Audiholic

The idea that people get off on these kinds of technicalities is a popular MYTH.
Not gonna happen.. You try it you're in for a surprise.

ReyHey

Bring a pic of yer A4, and get a break for not being a Honda!!!!!!

Jason H

I'm going to court on a "speeding" ticket Fri. First of all, I really wasn't speeding, which is why I feel some indignant need to fight it, not like knowing I was wrong and looking for a loophole. The cop first of all wrote that the ticket occured at an intersection that does not exist. the two streets named are at least half a mile apart. The cop asserts on the citation that I was in a 25 zone, but on the actual street I was on (which does intersect with the cross street named) is posted 30. the cop admits he had no radar reading or timing between fixed points, and that he simply "visually estimated" my speed.

My question is how does he visually estimate anything precisely if he doesn't know the posted limit, or even where he is when he wrote the ticket? Does this sound like a pretty sure bet for dismissal? BTW, this is in suburban SoCal if that influences the likelyhood of judicial fairness.<p><a href="http://www.meniscusdesign.com/a4/"> <img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/AudiWorldPics/2000/jasonh_aw_sig.gif" border=0 target="_top"></a>

Audiholic

If it was just the date, I would say you haven't a prayer. They can make all kinds of little screw ups and it won't be tossed on a "technicality". However, it sounds like you have a lot more to go on than just the date here. Your initial message didn't mention the discrepancy in posted limits, no radar & visual estimation, etc.. You might have a prayer after all?

Lou33

The cop doesn't always show up for the court date. Then the judge will dismiss in 2 seconds

SK

Here's another tactic for less serious citations (with the goal of a no-show by the officer):

- Be sure NOT to be memorable when you're cited (e.g. arguing vehemently with the officer, etc). This tactic probably won't work too well if, say, you were rocketing through a school zone at 60mph.
- Postpone your court appearance as long as you can (to do this, you'll be waiving your right to a timely trial, which is another technical tactic to get off... life's full of trade offs!). Usually, you can push the trial out really far.
- Sometimes the citation has a note on it showing when the officer is not available for court appearances. You can also see if the court clerk will make a mistake and schedule your trial for those times.
- Prepare a defense, just in case the officer shows. There are books out there to help you with this. Specifically in California, Nolo Press publishes some good ones.
- Go to court and hope the officer doesn't show! 6 months after the fact, the officer can't remember you, the violation doesn't seem that serious... he might not bother to show up.

This worked for me the one time I tried to fight a ticket--the officer didn't show. Incidentally, I did also believe I had a defensible argument (with photos and diagrams) if the officer was there.

av_audi

I wouldn't use it as a point to have the ticket dismissed. Concentrate on his "visually estimated speed" BS and bring up the date mistake "en passant" only to show that he was really sloppy that day. You might stand a better chance that way.

But don't be surprised if the cop claims to have used radar during the hearing. Do I need to spell Rampart ;-) Years ago, I got a ticket in Palo Alto, just like phoolan. The cop claimed to have clocked me at 44mph. Later I noticed he wrote me up for 45mph, probably for a higher fine. I am pretty sure I wasn't even close to 40mph.

RickM

1. Every traffic court is different, but some hear the cases on a first-come, first-served basis. If so, show up last, or near last. There are a couple advantages to this. First, you get to watch the judge and see how he/she responds to various kinds of arguments. You'll learn what works, and what doesn't with this judge. Pay attention. Second, if your cop is there, there's a chance you'll get to see him in action too. Again, pay attention. You may spot some weaknesses. Third, chances are at least some people will be there with lawyers. Watch and listen to what the lawyers do -- they generally know what works and what doesn't. All of this is part of a fast education on your part. If you're first on the list of cases to be heard, you miss the potential benefit of all of this. The only downside to this strategy is that you end up spending more time sitting there. But your goal at this point is to win, not to get out fast.

2. Cops never like to admit that they don't know something. If they don't remember, they'll make something up. In your situation you can use this to your advantage. He'll testify how he clocked you, etc. The date will be a trivial detail, if it's mentioned at all during his direct testimony. Whether or not the date mistake will get you off scott free, don't ignore it. Instead, exercise your right to cross-examine the cop. What date did this occur? Are you sure about that, officer? So this date isn't an error? And you're sure? And after that, ask how he clocked you...get all the details. You never know, maybe some OTHER part of his story won't make sense too. Ask him questions like whether you were alone, or whether anyone was with you in the car. See how far he'll go to make stuff up. Do NOT be afraid to cross-examine! The cop can be his own worst enemy.

3. Only after you're done with the cop should you testify. That's when you prove that the date is in error. IMO you should get off on that -- you've been charged with having violated the speed limit on that date. You can prove, conclusively, that you didn't. Just as important, you've shown that the cop doesn't really remember anything about this violation; he was "sure" the date was correct -- you got him to say so 3 times --- and now everyone knows it wasn't. That being so, what else is he wrong about? What else is he making up? Bring out whatever other inconsistencies there are in his story. Contradict him on whatever you can. Damage his credibility. This may be your only hope. But trust me, it can work.

4. I also second the suggestion made by someone else, to adjourn the hearing as long as you can. The more time passes, the more tickets that cop writes, and the less likely it is he really remembers anything. He'll still claim to remember everything about your violation -- that's what cops do -- but this may only help your strategy of damaging his credibility.
Good luck!<p>Rick
99.5 1.8TQMS

Lou33

The ticket is a legal document. They are charging you with speeding in a certain car on a certain date. You didn't own that car and you can prove it. Even if you signed your ticket.

When you show up for court it's not like they can say, "oops we made a mistake on your charge, let me just amend this real quick and let's get on with the trial".

I have a friend that got off on a technicality that I will separately post below.

LeeH

Fight it but be respectful. Some judges really don't like people trying to use TV lawyer tricks.