caught speeding by following

Hi I just got a speeding ticket. Cop caught the guy in front of me on
radar going 76 and because I was behing him he says I was speeding also
but put on the ticket I was going between 70-75.
Does anybody think I can fight this ticket, since I was never caught on
radar? Also isn't the cop contraticting himself when he clocks the guy
in front at 76, and says I must have been going 70-75? Also he asked
the driver in front of me if I was following him and apparently he said
I was close behind him therefore that's why he was speeding.
The way I see it if the cop had to ask questions to the driver in front
of me, and gives me a ticket less than him, doesn't that say he is
uncertain of me speeding. If anybody has any arguments or experiences
in a similar situation, please respond. Don't mind paying the ticket
it's loosing points I don't like.
Thanks in advance.

On Mon, 16 May 2005 wrote:

> Hi I just got a speeding ticket. Cop caught the guy in front of me on
> radar going 76 and because I was behing him he says I was speeding also
> but put on the ticket I was going between 70-75.

Wow. Neat trick on the cop's part.

> Does anybody think I can fight this ticket, since I was never caught on
> radar? Also isn't the cop contraticting himself when he clocks the guy
> in front at 76, and says I must have been going 70-75?

Oh, of course he is, but not as badly as the cop who once told a relative
of mine that he'd clocked him going 68 at the back of a contiguous line of
cars going 54.

> Also he asked the driver in front of me if I was following him and
> apparently he said I was close behind him therefore that's why he was
> speeding.

Sounds like you got written up by Deppity Dawg.

wrote:

> Hi I just got a speeding ticket. Cop caught the guy in front of me on
> radar going 76 and because I was behing him he says I was speeding also
> but put on the ticket I was going between 70-75.

He pulled you over first, and then he pulled over the
guy in front? I've always wondered how a cop can
pull over 2 cars.

> Does anybody think I can fight this ticket, since I was never caught on
> radar? Also isn't the cop contraticting himself when he clocks the guy
> in front at 76, and says I must have been going 70-75? Also he asked
> the driver in front of me if I was following him and apparently he said
> I was close behind him therefore that's why he was speeding.
> The way I see it if the cop had to ask questions to the driver in front
> of me, and gives me a ticket less than him, doesn't that say he is
> uncertain of me speeding. If anybody has any arguments or experiences
> in a similar situation, please respond. Don't mind paying the ticket
> it's loosing points I don't like.
> Thanks in advance.

So the cop was ahead, and measured the speed of the car in front
of you, but not your speed.

You have a great chance of having your ticket dismissed. The cop pulled
the charge out of his fat ass.

> So the cop was ahead, and measured the speed of the car in front
> of you, but not your speed.
>
> You have a great chance of having your ticket dismissed. The cop
pulled
> the charge out of his fat ass.

What makes you think that judges and magistrates base their traffic
decisions on facts?

223rem wrote:
> wrote:
>
> > Hi I just got a speeding ticket. Cop caught the guy in front of me
on
> > radar going 76 and because I was behing him he says I was speeding
also
> > but put on the ticket I was going between 70-75.
>
> He pulled you over first, and then he pulled over the
> guy in front? I've always wondered how a cop can
> pull over 2 cars.
>
> > Does anybody think I can fight this ticket, since I was never
caught on
> > radar? Also isn't the cop contraticting himself when he clocks the
guy
> > in front at 76, and says I must have been going 70-75? Also he
asked
> > the driver in front of me if I was following him and apparently he
said
> > I was close behind him therefore that's why he was speeding.
> > The way I see it if the cop had to ask questions to the driver in
front
> > of me, and gives me a ticket less than him, doesn't that say he is
> > uncertain of me speeding. If anybody has any arguments or
experiences
> > in a similar situation, please respond. Don't mind paying the
ticket
> > it's loosing points I don't like.
> > Thanks in advance.
>
> So the cop was ahead, and measured the speed of the car in front
> of you, but not your speed.
>
> You have a great chance of having your ticket dismissed. The cop
pulled
> the charge out of his fat ass.

He did? Let's see. He radars a car and observes another going at the
same or very similar speed behind him. That testimony by itself is
sufficient. He then asks the lead to corroborate his observation. That
gives two bits of evidence for the court rather than just the cop's.
Slam dunk, guilty.

Harry K

Harry K wrote:

> Let's see. He radars a car and observes another going at the
> same or very similar speed behind him.

We don't know what the legal speed was in this situation.

We've been told that 76 is apparently over the limit (not sure why the
cop told the 2'nd driver what the first driver was clocked at). Cop
tells 2'nd driver that he must have been doing 70-75. What is legal
speed? Is it 65?

What was the visual angle between the cop and the road, and how far
away were the cars when the reading and estimate were made?

Cop is on shaky ground if he claims he can gauge speed of a car
driving towards him at a narrow angle.

I would argue that by the time the cop clocks the first car and puts
the gun down and changes his focus to the second car, the first car
has slowed down (by 5 mph? 10?). He sees the distance between the
cars are still increasing (perhaps very slowly), but because the first
car isin't going 76 any more his judgement regarding how fast the
second car is going is now in question.

Combine that with a narrow-angle observation and you've got pure
speculation on the part of the cop.

What was the terrain of the road in the area in question? Did both
cars come over a hill or around an obstructed curve immediately before
the cop gunned the first car? How far back could the cop observe both
cars travelling in tandem?

Harry K wrote:


> He did? Let's see. He radars a car and observes another going at the
> same or very similar speed behind him.

His view of the following car was blocked by the car in front.


> sufficient. He then asks the lead to corroborate his observation. That
> gives two bits of evidence for the court rather than just the cop's.
> Slam dunk, guilty.

The witness is not qualified to visually estimate speeds.

More interestingly, how does a single cop car pull over 2
vehicles??

>
> The witness is not qualified to visually estimate speeds.
>
> More interestingly, how does a single cop car pull over 2
> vehicles??

By running one of them off the road. Happened to me many years ago . . .
had a local cop come around a blind corner and then crossed all the way over
the center line (with all four wheels) into my lane, forcing me all the way
off the road (to avoid a head-on with a police cruiser IN MY LANE), where I
darn near wrapped my car around a big tree . . . then he pulled over a
station wagon headed the opposite direction. Silly me thought the cop had
briefly lost control of his vehicle, and there was no harm done (really), so
I put my car back on the road and continued about my business. Later, I was
darn near arrested and hauled off to jail for fleeing from the same cop
who -claimed- he was trying to pull me over when he ran me off the road.
(like I was supposed to know somehow that ATTEMPTED MURDER is a valid way to
stop someone for an alleged minor traffic violation 50/40???) -Dave

On Tue, 17 May 2005 13:06:39 -0400, "Ted B." >
wrote:

>Dave

Are you Ted B or Dave?

223rem wrote:
> Harry K wrote:
>
>
> > He did? Let's see. He radars a car and observes another going at
the
> > same or very similar speed behind him.
>
> His view of the following car was blocked by the car in front.
>
>
> > sufficient. He then asks the lead to corroborate his observation.
That
> > gives two bits of evidence for the court rather than just the
cop's.
> > Slam dunk, guilty.
>
> The witness is not qualified to visually estimate speeds.
>
> More interestingly, how does a single cop car pull over 2
> vehicles??

The witness isn't estimating speed. He is just saying that car B was
maintaining a set distance. The cop ain't estimating speed either,
just observing that it is at or close to the speed he radared already.
No need to estimate.

As for pulling over two. He pulls over Car A and waves B over or waves
both over (happened to me). Gets a bit more exciting if he has to chase
down the first one.

Harry K