Post by: David C Nickerson on December 22, 2010, 12:31:16 AM
If I'm holding a LIDAR laser gun, and have a target at 584', how much does my beam move, if I'm handheld with my gun, assuming I move 1/8", 1/4, maybe 1/2"?
I've figured there's a 21" beamwidth at range, but am thinking that a little wiggle in the trooper's hand could have had him shooting the footbridge, and not me.
Hoping to raise enough doubt to save $3K in insurance penalties.
Thanks in advance,
David
Post by: Chris Davis on December 22, 2010, 02:28:10 AM
I guessed that the end of the handgun is probably about 6" away from the pivot of the wrist, although the 6" is just a speculative number and a more accurate number could be substituted here if known.
Then 1/8", 1/4", and 1/2" would be the distance traveled at 6" (at the end of the gun...this is what you were thinking, right?).
Then I solved for the distances traveled at 584', except that I solved for it in terms of inches, then converted the answers to feet. The first one would be (7008" * .125") / 6" = 146"
P.S. None of this accounts for your estimated 21" beamwidth at 584'
Post by: Andy Zimmerman on December 22, 2010, 09:13:58 AM
| David C Nickerson wrote on Tue, 21 December 2010 23:31 |
Hoping someone can help me crunch this... If I'm holding a LIDAR laser gun, and have a target at 584', how much does my beam move, if I'm handheld with my gun, assuming I move 1/8", 1/4, maybe 1/2"? I've figured there's a 21" beamwidth at range, but am thinking that a little wiggle in the trooper's hand could have had him shooting the footbridge, and not me. Hoping to raise enough doubt to save $3K in insurance penalties. Thanks in advance, David |
Just how fast was this footbridge going?
According to wiki, these devices obtain their reading within a fraction of a second. How much wiggle is going to occur in that time frame?
http://www.sunley.ca/lidar.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIDAR
http://tipmra.com/
Good luck. I think that you are going to need it.
PS
Couple of recent cases
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/il-court-of-appeals/1482413.html
http://www.state.hi.us/jud/opinions/ica/2006/ica26272.htm
Post by: Matt Vivlamore on December 22, 2010, 09:22:26 AM
I’ve seen a few people argue that the officer pulled over the wrong car, and that other car was passing them and so they weren’t speeding.
Apparently the laser guns have a set of crosshairs they look through and the officer can see the "dot" on your car while reading your speed.
*Yes, I go to court after being pulled over. In MD, depending on your driving record and issued ticket, you can trade in your fines and/or points for Volunteer work.
Post by: Charlie Zureki on December 22, 2010, 09:24:33 AM
I'm guessing you're going to Court to argue that this Patrolman could have been actually measuring something else besides your vehicle?
Good luck, hopefully the Court will indulge you...but, I hope that you're prepared to actually show through a model or physical demonstration.
If it's a Lidar, then, take (with permission of the Court) a laser pen and a couple of mirrors for an incidence/reflection demonstration. (he could have been measuring something else)
Ask when the gun had been last calibrated prior to the event, to what "standard" , and who calibrated it and were they certified to actually calibrate it? Do they keep records of these calibrations?
Find the model number of the gun the patrolman used and get the specs. It could have a +/- in your range example that makes the patrolman's claim questionable.
In a proper Court, you'd only need to show a doubt that the measurement was correct.
Good Luck,
Hammer
Post by: Dan Johnson on December 22, 2010, 09:29:52 AM
| Chris Davis wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 01:28 |
I agree with Chris' numbers. And I assume this gives you more than enough info to factor in your 21" beamwidth and still have the margin of error you were hoping for. There would be the same margin of error in the horizontal plane as well as the vertical plane of course. I would think the much harder thing about this would be to prove that the cop was where you say he was and that you were where you say you were when he took the reading. As others have said though, there are other factors that support the officer's aim being reasonably accurate. And how do you explain the footbridge moving at that speed?
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 22, 2010, 09:43:17 AM
While the traffic court judge may have heard of "cosine error" http://copradar.com/preview/chapt2/ch2d1.html
The bad news is, that cosine error causes the device to under report speed, when measured at an angle so don't bother with that, but the geometry is similar.
You have a slender chance if you were in traffic and being passed by somebody, and the officer doesn't show up. You weren't likely to be passed by a moving bridge.
The devices typically lock on the fastest/strong ping return, they probably try to filter out returns that don't show movement.
JR
Post by: Bennett Prescott on December 22, 2010, 10:39:13 AM
| Charlie Zureki wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 09:24 |
Ask when the gun had been last calibrated prior to the event, to what "standard" , and who calibrated it and were they certified to actually calibrate it? Do they keep records of these calibrations? |
This is how you win this. You are not going to convince a judge that a footbridge was going 90MPH. Try asking to see the gun's source code, after all, you hbe a right to face your accuser.
In the past I have gotten the DA talked down to a two point non-moving violation with little effort. The one time I hired an attorney I got that same deal.
Post by: Stavross (Sam Buck) on December 22, 2010, 10:47:03 AM
Post by: Dave Bigelow on December 22, 2010, 11:24:35 AM
| Stavross (Sam Buck) wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 10:47 |
Ask for an extension, this should move the court date back between a couple weeks and a month. Repeat at least one more time. Trooper doesn't show up, you win. |
Exactly, that is what most lawyers are gonna do anyway.
I don't see why you are going through all of this for a speeding ticket when using the good old mechanical failure defense works almost every time.
Post by: Matt Vivlamore on December 22, 2010, 11:30:28 AM
| Bennett Prescott wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 10:39 | ||
This is how you win this. You are not going to convince a judge that a footbridge was going 90MPH. Try asking to see the gun's source code, after all, you hbe a right to face your accuser. In the past I have gotten the DA talked down to a two point non-moving violation with little effort. The one time I hired an attorney I got that same deal. |
In MD, (at least what is said in court) the Radar Guns are check & calibrated before the working shift.
Post by: Charlie Zureki on December 22, 2010, 12:01:25 PM
| Matt Vivlamore wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 10:30 |
In MD, (at least what is said in court) the Radar Guns are checked & calibrated before the working shift. |
Of course they are.
No offense...that is EVERY Policing group's statement and not exclusive to MD.The truth is, with all of the cutbacks in Federal & State funding... they probably haven't had their Calibrating equipment, Calibrated for years.
People generally get caught up in what they view as the most important aspects of their jobs. Having Radar equipment Calibrated is probably not one of them, including the keeping of accurate and detailed records.
I'd insist that their Calibration Records be produced. I'd ask for the Calibration Certificate on their standard.
If they could not produce them in the Court room at the time of appearance, I'd request that the Judge dismiss the Ticket.
In the matter of any Tickets...they want you to plead guilty. If you will not plead & pay they'll offer you a deal.
The burden is on them to prove that you were violating the traffic laws....make them earn their money.
Hammer
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on December 22, 2010, 01:13:29 PM
They don't generally ticket unless you are going significantly over.
Perhaps on a good night you can get it reduced.
If you were speeding be glad you weren't ticketed in one of the European countries where they take your first born child.. or something of similar value.. We like to think of the autobahn, as fast and easy, but they can be difficult in some countries.
JR
Post by: Ned Ward on December 22, 2010, 04:03:48 PM
I'd go in and be humble. 1995 - I went into a court in Coalinga over a speeding ticket (105 in a 70, officer called it 99) and was planning on using the excuse my speedometer was broken (which it was; verified by the officer who got in my passenger seat of my Jetta and had me drive 1/2 mile down the 5 and back). Mandatory court appearance, and fee could ahve been as high as $1200 so I wasn't going to pay that.
Trucker ahead of me in for speeding ticket. His excuse - speedometer wasn't working. Judge rips into him and an argument between the 2 ensues for 10 minutes, ending in the driver having to be driven up from Long Beach the next week.
I went up, and when he asked how I plead, I said "guilty" almost before he could finish the sentence. He looked at me and said, "you know what would have happened had it been 30 miles over the limit, right?" I said yes, and got out with only a $219 fee.
Post by: Jason Dermer on December 22, 2010, 09:31:59 PM
I've also spent a lot of time in municipal court and civil courts for other reasons NOT involving me being stupid.
You will NOT beat the officer by questioning his competence at face value. You are the evildoing speedster terrorizing the roadway and he is the well respected enforcer of the legal system. But there are other options...
Was he trained and certified to operate the exact model of equipment he nailed you with?
Was the equipment calibrated to factory spec in the proper time frame?
Is all of the information on the ticket correct,includng statute numbers, time of day, date, your info, etc?
Was the officer working a double, or outside of his usual shift? Taking any medication? Any other demonstratable cause for error? Be very careful and sure of what you are going for if you tread in this direction.
Post by: David Karol on December 22, 2010, 09:46:22 PM
| David C Nickerson wrote on Wed, 22 December 2010 00:31 |
Hoping someone can help me crunch this... If I'm holding a LIDAR laser gun, and have a target at 584', how much does my beam move, if I'm handheld with my gun, assuming I move 1/8", 1/4, maybe 1/2"? I've figured there's a 21" beamwidth at range, but am thinking that a little wiggle in the trooper's hand could have had him shooting the footbridge, and not me. Hoping to raise enough doubt to save $3K in insurance penalties. Thanks in advance, David |
Was this the one on Storrow Drive two months ago? There's no way he clocked you where he said he did, probably hit the car who sped right past, the big filled van was just the easier catch.
Post by: Bob Lee (QSC) on December 23, 2010, 03:27:15 PM
http://www.amazon.com/Speeders-Guide-Avoiding-Tickets/dp/038 0807580
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 24, 2010, 09:18:49 AM
I also asked a key question and that was where was he aiming the gun. Be aware that police are taught to aim for the front license plate, and I don't have one (hint). All in all a little math proved I wasn't going anywhere near as fast as the cop said I was.
So, any bushes or obstructions, how far to stop you vs how long it took the cop to pull you over, no plate = no pay for ticket, at least in my case. Any thing other than fact or science won't get you anywhere.
Also check the ticket to see if the use of LIDAR was checked or noted. That was also a part of my beating the ticket. So when you go to court let the cop make his case and if he did not specifically state LIDAR on the ticket you then have an opening to speculation or a guesstimate of speed. The cop who gave you the ticket probably won't be the same cop in court and there is then reasonable doubt.
Post by: David C Nickerson on December 24, 2010, 09:24:57 AM
Thanks for all of your advice on this.
Yes David K, this is for the stop when I was bringing you to that job at the boathouse.
The way it works in Massachusetts is that you are guilty unless you can prove otherwise.
Your first chance to get out of the citation is with a Magistrate (clerk) and a representative of the police department. Typically, if you have some sort of strong argument, the magistrate will offer a reduced fine.
The alleged offender can accept a deal from the Magistrate or request a hearing with a judge.
The magistrate did offer me a discount on the ticket -from $200 to $125 for an alleged 60mph in a 40mph zone. Even though I wasn't speeding, I don't really have a problem with paying the fine. The big problem for me is that in Massachusetts, the insurance penalty is insane.
I was not speeding. In a full-size van, in a narrow lane, especially after seeing the trooper set up going the other way on the road minutes earlier, I was driving in the slow traffic lane at the 40mph speed limit.
I'm confident the trooper hit another vehicle with his LIDAR gun. I've returned to that stretch of road, and can't get over 50mph... (I've tried!).
I declined the Magistrate's discount, requested a hearing with a judge. As I left the courthouse, I realized that I wanted to get the make and model of the LIDAR gun to help better prepare. I returned to ask the Trooper what make and model, she said that she didn't know those numbers, but that I could file a motion to request that information. I did, and was floored when yesterday I got a letter (next day) from the Clerk. It's marked "Denied. You May Request the Lidar's Certification from the Trooper."
I'm stumped.
I guess I'll play along and request this certification, but don't understand why I'd be denied the opportunity to learn what make and model the LIDAR unit is.
Ugh...
Just trying to save $1000+ in insurance penalties.
Thanks again all, Happy Holidays!
Post by: Noah Waldron on December 24, 2010, 12:10:25 PM
Post by: Phil LaDue on December 24, 2010, 12:11:19 PM
Station H-4
250 Leverett Circle
Boston, MA 02114
Telephone: (617) 727-6780
Post by: drewgandy on December 25, 2010, 12:08:18 AM
| Phil LaDue wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 11:11 |
Have you contacted the commanding officer of the station the trooper works out of? |
This is one of the things that gets me about Chicago cops. I got a ticket for right-turn-on-red in a no-right-on-red intersection a few years ago. It happened late night after a downtown gig and I didn't get pulled over till several blocks after the turn so I was rather dumbfounded about whether I actually did the deed. The next day I tried to call to at least get the name of the officer to find out where they were hiding at the time and the dept couldn't tell me who it was. I had a badge # (and a 'doctor autograph') on the ticket but they acted like they had no way of correlating the # to a name. After some time on the phone I realized that I wasn't going to talk to anyone who had any details about my ticket. I decided it was just another example of the city's simple predator-prey system and chose to do the driving school. But I was really ticked for awhile that I couldn't face my accuser without going to court; which in time alone cost the face value of the ticket let alone that it's a gamble on whether you will win or lose. Then after a while I realized that there are much more important issues that society needs to fix before putting effort into the injustice of traffic stops.
That said, this issue obviously still rubs me wrong.
btw, are there any issues with audio recording the interaction with an officer during a traffic stop?
btwII I'm very impressed at the prolific speeding efforts of many of the posters.
drew
Post by: Charlie Zureki on December 25, 2010, 08:58:13 AM
| drewgandy wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 23:08 | ||
This is one of the things that gets me about Chicago cops. I got a ticket for right-turn-on-red in a no-right-on-red intersection a few years ago. It happened late night after a downtown gig and I didn't get pulled over till several blocks after the turn so I was rather dumbfounded about whether I actually did the deed. The next day I tried to call to at least get the name of the officer to find out where they were hiding at the time and the dept couldn't tell me who it was. I had a badge # (and a 'doctor autograph') on the ticket but they acted like they had no way of correlating the # to a name. After some time on the phone I realized that I wasn't going to talk to anyone who had any details about my ticket. I decided it was just another example of the city's simple predator-prey system and chose to do the driving school. But I was really ticked for awhile that I couldn't face my accuser without going to court; which in time alone cost the face value of the ticket let alone that it's a gamble on whether you will win or lose. Then after a while I realized that there are much more important issues that society needs to fix before putting effort into the injustice of traffic stops. That said, this issue obviously still rubs me wrong. btw, are there any issues with audio recording the interaction with an officer during a traffic stop? btwII I'm very impressed at the prolific speeding efforts of many of the posters. drew |
No, there are no legal issues, other than pissing off some Cop. People that have positions of power, generally do not like to have their authority challenged. Being recorded, can be perceived as a challenge to their authority, especially if the recording device is not something that they were "prepared" for.
But, if the Cop doesn't know that you're recording, he cannot over act in regards to the recording device. If you're going to record, I'd suggest you keep the whole process as low-key as possible. Start the device, and DO NOT TOUCH IT until the event is completely over, and the Cop has left the scene.
Touching this device could be perceived as a physical threat to the officer, netting you a bullet.
In regards to "interaction" with an Officer during a stop....don't say anything and don't admit to anything.
If stopped, pull to a safe location at the side of the road. Turn off your vehicle and wait for the officer to approach your vehicle with both of your hands on the steering wheel.
Bring out your license, insurance and registration, only if the officer requests them.
And, you don't not have to answer ANY questions asked by an officer...the Law states that you only have to provide identification, proof of insurance and the vehicle's registration.
If you're not under arrest, ask if you're free to go. This statement will prompt him to do SOMETHING...either arrest you, ticket you, or let you leave.
Good Luck, stay safe, and obey the traffic Laws...they're probably the most sane of our Laws.
Hammer
ps. consult your attorney for Legal advice..disclaimer.
Post by: Andy Zimmerman on December 25, 2010, 09:00:28 AM
| drewgandy wrote on Fri, 24 December 2010 23:08 |
btw, are there any issues with audio recording the interaction with an officer during a traffic stop? drew |
You would have to look into the laws in your state to be certain, but in general you can't record such audio without the permission of all parties involved (ie the officer). Doing so w/o permission can lead to more problems (ie additional charges).
Post by: Charlie Zureki on December 25, 2010, 10:58:06 AM
| Andy Zimmerman wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 08:00 | ||
You would have to look into the laws in your state to be certain, but in general you can't record such audio without the permission of all parties involved (ie the officer). Doing so w/o permission can lead to more problems (ie additional charges). |
Nonsense. You are in a public place. You can record inside your vehicle, it is your property. The Laws regarding recording stipulate that as long as one party knows of the recording, it is legal.
Hammer
Post by: Kristian Johnsen on December 25, 2010, 01:15:16 PM
| Charlie Zureki wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 16:58 | ||||
Nonsense. You are in a public place. You can record inside your vehicle, it is your property. The Laws regarding recording stipulate that as long as one party knows of the recording, it is legal. Hammer |
Does this mean that in the USA, the cab companies can audio/video record you without even putting a sticker on the dash warning you that they are?
Post by: Andy Zimmerman on December 25, 2010, 01:46:39 PM
| Charlie Zureki wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 09:58 | ||||
Nonsense. You are in a public place. You can record inside your vehicle, it is your property. The Laws regarding recording stipulate that as long as one party knows of the recording, it is legal. Hammer |
Like I said, you would have to look into the laws in your state to be certain. Here is an overview I found thru a quick search.
http://www.rcfp.org/taping/
Post by: Randy Pence on December 25, 2010, 02:24:10 PM
Post by: Andy Zimmerman on December 25, 2010, 07:52:30 PM
| Randy Pence wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 13:24 |
Public place, public servant, and you are taping yourself for your own protection. |
Possibly. But from what I have read, some police officers don't care to be recorded (audio/video/photo) while preforming their duties, and there are a number of instances I have heard of where the officer will demand that the recording device be turned off, regardless of his/her legal justification for doing so. With such an officer, discovery of a hidden recording device is going to further complicate matters. Also, AFAIK the whole point of making a recording is to use in a court of law - which if the recording is illegal in the first place, so much for that idea. You could also display the recording in the press or on YouTube, but an illegal recording can get you in trouble here also. Bottom line, how much court battle and legal fees are you willing to go through over a speeding ticket?
Post by: Tim McCulloch on December 25, 2010, 08:12:26 PM
| Andy Zimmerman wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 18:52 | ||
Possibly. But from what I have read, some police officers don't care to be recorded (audio/video/photo) while preforming their duties, and there are a number of instances I have heard of where the officer will demand that the recording device be turned off, regardless of his/her legal justification for doing so. With such an officer, discovery of a hidden recording device is going to further complicate matters. Also, AFAIK the whole point of making a recording is to use in a court of law - which if the recording is illegal in the first place, so much for that idea. You could also display the recording in the press or on YouTube, but an illegal recording can get you in trouble here also. Bottom line, how much court battle and legal fees are you willing to go through over a speeding ticket? |
Re-read Hammer's post, as it is generally correct.
If you are in a place where there is no inherent expectation of privacy (street, sidewalk, common areas of private property such as a hotel lobby or restaurant dining room); any private place which you own, lease or rent; one is free to record any conversation or activity to which that individual is a party.
Recording conversations that are not face to face, in-person encounters are different, as are recordings made without the knowledge (and presumably, consent) of the individuals involved. The link to the Reporter's Freedom of the Press page highlights how these are different from recording in-person encounters.
Many law enforcement agencies record audio or audio & video of every officer encounter with the public. In my area, the Kansas Highway Patrol and Sedgwick County Sheriff have recorders & cameras in every patrol vehicle, and the city PD is outfitting their cars gradually. Oddly, the people who clamored for recorders are finding "their people" don't seem quite as innocent or maligned as their leaders believed. Oops, might be drifting into verboten territory...
Have fun, good luck.
Tim Mc
ps. recording encounters with L.E.O., unless it's already being done by the departments, is likely to be seen by the officer as provocative but any decent cop will just nod and go on.
Post by: Andy Zimmerman on December 25, 2010, 09:07:34 PM
| Tim McCulloch wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 19:12 |
Recording conversations that are not face to face, in-person encounters are different, as are recordings made without the knowledge (and presumably, consent) of the individuals involved. The link to the Reporter's Freedom of the Press page highlights how these are different from recording in-person encounters. Many law enforcement agencies record audio or audio & video of every officer encounter with the public. In my area, the Kansas Highway Patrol and Sedgwick County Sheriff have recorders & cameras in every patrol vehicle, and the city PD is outfitting their cars gradually. Oddly, the people who clamored for recorders are finding "their people" don't seem quite as innocent or maligned as their leaders believed. Oops, might be drifting into verboten territory... Have fun, good luck. Tim Mc ps. recording encounters with L.E.O., unless it's already being done by the departments, is likely to be seen by the officer as provocative but any decent cop will just nod and go on. |
Tim,
IMO, if you are going to record a LEO during a traffic stop, you darned well better cover your ass and make sure it is legal, because you may have to prove it - either to him, or in a court of law, and be prepared to deal with the consequences after that.
Copy and pasted from the aforementioned website:
"In Illinois, an eavesdropping device cannot be used to record or overhear a conversation without the consent of all parties to the conversation. 720 Ill. Compiled Stat. Ann. 5/14-1, -2. An eavesdropping device is defined as anything used to hear or record a conversation, even if the conversation is conducted in person."
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=07200 0050HArt.+14&ActID=1876&ChapAct=720%26nbsp ;ILCS%26nbsp;5/&ChapterID=53&ChapterName=CRIMINAL+OF FENSES&SectionID=60651&SeqStart=26600000&SeqEnd= 27800000&ActName=Criminal+Code+of+1961.'
"(b) The eavesdropping of an oral conversation or an electronic communication between any law enforcement officer, State's Attorney, Assistant State's Attorney, the Attorney General, Assistant Attorney General, or a judge, while in the performance of his or her official duties, if not authorized by this Article or proper court order, is a Class 1 felony.
(Source: P.A. 91‑357, eff. 7‑29‑99; 91‑657, eff. 1‑1‑00.)"
Interesting reading: http://reason.com/archives/2010/12/07/the-war-on-cameras
Post by: Chuck Harrigan on December 25, 2010, 10:45:01 PM
| Charlie Zureki wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 09:58 | ||||
Nonsense. You are in a public place. You can record inside your vehicle, it is your property. The Laws regarding recording stipulate that as long as one party knows of the recording, it is legal. Hammer |
If the device is in plain sight, then it can be surmised that all parties involved could have known about the recording.
also from a lawyer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
Post by: drewgandy on December 25, 2010, 11:18:45 PM
| Chuck Harrigan wrote on Sat, 25 December 2010 21:45 |
If the device is in plain sight, then it can be surmised that all parties involved could have known about the recording. |
So I could start off by saying "Officer, my phone may or may not be recording right now."?
| Quote: |
"There is no electronic solution to a personnel problem. -Andy Peters" |
Have you seen Futurama?
Post by: Bob Leonard on December 27, 2010, 10:27:48 AM
I must have 50 friends that are cops. The magistrates discount was no discount. It was the magistrate telling you that he believes you were speeding, but not going as fast as the cop says.
Knowing about the LIDAR won't help your case. Basic math skills and pictures will help your case. Get out to the site and take pictures which show how the cop could have made a mistake, measure some distances from point A to B and do some math.
And where in the Boston area did you get tagged?
Post by: Dennis Wiggins on December 29, 2010, 07:44:40 PM
Oscar Had A Handful Of Apples.
Sin Opposite/Hypotenuse
Cos Adjacent/Hypotenuse
Tan Opposite/Adjacent
-Dennis
edit: Sorry, I thought the OP was a geometry question.
-DW
Post by: David C Nickerson on January 07, 2011, 12:18:04 PM
After tons of homework, learning that LIDAR has been thrown out and is no longer admissable in NJ and OH, I thought I would be prepared to present a solid defense at yesterday's hearing before the judge and the Trooper.
I ended up not needing any of it.
I approached another trooper in court before we went on, and asked if he could answer a few questions for me. He was super-cool and helpful.
He basically said that they'd seen it all before, and that all of my homework would just "make me look like a fool". After "my" trooper arrived, the two of them spoke, and I thought the worst as there was some subdued laughing back and forth between the two. I approached "my" trooper, and asked if he'd mind stepping outside to speak with me. I described all that I'd prepared, and acknowledged that I was confident that he'd still win, and asked if there was anything he could do to help me avoid the "points" penalty that is the big problem with getting a ticket in Massachusetts. (over the next 6 years, I could pay a total in penalties of more than $2000, because of one speeding ticket).
He also suggested that I don't bother with all of my defense, and just tell the judge: "I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was speeding".
I've got a little history with the Mass. State Police, so I was a bit hesitant to trust in this advice, but while standing before the judge, "my" trooper after concluding his description of my offense said: "Your Honor, I'd like to add that during the traffic stop Mr. Nickerson was very courteous and polite".
I somehow took that as a sign that I should trust and go the route he advised.
I did, and was elated when the judge gave me word that I was "Not responsible."
Clearly the "Courteous and Polite" was the codeword.
So, thanks to the Mass. State Police troopers who took good care of me yesterday.
And thanks to everyone here for advice in this thread.
Best,
David
Post by: Dick Rees on January 07, 2011, 12:23:14 PM
Congratulations!
Post by: Chris Hindle on January 07, 2011, 12:33:41 PM
Be a prick, you'll get screwed.
After all, "they" are people too. Sometimes the hat may be a little small for the head, but if we can deal with prima-donna "Artists", how tough can it be to deal with someone that works for a living ?
Post by: Geri O'Neil on January 08, 2011, 08:02:55 AM
| David C Nickerson wrote on Fri, 07 January 2011 11:18 |
(snip) I've got a little history with the Mass. State Police, so I was a bit hesitant to trust in this advice, but while standing before the judge, "my" trooper after concluding his description of my offense said: "Your Honor, I'd like to add that during the traffic stop Mr. Nickerson was very courteous and polite". (un-snip) Best, David |
An old adage is coming to mind..."An ounce of prevention....."
It's worth a look....
Geri O