosecution will argue, "That this is be best speed reading they got because you were using a radar detector. So, why did you change your speed if you were not speeding and why did you use a radar detector if you abide by the speed limit?" In my opinion, you will need to address these arguments.

Deeb,

I have been following the thread and I figure its time to wade in. George has excellent comments and should be fully considered. The book I referred to, covers much of the discussion - including the points about calibration, distance, time to get an accurate speed reading. Haven't seen all the http links but they look good.

With regard to your defence: After I received my very first speeding ticket in Toronto, I consulted with a lawyer. They said I should present a defence similar to what you have outlined. Which I did successfully. At the time, the high tech gear your car has, was not available so I had to use some of the arguments George mentioned. A word of caution, what I was told is that "Road and Track" cannot be used as an authoratative source for data in a court on its own. Backing it up by your in car shot is perfect.
There is one thing that I would repectfully add to your defence. I would also say something like: "The radar reading was taken at a time when I was accelerating. Acceleration, being a non-steady state where speed changes with time and distance, introduces a number of variables that can make a radar or laser speed reading not entirely accurate. In light of the evidence presented, it is not surprising to me that there is some question and doubt over the accuracy of the prosections' data."
So in my opinion your defence is super. It does what my lawyer suggested, uses physics, and physical data to creat doubt in the mind of the judge. So its up to the judge of the day on how it will go. Personally, your defence brings a smile to my engineering face. Well done.

Just a comment, George Dzioba, a neighbour and friend, who just retired from the crown prosecutors office gives me advice from time to time. I recall a discussion of the Highway Traffic Act and wondered why it was that the defendant seems to be put in a position of proving innocence (being assumed guilty) rather than being assumed innocent. His answer: "The Highway Traffic Act is written that way!".

HTH (Hope This Helps)

Good luck

Bohdan

Update

I am aging while this defence goes on and I'm losing interest in going beck to court. Even though I like the fight, hanging around the courthouse for hours and hours waiting for my 20 minutes can get real old real fast.

In discussion with my lawyer I opted to settle. My 5 points and $560 will be negotiated to 2 points and $130 (plus a few hundred K to the lawyer). Anyhow, it started out fun, but I'm just to busy to waste more time on this. Maybe I would be more aggressively involved if I was about to lose my licence (again). But my driving record and my conscience are absolutely clear.

Next big ticket I'm going to try this one:

For most of us it is not the fine that is the problem. It is the demerit points and what the insurance industry will do to you if you get enough points against you.

I have NOT tried this myself but I know two guys that swear by it.

When you get the ticket. Sign it and mail in the payment by check only ADD an additional 10 dollars to the amount. The courts will realize you have overpaid and mail a refund for the 10 dollars. DONT cash the refund. If the accounting department has an outstanding financial issue they will not send the case number for closure. No closure, No conviction, No points. Apparantly you can keep the conviction and points off the books pretty much indefinately.

I have no idea if a stunt like this will work in the U.S.

If it really does work, it's a pretty slick way to keep a clean driving record.
Doug M

It's certainly worth the $10 to see if it works.

David, sorry I hadn't seen this article before you closed the books on it - however, maybe this advice can help others.

I came across a good article on the web some time ago when I was helping someone that was a bit stressed out about a ticket - it is Ontario centric, but I'm sure a lot of it applies to other jurisdictions.

The net of it is, you have the right to disclosure from the prosecution, by sending a written request for a boat-load of information prior to the court date, if they don't send it, you have every right to request the case be thrown out, they will likely just give you a date in the future, and very often that date (because it is given on the spur of the moment) does not coincide with a date the officer will be scheduled to spend the day in court - if he doesn't show up, the case is dismissed - if they don't provide the required documentation prior to the second court date, you are very likely to get the case dismissed - or if they try to drag it out even further, it can be dismissed as the courts may agree that they have violated your right to be tried within a reasonable amount of time.

Net, for the person I was helping out, they went with one of the traffic ticket specialists (OTT I think), made sure that they defined up-front that a 'win' would be the case dismissed (if you say getting rid of the points is fine, then that's all they'll try to do). I think it cost $200 all said and done - no need to go to court, and the case was finally thrown out.

Here's the article for you do-it-yourselfers in the crowd...

http://www.magma.ca/~fyst/

Last thought - I have a coworker who received a ticket that had an error on it (wrong location) - when he went to court, they acknowledged their error and 'innocently' asked if they could change it, he said NO, and that he was not at the location identified on the ticket at the time and date indicated - the case was immediately thrown out. If he had said 'yes', they would have had him.

Interesting, but Quebec is different. They don't have to send you anything, nor does the officer have to be in court. They can even make mistakes and correct them. And if you're English it's even worse - they simply don't care about you.

I was able to beat many points in Ontario using TICKETS.COM. But consumer protection against Provincial laws is just not available in Quebec. So we do what our forefathers did, we lie, cheat and steal our way out of trouble.

So here's the update. My lawyer was NOT able to negotiate a settlement. The prosecutor claims the speed as recorded is absolute and not negotiable.

We have a new court date, March 17. I have found a new defense lawyer who is a car guy that specializes in these cases.

I will let you know what happens - provided they allow inmates access to a computer.

Don't worry, I'll bring my laptop in for you to use during visiting hours.

Mark

While she was 'flying' down the road, a
woman passed over a bridge only to find a cop with a radar gun on the
other side lying in wait.

The cop pulled her over, walked up to the car, with
that classic patronizing smirk we all know and love, asked, 'What's your hurry?'

To which she replied, 'I'm late for work.'
'Oh yeah,' said the cop, 'what do you do?'

I'm a rectum stretcher,' she responded.

The cop stammered, 'A what? A rectum stretcher?
And just what does a rectum stretcher do?'

'Well,' she said, 'I start by inserting one finger,
Then work my way up to two fingers, then three, then four, then with my
whole hand in. I work from side to side until I can get both hands in,
and then I slowly but surely stretch it, until it's about 6 feet wide.'

'And just what the hell do you do with a 6 foot asshole? ' he asked.

'You give him a radar gun and park him behind a Bridge...'


Traffic Ticket - $95.00
Court Costs - $45.00
Look on the Cop's Face................PRICELESS

David,
I did a bit more searching, and can't believe the number of forum posts out there of people complaining about the Quebec courts when it comes to speeding tickets.

I found one case of someone who beat a ticket - it was a Rabbi rushing to a circumcision, and the judge accepted his argument.

There's another post I just found (from 2008) with some advice and suggested contacts:
http://www.gtamotorcycle.com/v...wthread.php?p=743250

Here's some of the pertinent stuff...

>>>
The courts are obliged to serve you in English or French as you choose ... you have a right to be tried in English or given an interpreter.

In Quebec the cops don't need to show up in court. So he might not be there. Although you can ask for a postponement, and state that you would like to summon the cop (witness). ...

Other than that, here are a few ticket lawyers/paralegals:
1. www.sosticket.ca They normally ask for people to contact them 7 days before the court date.
2. (514) 767-4398 This is the number of a guy, who is a lawyer. He is a moderator on montrealracing.com, is a biker and a tuner driver.
3. (514) 842-4649 this is the number for another lawyer - "Emile H Benamor"'

SOStickets is the cheapest one of the above. They charge $90+tx flat fee, which includes 2 points (if they get that off). For every extra point that they get off its an extra $60 i think. The other ones too are not very expensive, will just cost you $40-50 extra...

Another thing, montreal lawyers are more inclined on making plea bargains... If you don't want that then discuss that with them
>>>

Hope the above helps.

Good Luck, and keep us posted!

And one other thing, I've got to believe that even in Quebec you are entitled to full disclosure from the prosecution. And, unless I'm wrong about this, you should have your lawyer immediately request disclosure of all evidence that the prosecution has in the case - and request it be provided in English (and get dated proof of delivery of your request). If they don't deliver the information, then, in court you or your lawyer requests that the case be dismissed (or a stay of proceedings - whatever the correct terminology is in Quebec). The prosecution will likely ask for an adjournment to a future date, and if you get that far, then your lawyer will either make some progress on the plea front, or will request that the officer be summoned at the future date as a witness (I believe even in Quebec if you request they subpoena the officer, then he has to show up, the third thing your lawyer may do (if your next court date is far enough in the future) is put forward a motion that your constitutional right to a speedy trial has been infringed.

All of the above is done for a couple of reasons...
1) To ensure you get a fair trial - the law is there for your protection, if they are not willing to disclose evidence, how can you prepare a proper defense? And if they drag things on too long, then your memory (and that of the witness) of what happened becomes hazier - again, impacting your right to a fair trial.
2) To ensure that they really believe prosecuting you is the right thing for the court system to spend their time doing (if they give up because of the challenges you're making, then obviously, their case isn't strong enough, or they think they'd be better off prosecuting people who don't put up a fight).

Of course, I'm not a lawyer, and I certainly haven't read much about Quebec legal proceedings, so take my advice with a grain of salt.

Russ,

Thanks for the leads and your help with this. Unfortunately, I have a final court date in less than a week so I'm stuck with what I've got. The lawyer figures he can at least negotiate a few MPH off the offence which would cut the demerit points to less than half. Any financial saving will be taken up by his fees for sure.

Your idea is fine, but my problem is that according to the Judge and Quebec law, any evidence I wish to present has to be able to withstand cross examination. Which means that if I used Road and Track's 0-60 times for a Pantera then I need to bring the Editor of Road and Track or a testing expert to court. Same with a physicist to deal with my formula for linear acceleration. I then have to have a GPS expert testify regarding the data recorded on my GPS. At that rate I am in for thousands in expenses for these experts. That, I guess, is the whole point. So we suck it up and negotiate - if we're lucky.

On the upside, I have fought and won or reduced almost all of the tickets I got in the past 10 years. The downside is that prior to that I also lost my licence. Twice. Now with the new laws in place, I am getting ready to watch them take the cat away one day and crush it into a little cube.

When that happens, I'll have some time to start over with my next dream Pantera. This time, a black primer shell with zero comforts, 800 HP and 20" wheels.

What if you sold your cat to someone (a spouse perhaps?) for say, $50 and then leased it back indefinitely for say, $1/month, if you get caught for speeding, would they be able to take it away and crush it if you were not the owner?

Just a hypothetical question the next time you're talking to your lawyer :-)


And just to be clear on my advice above, I'm not suggesting that you present any evidence yourself, but merely that you request they provide you with all of their evidence in advance of the case and in English (this includes copies of any notes the officer wrote down as well as copies of both sides of the ticket) - this should be your legal right, and if they don't comply, then the judge should either throw out the case or give them an adjournment to put together and send you the material - oftentimes the prosecution isn't up to the bother of this and will give up. But as you say, it's only a week away, so you'd have to get the request couriered to them ASAP - two weeks is considered plenty of notice, but even a few days may be sufficient in the eyes of the court.

I'm just encouraging you to fight tooth and nail, I wouldn't want to see a cat smooshed into a little cube in the future because this one is on your record.

Good Luck!

quote:

What if you sold your cat to someone (a spouse perhaps?) for say, $50 and then leased it back indefinitely for say, $1/month, if you get caught for speeding, would they be able to take it away and crush it if you were not the owner?

AWESOME!!!

Man you Canadian have it rough up there ...and there is so much land you should have an AUTOBAHN with speed limits to match.

Ron

David,

I would be willing to act as an "expert winess" on acceleration and GPS. (We engineer the installation GPS units on our aircraft as part of Avionics upgrades.)

I would need some short time to review your evidence submission and prepare.

HTH.

Bohdan

Points, tickets and insurance....
I spoke to my insurance broker (State Farm) regarding speeding tickets and insurance rates.
I have an allowance of 2 speeding tickets before my rates go up. These speeding tickets can be 10kmh or 30kph over. It doesn't matter. Nor do the amount of points matter to my insurance company. Points have eveything to do with the Ministry of Transportation. If you get 15 points, the ministry will take your licence away, not the insurance company.
If you are leaning towards losing your licence from excessive points, then it makes all the sense in the world to go and fight the ticket and reduce points. If you don't have alot of points and you go to court to only have the ticket reduced in speed and no points, then you've lost a days pay to only have the ticket fine reduced. You're insurance will still see "a ticket", points or no points.
Will

quote:

Originally posted by INZOWHO:
Next big ticket I'm going to try this one:

For most of us it is not the fine that is the problem. It is the demerit points and what the insurance industry will do to you if you get enough points against you.

I have NOT tried this myself but I know two guys that swear by it.

When you get the ticket. Sign it and mail in the payment by check only ADD an additional 10 dollars to the amount. The courts will realize you have overpaid and mail a refund for the 10 dollars. DONT cash the refund. If the accounting department has an outstanding financial issue they will not send the case number for closure. No closure, No conviction, No points. Apparantly you can keep the conviction and points off the books pretty much indefinately.

I have no idea if a stunt like this will work in the U.S.

If it really does work, it's a pretty slick way to keep a clean driving record.
Doug M

Not true
http://www.snopes.com/autos/law/ticket.asp

I am waiting for that 15 point ticket I'm bound to get. Which is why I need to keep zero points in my account at all times.

In court on Tuesday with a new lawyer. Will let you know what happens.

Regards,

Bernie Madoff

Will,

Thanks for the heads up. I had my doubts as to whether these guys were bs'ing me or not. Never got the chance to try it out. Last ticket I got was in the Mrs. honda civic, go figure. Not that I didn't deserve a few, just got lucky.
Doug M

Man you Canadian have it rough up there ...and there is so much land you should have an AUTOBAHN with speed limits to match.

Ron
____________________________________________

Unfortunately, while we have some great driving roads, we also have a population that fervently believes "speed kills". It is a matter of cherished belief in Canada that a bored idiot driving a '74 Pinto with iffy brakes causing havoc by going 10 km/h below the limit is OK, but a competent, attentive driver who has invested in a mechanically optimized high performance vehicle is a public menace if they exceed the speed limit by any amount.

In Canada, we have 3,000 traffic fatalities per year and this causes the Safety Nazis to demand ever more draconian laws that take all the joy out of driving (instead of pushing for safer roads and better driver training, which might actually do something to address the problem). At the same time, we have on the order of 23,000 deaths annually due to preventable medical errors in our hospitals. No one says a damn thing about that, though, because our precious universal health care system is a sacred cow.

My answer is to try not to think about the lunacy too much lest I lose what little remains of my own sanity, and simply invest in a good radar detector. Then, if I pick up a ticket here and there, I simply look at it as just yet another tax I have to pay for the privilege of living in this lotus eating la-la land.

quote:

a bored idiot driving a '74 Pinto

Good grief, you are painting a bleak picture, but I agree with every word, except bored idiot. My girlfriend in the last year of high school had a 74 pinto and she wasn't boring at all.

Right on Peter! Well said.

As a matter of fact, I have family who have been marketing medical software that prevents mistakes in patient medication in hospitals. Although they have sold these systems to hospitals around the globe, making sales in Canada is next to impossible.

As for protecting ourselves from speed freak police, we are not as free as you folks in the West. Drivers in Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island are further preyed upon by being restricted from owning radar detectors.

quote:

Originally posted by David B:
... As for protecting ourselves from speed freak police, we are not as free as you folks in the West. Drivers in Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island are further preyed upon by being restricted from owning radar detectors ...

David, radar detectors are legal in So Cal. And the steaks are on me dude.

I am still at liberty.

The trial date today was the court's "final date" with no possibility for extension. Given that fact, the smartass prosecutor was unwilling to negotiate a settlement.

On my instructions, my lawyer threatened to bring in several expert witnesses to support my extensive documentation on this case (thank you Bohdan for the generous offer to testify) as well as calling in both police officers involved in the ticket. This would suddenly require them to set a new date, contact the officers and incur some expense - if I won.

However, surprise, they decided to negotiate, and with me on the phone, they agreed to accept a 6 kph reduction which would make it 2 or 3 points (instead of 5 or 6) and about $120 instead of $835. Not bad.

I would love to post my defense (my lawyers said it was the best they had ever seen) but it's too large to attach. I will try to reduce and post later.

Free at last...

Congratulations David!!!

Hopefully the $700 you saved covers the legal bill plus gives you enough left over to take the family out to dinner - and then maybe a couple of tanks of gas!

Well Done!

quote:

Originally posted by David B:
... they decided to negotiate, and with me on the phone, they agreed to accept a 6 kph reduction which would make it 2 or 3 points (instead of 5 or 6) and about $120 instead of $835 ... Free at last ...

Feel free to use this defense if you ever find the need. However, call me first as there are some, well, discrepencies.

And, oh yeah, make sure you don't have a bunch of youtube videos of you acting like a crazy 17 yr old with your licence plate in full view. Duh...

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

David,
First, let me say congratulations. Big tickets are much harder to fight and win than little ones. Very thorough defense indeed! I guess the only thing the prosecution missed is that a highly modified car is going to accelerate much quicker than a magazine test of bone stock equipment. Good for you.
Doug M

Great Defence ...

Loved the whole story.

I glad your car accelerates to 60mph in only 5.5 seconds .

B.G.

I have to add that it's a good thing the cops don't have any knowledge of GPS or digital maps. ;-)

Well done!

I wouldn't worry about the maps or GPS. I actually walked the distance with a wheel to confirm these measurements. And my GPS is very accurate. Ask Bohdan.

But, there are indeed several major loopholes in my defense. Can you spot them?

As for the police, or the courts, all they would have to do is Google me and Pantera and they will easily find enough youtube videos to quickly destroy any credibility I may have presented.

I work in the GPS industry. We sell high-end GPS tracking and messaging system to the oil and gas industry. I have heard from many clients that they were able to use our active GPS 'map trace' function (and supporting minute-by-minute reports) to have speeding tickets outright dismissed in court. I have ask for some more details in light of this thread. I will post the steps they took in their defence (while maintaining confidentiality, of course), but I would assume their logic to be similar to David's with the main exception being that they actually had real-time GPS evidence to present.

In other news, I was called by my insurance company (Aviva - brokered by Competition Insurance) and I was offered a 30% reduction in my 2009 premiums because I have just installed an active GPS system into my cat. Once I'm able to hit the road again, I will send links to the GPS data that I pull from our software. I am wondering if I'll be able to peak the GPS speed-o over the 300 km/h mark ... if only for a minute.

quote:

Originally posted by EA #3528:
I work in the GPS industry. We sell high-end GPS tracking and messaging system to the oil and gas industry. I have heard from many clients that they were able to use our active GPS 'map trace' function (and supporting minute-by-minute reports) to have speeding tickets outright dismissed in court. I have ask for some more details in light of this thread. I will post the steps they took in their defence (while maintaining confidentiality, of course), but I would assume their logic to be similar to David's with the main exception being that they actually had real-time GPS evidence to present.

In other news, I was called by my insurance company (Aviva - brokered by Competition Insurance) and I was offered a 30% reduction in my 2009 premiums because I have just installed an active GPS system into my cat. Once I'm able to hit the road again, I will send links to the GPS data that I pull from our software. I am wondering if I'll be able to peak the GPS speed-o over the 300 km/h mark ... if only for a minute.

So what happens if there was an accident (lets hope not) and the Ins. Co. gets a hold of the GPS and sees that maybe the accident was caused by the fact that the car was doing say 140mph? Then they decide they don't what to pay for the claim? Some things BIG brother doesn't need to know. Just a thought.

Well, big brother is already there!

New cars have 'black boxes' like aircraft that record all relevant factors for review in case of an incident.

But I'm not sure how the laws may vary regarding access to this info.

Overall, an impressive package, but since you asked about 'loopholes', here's what caught my attention (much of it 'tongue in cheek') ...

First off, your estimates are from a standing start, in fact, you were already traveling at some speed going around the corner and probably already clocking and in 2nd gear with your foot to the floor at the point where you began measuring the 402 feet (not exactly a 0-60 situation).
There is also no way to know for sure that the photo of your GPS unit was truly taken immediately after the infraction (if you tell me it was, I'd believe you, but that doesn't mean the courts would) - here's what struck me about the GPS photo (1) It shows your max speed was only 40miles/hour for the trip (ok, something tells me your genetic code won't let you take a drive in the cat with a max speed of only 40mph.) (2) It shows your stopped time was only 10:17 - did he really get your license/ownership/insurance, run it and then issue a ticket in only 6-7 minutes (I'm allowing for about 3-4 minutes for traffic lights and stop signs during your excursion).
(3) I'm assuming that you were out to enjoy the cat for a while, and the ticket would have put a huge damper on that, but did you really just turn around and go home? The out-and-back mileage on the GPS just makes me go hmmm.
(4) The date stamp on the picture of the GPS is from '07 - admittedly you may not have set the clock on your camera, but it does call into question when you actually took the picture.

Next, since I'm not sure from the pictures what obstructions may have existed, I don't know why you show in "2" such a short distance for where "radar could have recorded speed of vehicle" - I would have thought he could have still picked you up much closer to point #3, and therefore your total distance for acceleration would have been well over 500 feet.
Finally, the distance from #4 to #5 makes me think you must have been going a good clip for the cops to need that much distance to catch you

Please feel free to knock any of my ideas - it's just what I came up with, and there are likely problems with my assumptions.

I'm glad you beat most of the rap.

quote:

Unfortunately, while we have some great driving roads, we also have a population that fervently believes "speed kills". It is a matter of cherished belief in Canada that a bored idiot driving a '74 Pinto with iffy brakes causing havoc by going 10 km/h below the limit is OK, but a competent, attentive driver who has invested in a mechanically optimized high performance vehicle is a public menace if they exceed the speed limit by any amount.

In Canada, we have 3,000 traffic fatalities per year and this causes the Safety Nazis to demand ever more draconian laws that take all the joy out of driving (instead of pushing for safer roads and better driver training, which might actually do something to address the problem). At the same time, we have on the order of 23,000 deaths annually due to preventable medical errors in our hospitals. No one says a damn thing about that, though, because our precious universal health care system is a sacred cow.

My answer is to try not to think about the lunacy too much lest I lose what little remains of my own sanity, and simply invest in a good radar detector. Then, if I pick up a ticket here and there, I simply look at it as just yet another tax I have to pay for the privilege of living in this lotus eating la-la land.

(Have been out of town - getting caught up on the posts)

RIGHT ON PETER !!

In the aviation business, when a pilot does something "questionable" - rather than improve training, piloting skill, situation awareness etc., we are tasked to engineer out the stupidity. Unfortunately, the "engineering out" affects the whole community. I feel the attitude of simple lawmakers is much the same on the roads - easier to try to "engineer out" the problem in a politically expedient way (that may or may not make any sense).

We should be training our drivers to:
1) Know and maintain their vehicles,
2) Know their driving skills
3) Know the condition of the roads they are driving on.
4) Respect the weather conditions.
5) Respect 1 - 4 and drive accordingly.

Or, we can believe in Darwinining selection and assume the bored idiot will be "naturally selected out".

I wonder what the German accident rate is? Surely, part of the price of the Autobahn is to ensure a vehicle is maintained roadworthy manner

I have just adopted Peter's view of looking a speeding tickets as another form of TAX.

quote:

Originally posted by andriyko:
I wonder what the German accident rate is? Surely, part of the price of the Autobahn is to ensure a vehicle is maintained roadworthy manner

I have family who have lived their entire life in Europe (Belgium and Luxembourg). During visits, I am astounded by the stories of speed-related deaths. Nearly every family has lost someone due to speed. Now, the fact that they don't have a limit on drinking age may also be a factor.

Still, I wish we had a more relaxed attitude towards speed in Canada.

quote:

Originally posted by Cuvee:
So what happens if there was an accident (lets hope not) and the Ins. Co. gets a hold of the GPS and sees that maybe the accident was caused by the fact that the car was doing say 140mph? Then they decide they don't what to pay for the claim? Some things BIG brother doesn't need to know. Just a thought.

This is a valid point. Since I own and control my GPS data, I would only use it to my benefit. I was surprised that they didn't ask for a monthly GPS report, which is how our customers get their insurance premiums reduced.

As far as the black box goes, I have heard stories from trucking companies where the box (ie. the ECM module or the older tachograph) would mysteriously go missing every time there was an accident. They had no way of "coaching" their (mostly young) workers to drive according to conditions.

The two biggest issues relating to speed here in Western Canada are 1) too many trucks on the road that drive way too fast and 2) absolutely ZERO lane discipline (the proverbial "left lane bandit"). Remove both those elements and the roads would be a much safer place - for us to drive at 200 km/h speeds!

Cuvee, There was a case in Montreal in 2001 (court date apr 2004) where a young man had an accident at an intersection and killed someone at the wee hours of the night. The crown got a hold of the vehicle's pcm and managed to contradict the driver testimonial that he was driving the speed limit at the time of the accident. (He was driving a Pontiac Sunfire)
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story...ackbox_20040414.html

David, Automobile PCMs (black boxes) are not at all like those of airplanes. They measure a variety of items to control the vehicle and not all manufacturers PCM available info is the same and few people have the knowledge to de-cript it's info. Typical mesurements are atmospheric presure, coolant temprature, trans oil temp, exhaust temp, O2 exhaust con, rate of deceleration, wheel rotational differences.
Can't speak for all manufacturers but the simple excercise of pulling this info would be (is) a bureaucratic nightmare. In my 20 years there were only 2 instances where it was requested and granted ant it was for accidents involving police cars and deaths.

quote:

Originally posted by Denis C:
Cuvee, There was a case in Montreal in 2001 (court date apr 2004) where a young man had an accident at an intersection and killed someone at the wee hours of the night. The crown got a hold of the vehicle's pcm and managed to contradict the driver testimonial that he was driving the speed limit at the time of the accident. (He was driving a Pontiac Sunfire)
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story...ackbox_20040414.html

David, Automobile PCMs (black boxes) are not at all like those of airplanes. They measure a variety of items to control the vehicle and not all manufacturers PCM available info is the same and few people have the knowledge to de-cript it's info. Typical mesurements are atmospheric presure, coolant temprature, trans oil temp, exhaust temp, O2 exhaust con, rate of deceleration, wheel rotational differences.
Can't speak for all manufacturers but the simple excercise of pulling this info would be (is) a bureaucratic nightmare. In my 20 years there were only 2 instances where it was requested and granted ant it was for accidents involving police cars and deaths.

Not to make light of things, he should have got more time just because he was driving a Sunbird!