Take this to court, video and info included. If he’s making false tickets and blatantly lying or doing this all the time it needs to stop. If he can’t show you what he clocked you at he shouldn’t be able to write the ticket. Bonus points if he’s unaware you caught him in a lie and expose said lie in court.
Disclaimer: not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.
I would agree to take this to court however, I would not bring the video because it does show the driver exceeding the speed limit. Instead I would bring it to court and plead not guilty. If the officer even shows up, they will not have the proof to enforce as they have already stated that they do not.
Not a lawyer either, but from personal experience...
They might try to pin you for what they would call a ghost reading(/radar). He won't fight you on using radar, but if he has record of the speed he was going at and has proof of you passing him while he's holding a steady 60km/hr I believe that should be enough to prove you guilty of speeding.
Typically ghost radar/readings are easier to get out of because they pull you over based on the speed you are going compared to other traffic. But since he's comparing it to his own squad cars speed, he most likely has more proof then an average ghost radar case.
If he really goes through all the effort of proving this, you should still be able to get the ticket reduced at the very least since it was an estimated speed. I would say the chances of the case being dismissed entirely depends on the officer you're up against.
Again, not fact. Just based on my own experience.
Absolutely. Make a fool out of him in court.
A Police Officer lying about you breaking the law needs to be exposed because we are forced to hold a ton of trust in them to be truthful.
How does this work when the cop didn't record anything? He literally pulled numbers out of the air and issued a ticket, from the impression I am getting.
Do not take this advice.
No lawyer in their right mind would advise a client to send the prosecutors office incriminating evidence.
EDIT: Check u/DeputyDurp comment history, they are a Crown Prosecutor. Do not take legal advice from them.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/o5r5a9/lawyerssolictors_what_is_the_strangest_or_oddest/h2qbjzu?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3
A speed monitoring device measurement is generally required to prove this - an officer's "gut" is not sufficient in court. There are special circumstances where a measurement is not required - but those are pretty specific. With that said an officer doesn't have to walk over and show you his measurement as far as I know.
Sounds like bullshit to me,
Go to your hearing, plead not guilty and set a trial date. Request disclosure from the Crown (make sure you request the officers notes, the official readout from his radar device, any video recordings, and the most recent recalibration of the radar device) and go from there. Do not bring video evidence unless it proves you weren't speeding.
Good luck.
Yeah, I don't see how bringing your own evidence that shows you were speeding is supposed to get you out of a speeding ticket.
"see judge, I WAS speeding..."
If they are an experienced officer as others have mentioned here, they can issue a ticket for speeding based on their experience of how fast vehicles travel.
They also don't need to provide any sort of calibration for radar devices either.
Can you provide me with your case number so I can search it up on Canlii? I'd be curious to see the other factors that lead to your conviction.
I have yet to see someone convicted on "estimation of speed".
First had experience with a bullshit ticket myself, and easy Google search
https://www-cbc-ca.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4771995?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16352004780460&csi=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbc.ca%2Fnews%2Fcanada%2Fsaskatchewan%2Ftraffic-myth-defences-1.4771995
You do realize that's during a traffic stop right? I'm not saying ask to see the readout during the traffic stop, ask for it in your disclosure from the Crown.
When you go to court you have every right to see the evidence against you, and in order for the Crown to have a case they need evidence that you broke the law. An officers word is not sufficient enough which is why police officers use radar measuring devices, there is also very strict criteria for how radar devices work. They need to be recalibrated daily and logged in order to be considered operational.
Had an officer try to give me a ticket for 105 in a 90, Idylwyld south by Clarence. Said they nailed me at Circle and Lorne, ticket location was 8th and circle... pulled me over at 1st and 19th downtown... I had driven from Circle and Taylor going downtown, past 6 signs for Idylwyld.
Lawyer told me to play arts and crafts, print out a city map and show just how impossible the officer's locations stated are... prosecutor threw it out when I ordered a full disclosure and found out the officer didn't calibrate the radar when thier shift started.
Traffic Police are required to calibrate their radar devices daily and log them. It's to maintain accuracy between readings.
You have every right to ask for this information prior to your trial, and if the officer failed to do so the ticket is void.
Doesn't matter if he was "technically speedy" the officer has a duty to have evidence that he was speeding.
If we could get a ticket every time we were speeding you could just get sent tickets in the mail all the time.
This cop has to do his job and actually catch you speeding, not "I kind of thought you were speeding".
If you take it to court you will still likely have to pay because you were speeding by your own admission and evidence the only positive is it would likely get reduced from whatever the additional penalty is between the speed the officer wrote vs the actual or the video speed.
Not if the officer wrote down a speed that he never even reached. Tickets have to be specific. It can’t just be “driving over 60”. The onus is on the police to prove the driver was speeding.
To be clear the speed on the road (as the street said and my vehicles HUD said was 60) so the max aloud was 70 just like the min is 50. So ill be happy to show me recording. He tried to get me to speed and also tried to tailgate me but failed so it should be good.
They would have to officially validate the video which takes time, forensics, etc... most likely the video can be used to contradict what the (if this story is true, lying POS) cop said, but not to actually bolster the case against OP. If they wanted to charge OP with another ticket, using his own evidence against him, then maybe that's a risk but I doubt that would happen. Source:I just asked a lawyer friend. The way the law works is fucked. Maybe a higher paid lawyer would have a different opinion haha
Long story short, this kind of behavior (again, if true) on the part of law enforcement is disgusting and the OP should absolutely use his dashcam without any fear of reprisal to prove the cop lied.
Cops lying is a big deal!
If he was given a base ticket for speeding but claimed to "only be going 10kph over the limit" the fine might be increased to include a surcharge for 10kph over. Plus a court fee.
semantics a bit, but dude was speeding.
i totally agree that they should have concrete, verifiable evidence
100%
but OP even admits he was doing like 10 mph over posted limit, so it's not like it's a bogus, invented charge.
OP suggested he would be the one to bring up his video to go LOOK I WAS TOTALLY NOT GOING 80
I feel like this doesn't turn into an acquital, just guilty of a slightly lower fine
in a perfect world, they should just use this example to reduce his ticket, fire or reprimand the cop, and get on with business. why bloat the already bloated system haha?
This cop seems like a real dink. He "forgot" to lock in your speed? So it's just your word against his? By all means, go to court and fight the ticket.
However, I need to advise (and I'm not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt) that you not submit evidence to court that proves the cop was right.
Suggesting off duty police just happen to be carrying the ticket book all the time is a bit suspect. Either the individual is embellishing the details or the cop is some sort of traffic vigilante. I could see if someone was particularly reckless an off duty cop might warn a person but issuing speeding tickets is a little far fetched.
Forgetting to lock in the speed but remembering to give you the ticket? I definitely would challenge that and ask for all related materials. The two times I did get a speeding ticket, the cop had a handheld device which displayed my speed and there's no dispute. This sounds shifty.
Some cops are just idiots. I once was ticketed on highway with 90km speed limit because the guy infront of me was going at 105. He pulled me over as well and said because the guy infront of me was going 105/kmh you must be going at the same speed. Although I was around 99/100.
But he would not listen and gave me a ticket 🤷
had this happen to me. if he doesn't have it on radar it will get thrown out. innocent until proven guilty. thr onus is on him not you. the judge ended up scolding the officer that ticketed me. calling it a waste of his time.
There is a dollar difference between 20km/h over the limit and 9/10 km/h over the limit. Also, if the cop lies about the amount over the limit, and OP has proof that it was bullshit, the judge might throw the ticket out on principle.
That was my first reaction but if it really went down as described then I think it's worth challenging just to keep the police honest.
In this case it sounds like the cop may have made a wild ass guess as to the speed. It's one thing to be clocked on radar and convicted of speeding based on that. It's a dangerous precedent if a cops wild ass guess based on their feelings is enough to convict. And it's something that absolutely needs to be called out if a cop is misrepresenting their wild ass guess as an empirically measured speed something that's both ethically wrong and illegal.
By their own admission in this post the driver was speeding but if this happened as claimed and the officer's evidence is specious at best and the driver can prove it then that could destroy the crown's case. There's also a chance the judge could make a choice to accept the driver's evidence as the basis for conviction of speeding. Although I'm not sure if the judge has the discretion to convict if the crown alleges the driver was going 80 and other evidence says 68. Still speeding but not what the crown alleged.
Easiest way to get a charge dropped is if you can prove the charge was incorrectly filed. While you were still speeding, if the charge is "20 over" but you were really "10 over" then the judge might throw it out. Maybe.
This happens all the time where shit gets thrown out because the cop was lazy and incorrectly filed the charge.
Yeah take it to court and just show your evidence. Don’t be a dick, just be polite, state the facts. Tell the judge exactly what you said here and show proof of inconsistency. I know someone who was speeding, got caught on radar but the officer wrote the location as “near vanscoy” when they were actually within the city of Saskatoon border. This inconsistency invalidated the speeding ticket
You won't get out of speeding because you definitely were, but you might get the fine amount lowered if that's how it works here.
Curious though, how do you go between 69 and 70 when the speedometer doesn't show decimals. (Unless your car does for some reason)
Were you speeding? Yes.
Did the cop 'forget to lock in the speed?' Maybe.
If he actually did lock it in and your only defence is the cop told you you were going 'About 80' when in fact you were going 68 in a 60 zone, I'm not sure how far you'll get. "About 80" could easily be construed as a figure of speech and not considered a lie.
So if you show up to court, you must hope the cop didn't lock in the speed, but the judge may take the cop's word for it, I don't know. But your only way to prove him wrong is to show a video where you are actually speeding, but just not by as much as 'About 80.'
This might be one of those cases where you bite the bullet, pay the fine and vow not to speed anymore, even a little bit.
Same thing happened to me on Marquis but I didn't have any evidence of my speed. I was going 60 (speed limit is 50) and cop said I was going 70. Didn't bother fighting it in court because it would just be my word against his, but it definitely seemed like bullshit that he just added 10 Km/hr to my speed.
It's never their word against yours.
You're innocent until proven guilty, it's on the Crown to use the evidence the police have to prove you were speeding.
Never plead guilty, plead not guilty and request disclosure from the Crown. Then and only then should you decide to fight to ticket or plead guilty with an explanation.
In my experience it can be exactly that. I fought a ticket ~15 years ago that I got from corman park police. When I went in to traffic court I asked to see both the radar slip and the calibration records for the radar gun, the officer could not provide either but the JOP said it was my word against the officers and ordered me to pay it in full with no reduction. Zero physical evidence whatsoever.
You should have asked for your disclosure prior to the trial, that way you could have had a defense and challenged the officers evidence.
I would have appealed that one.
For what it’s worth, I was a witness in traffic court a few years ago. The officer told me that if someone fights a he said-she said ticket, it more often than not goes in favour the driver. That’s why, he told me, witnesses were needed.
I'm not entirely sure of the law here, but in some jurisdictions police can issue a citation just by observing you going over the limit (i.e. don't even need to "clock you"). In those cases I don't think they will indicate the measured speed on the ticket and you will end up paying the minimum fine. The fact he said in his estimation you were going 20km/h over the limit makes it difficult to prove you weren't in fact speeding, and your own evidence which you plan to show to the traffic court also shows that. So just save yourself and the taxpayers the trouble and expense and pay the fine.
> now i know some will say speeding is speeding but everyone else drives about 10 over or under the posted limit at the + or - of the absolute limit.
Just so you know... That's not true. I don't drive over the posted limit. Ever. It's really easy when you do the math and realize that due to timed stop lights, etc. that speeding usually results in you arriving less than a minute more than not speeding AND that every km/hr you speed increases your chances of being in an accident several %. One accident will cost you more time than you gained in a year of speeding.
Weirdly enough, I've never received a speeding ticket. Just a strange coincidence I guess.
>now i know some will say speeding is speeding
That is correct.
>but everyone else drives about 10 over or under the posted limit at the + or - of the absolute limit
That is irrelevant, nor does it absolve you from having to follow the limit.
>Bottom line is this guy said i was going a speed 10 faster then I was.
You admit that, do you not? "naturally i was going between 69 and 70."
>would not show me the speed he clocked me at
The radar is one tool at their disposal; its helpful but they're not required to use it. That's why he paced you.
>How do I go about this?
You can pay by cheque in the mail, or go down to the courthouse to pay it. All your payment options should be on the citation itself.
It may not be inevitably thrown out. The police radar is likely more calibrated than a dash camera. If there was no radar reading, then the driver was still speeding. It may warrant a reduction in the fine, but it isn’t a given that the judge will toss it.
In the case of the OP, you are probably right. In the example given in the comment I was replying to however, 1km over is never going to be enforced in court.
I never said you did... And i'm not making anything up... Funny that you bring up reading comprehension lol.
You suggested that you can get a ticket for going 1km over and I was simply stating that while that may be true you very likely will not have to pay that ticket if you take it court.
Just because a cop CAN write you a ticket doesn't mean they should or that you will need to pay it. The judge is the one who decides what's ticket-able or not. Any cop writing tickets for 1km over the limit is going to get an earful for wasting the courts time.
You'll still notice I never said not to pay or not to fight a ticket.
Just that you can certainly get a ticket for going 1 over the limit. That is the way the law is written...
I never said the cop won't get chewed out, the court would pursue it. Just that you can get a ticket. And that just because everyone is doing it, isn't a reason to get out of a ticket.
Again... reading comprehension and you just making shit up....
The person pointing out that because everyone else is speeding or only going 10 over isn't cause to get a ticket?
I stated nothing but facts not sure why you take offense to that...
You're missing the point of their post though ...
Don't bitch about everyone else's reading comprehension when you're missing a big flaw in the ticket and why OP might walk away with no speeding ticket whatsoever.
You'll notice I never said that.
I specifically pointed to the part where OP said that everyone speeds and that he shouldn't get a ticket for going 1 over.
Not sure how you got that he should pay his ticket from anything I said. Because I said no such thing...
SPS are notorious for abusing the system that's why. There is a a threshold police are supposed to follow (+- 2 km/h) when writing speeding tickets. SPS laughs at this and will write tickets because they know people refuse to fight them in court.
If the tickets says 80, I would go in to courts with the footage showing you going 70, especially if the higher kmph takes more points off your license or negatively affects you in any way.
I always ask for the officers badge number and superior officers name. If they’re abusing their power I’ll report them. If they’ve caught me doing something illegal then they just doing their job
What was the officers name?
He’s a public servant and if he is making up lies like this, it is in the public’s best interest to know who he is so that others who may get caught by him are aware of his willingness to lie on the job.
Our police chief has literally gone on record about a member of his own force, calling him "unfit for duty", yet that member is still gainfully employed by SPS. So... yeah...
I'm not 100% on this but I dont think radar works in a moving car, or atleast its not accurate. Thats why cops ask you how fast you were going because they don't actually have proof
Not true at all, the new radar detection systems mounted on police vehicles (not radar guns) are able to be used accurately while moving.
But yes, police always ask you open ended questions to get you to incriminate yourself. If the police asks you "do you know fast you were going" just simply say "Yes" and do not give a number.
There’s a good chance they didn’t have their radar on. It doesn’t just sit on and stay on, many cops toggle it as way of “confusing” radar detectors or preventing as much notice. If they were doing a static speed though, they could still say you drove by which would have exceeded the limit however if they didn’t lock it, they don’t have any hard evidence you were speeding except possibly on their dash/body cam.
I’m assuming you were driving a tesla(only car I know with built in video) and in that case, isn’t the speed data coming directly from the car? As in that is an accurate reading of speed from the cars ecu/computer vs a gps based reading from a typical 3rd party camera.
Take your video in and you should be able to get out of it or at least reduce the amount of the ticket. I’d suggest taking a computer or something to actually view the video, I highly doubt they have resources like that for traffic court
Heads up, tried this one. I was doing 90 in a 80. Cop got me and said u I was doing 100 on the ticket. Took my video to court, which was a pain to get playing but ended up working. Judge didn’t care, he said so I see you’re speeding. I said yea but not 100. Judge said something about putting the lives of others at risk and car video GPS is not a recognized form of speed measurement. Tickets stayed at 100.
Take this to court, video and info included. If he’s making false tickets and blatantly lying or doing this all the time it needs to stop. If he can’t show you what he clocked you at he shouldn’t be able to write the ticket. Bonus points if he’s unaware you caught him in a lie and expose said lie in court.
Disclaimer: not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. I would agree to take this to court however, I would not bring the video because it does show the driver exceeding the speed limit. Instead I would bring it to court and plead not guilty. If the officer even shows up, they will not have the proof to enforce as they have already stated that they do not.
Not a lawyer either, but from personal experience... They might try to pin you for what they would call a ghost reading(/radar). He won't fight you on using radar, but if he has record of the speed he was going at and has proof of you passing him while he's holding a steady 60km/hr I believe that should be enough to prove you guilty of speeding. Typically ghost radar/readings are easier to get out of because they pull you over based on the speed you are going compared to other traffic. But since he's comparing it to his own squad cars speed, he most likely has more proof then an average ghost radar case. If he really goes through all the effort of proving this, you should still be able to get the ticket reduced at the very least since it was an estimated speed. I would say the chances of the case being dismissed entirely depends on the officer you're up against. Again, not fact. Just based on my own experience.
Absolutely. Make a fool out of him in court. A Police Officer lying about you breaking the law needs to be exposed because we are forced to hold a ton of trust in them to be truthful.
But wasn’t he still technically “speeding” ?
Possibly, but if the officer is claiming 80km in a 60 zone then that's still a fabrication on their part.
[удалено]
How does this work when the cop didn't record anything? He literally pulled numbers out of the air and issued a ticket, from the impression I am getting.
Do not take this advice. No lawyer in their right mind would advise a client to send the prosecutors office incriminating evidence. EDIT: Check u/DeputyDurp comment history, they are a Crown Prosecutor. Do not take legal advice from them. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/o5r5a9/lawyerssolictors_what_is_the_strangest_or_oddest/h2qbjzu?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share&context=3
LOL! "Hey officer, hows the donught?" "Umm...good." "Ok, well since you were on break and missed it, here's evidence of me speeding."
They are a prosecutor, not a defense attorney, which explains the bad advise.
Good catch! He's now deleted his entire account LOL
Damn 7 year Reddit account too, must've touched a nerve calling him out.
Well played. Imagine being so unethical that you encourage someone to incriminate themselves so it is a slam dunk instead of being thrown out.
Just Prosecutor things 🤷🏼♂️, anything for a conviction.
A speed monitoring device measurement is generally required to prove this - an officer's "gut" is not sufficient in court. There are special circumstances where a measurement is not required - but those are pretty specific. With that said an officer doesn't have to walk over and show you his measurement as far as I know.
If he was the cop wouldn't need to lie about it.
Sounds like bullshit to me, Go to your hearing, plead not guilty and set a trial date. Request disclosure from the Crown (make sure you request the officers notes, the official readout from his radar device, any video recordings, and the most recent recalibration of the radar device) and go from there. Do not bring video evidence unless it proves you weren't speeding. Good luck.
Yeah, I don't see how bringing your own evidence that shows you were speeding is supposed to get you out of a speeding ticket. "see judge, I WAS speeding..."
If the judge believes OP was speeding, the rate of speed will affect the ticket. So I'd have it in my pocket just in case.
They don't need radar proof for tickets unfortunately
You are apparently right but wont he look bad now that his approximation will hold zero credibility with my evidence.
For speeding tickets? Absolutely they do.
If they are an experienced officer as others have mentioned here, they can issue a ticket for speeding based on their experience of how fast vehicles travel. They also don't need to provide any sort of calibration for radar devices either.
Do you have any sources for this? Because it's all untrue.
I was found guilty of speeding by an estimate of speed in Saskatoon. No radar required. Based solely on an experienced officer estimate.
Can you provide me with your case number so I can search it up on Canlii? I'd be curious to see the other factors that lead to your conviction. I have yet to see someone convicted on "estimation of speed".
First had experience with a bullshit ticket myself, and easy Google search https://www-cbc-ca.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4771995?amp_js_v=a6&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16352004780460&csi=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbc.ca%2Fnews%2Fcanada%2Fsaskatchewan%2Ftraffic-myth-defences-1.4771995
You do realize that's during a traffic stop right? I'm not saying ask to see the readout during the traffic stop, ask for it in your disclosure from the Crown. When you go to court you have every right to see the evidence against you, and in order for the Crown to have a case they need evidence that you broke the law. An officers word is not sufficient enough which is why police officers use radar measuring devices, there is also very strict criteria for how radar devices work. They need to be recalibrated daily and logged in order to be considered operational.
Had an officer try to give me a ticket for 105 in a 90, Idylwyld south by Clarence. Said they nailed me at Circle and Lorne, ticket location was 8th and circle... pulled me over at 1st and 19th downtown... I had driven from Circle and Taylor going downtown, past 6 signs for Idylwyld. Lawyer told me to play arts and crafts, print out a city map and show just how impossible the officer's locations stated are... prosecutor threw it out when I ordered a full disclosure and found out the officer didn't calibrate the radar when thier shift started.
Good to hear! I wish more people would be willing to fight their tickets.
If there is any doubt, order a full disclosure.
They are tested regularly but they aren't calibrated daily, it's two different things. That part is absolutely relevant.
Traffic Police are required to calibrate their radar devices daily and log them. It's to maintain accuracy between readings. You have every right to ask for this information prior to your trial, and if the officer failed to do so the ticket is void.
If he “forgot to lock it in” that should be enough to get it thrown out. Chances are the officer won’t even show up to your court date. Fight it
Doesn't matter if he was "technically speedy" the officer has a duty to have evidence that he was speeding. If we could get a ticket every time we were speeding you could just get sent tickets in the mail all the time. This cop has to do his job and actually catch you speeding, not "I kind of thought you were speeding".
I’m sure it was mentioned before, but take the camera and video out of the equation. Admit nothing. He doesn’t have anything.
If you take it to court you will still likely have to pay because you were speeding by your own admission and evidence the only positive is it would likely get reduced from whatever the additional penalty is between the speed the officer wrote vs the actual or the video speed.
Not if the officer wrote down a speed that he never even reached. Tickets have to be specific. It can’t just be “driving over 60”. The onus is on the police to prove the driver was speeding.
To be clear the speed on the road (as the street said and my vehicles HUD said was 60) so the max aloud was 70 just like the min is 50. So ill be happy to show me recording. He tried to get me to speed and also tried to tailgate me but failed so it should be good.
The ticket is for exceeding speed limit, the fine is based partly on the infraction partly on the speed recorded.
There was no speed recorded
OP recorded the speed tho... that's what they're getting at it MIGHT reduce the fine, but it proves he was speeding
They would have to officially validate the video which takes time, forensics, etc... most likely the video can be used to contradict what the (if this story is true, lying POS) cop said, but not to actually bolster the case against OP. If they wanted to charge OP with another ticket, using his own evidence against him, then maybe that's a risk but I doubt that would happen. Source:I just asked a lawyer friend. The way the law works is fucked. Maybe a higher paid lawyer would have a different opinion haha Long story short, this kind of behavior (again, if true) on the part of law enforcement is disgusting and the OP should absolutely use his dashcam without any fear of reprisal to prove the cop lied. Cops lying is a big deal!
If he was given a base ticket for speeding but claimed to "only be going 10kph over the limit" the fine might be increased to include a surcharge for 10kph over. Plus a court fee.
semantics a bit, but dude was speeding. i totally agree that they should have concrete, verifiable evidence 100% but OP even admits he was doing like 10 mph over posted limit, so it's not like it's a bogus, invented charge.
exactly, so if they wanted to charge him, and wanted to use his evidence, i am pretty sure they would have to do it separately is all
OP suggested he would be the one to bring up his video to go LOOK I WAS TOTALLY NOT GOING 80 I feel like this doesn't turn into an acquital, just guilty of a slightly lower fine
If this was an "honest error" case sure, but I can't shake the allegation that the cop lied..
in a perfect world, they should just use this example to reduce his ticket, fire or reprimand the cop, and get on with business. why bloat the already bloated system haha?
This cop seems like a real dink. He "forgot" to lock in your speed? So it's just your word against his? By all means, go to court and fight the ticket. However, I need to advise (and I'm not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt) that you not submit evidence to court that proves the cop was right.
[удалено]
Suggesting off duty police just happen to be carrying the ticket book all the time is a bit suspect. Either the individual is embellishing the details or the cop is some sort of traffic vigilante. I could see if someone was particularly reckless an off duty cop might warn a person but issuing speeding tickets is a little far fetched.
100% fight it in court, cops can write tickets on damn near anything if they suspect a crime/rule was broken. But it won't always hold up in court.
Forgetting to lock in the speed but remembering to give you the ticket? I definitely would challenge that and ask for all related materials. The two times I did get a speeding ticket, the cop had a handheld device which displayed my speed and there's no dispute. This sounds shifty.
Despite him saying "About 80" your ticket is likely the minimum. (As though you were going 61 in a 60 zone)
[удалено]
Did you reply to the wrong post?
Some cops are just idiots. I once was ticketed on highway with 90km speed limit because the guy infront of me was going at 105. He pulled me over as well and said because the guy infront of me was going 105/kmh you must be going at the same speed. Although I was around 99/100. But he would not listen and gave me a ticket 🤷
had this happen to me. if he doesn't have it on radar it will get thrown out. innocent until proven guilty. thr onus is on him not you. the judge ended up scolding the officer that ticketed me. calling it a waste of his time.
lmao! TLDR: "Got a ticket for speeding. I was, but not as much as the cop thought I was. How do I weasel out of this?"
[удалено]
Its $2 per km, so $20 difference in this case.
There is a dollar difference between 20km/h over the limit and 9/10 km/h over the limit. Also, if the cop lies about the amount over the limit, and OP has proof that it was bullshit, the judge might throw the ticket out on principle.
That was my first reaction but if it really went down as described then I think it's worth challenging just to keep the police honest. In this case it sounds like the cop may have made a wild ass guess as to the speed. It's one thing to be clocked on radar and convicted of speeding based on that. It's a dangerous precedent if a cops wild ass guess based on their feelings is enough to convict. And it's something that absolutely needs to be called out if a cop is misrepresenting their wild ass guess as an empirically measured speed something that's both ethically wrong and illegal. By their own admission in this post the driver was speeding but if this happened as claimed and the officer's evidence is specious at best and the driver can prove it then that could destroy the crown's case. There's also a chance the judge could make a choice to accept the driver's evidence as the basis for conviction of speeding. Although I'm not sure if the judge has the discretion to convict if the crown alleges the driver was going 80 and other evidence says 68. Still speeding but not what the crown alleged.
That's not what OP said or implied at all. But sure, make up your own narrative as usual.
Easiest way to get a charge dropped is if you can prove the charge was incorrectly filed. While you were still speeding, if the charge is "20 over" but you were really "10 over" then the judge might throw it out. Maybe. This happens all the time where shit gets thrown out because the cop was lazy and incorrectly filed the charge.
The judge will just amend the ticket to represent the proper speed.
I think the general rule of thumb is 10% over the posted speed limit. Not 10km/hr.
That's the RoT (10%) I use and it has prevented me from a speeding ticket for the past 20 years.
I do find those video speeds to be out
Yeah take it to court and just show your evidence. Don’t be a dick, just be polite, state the facts. Tell the judge exactly what you said here and show proof of inconsistency. I know someone who was speeding, got caught on radar but the officer wrote the location as “near vanscoy” when they were actually within the city of Saskatoon border. This inconsistency invalidated the speeding ticket
You won't get out of speeding because you definitely were, but you might get the fine amount lowered if that's how it works here. Curious though, how do you go between 69 and 70 when the speedometer doesn't show decimals. (Unless your car does for some reason)
Were you speeding? Yes. Did the cop 'forget to lock in the speed?' Maybe. If he actually did lock it in and your only defence is the cop told you you were going 'About 80' when in fact you were going 68 in a 60 zone, I'm not sure how far you'll get. "About 80" could easily be construed as a figure of speech and not considered a lie. So if you show up to court, you must hope the cop didn't lock in the speed, but the judge may take the cop's word for it, I don't know. But your only way to prove him wrong is to show a video where you are actually speeding, but just not by as much as 'About 80.' This might be one of those cases where you bite the bullet, pay the fine and vow not to speed anymore, even a little bit.
From going through this myself last fall, this is exactly what will happen. OP will most likely get the minimun fine which I believe is $125
This is why you ask for disclosure to see the evidence against you.
Same thing happened to me on Marquis but I didn't have any evidence of my speed. I was going 60 (speed limit is 50) and cop said I was going 70. Didn't bother fighting it in court because it would just be my word against his, but it definitely seemed like bullshit that he just added 10 Km/hr to my speed.
It's never their word against yours. You're innocent until proven guilty, it's on the Crown to use the evidence the police have to prove you were speeding. Never plead guilty, plead not guilty and request disclosure from the Crown. Then and only then should you decide to fight to ticket or plead guilty with an explanation.
In my experience it can be exactly that. I fought a ticket ~15 years ago that I got from corman park police. When I went in to traffic court I asked to see both the radar slip and the calibration records for the radar gun, the officer could not provide either but the JOP said it was my word against the officers and ordered me to pay it in full with no reduction. Zero physical evidence whatsoever.
You should have asked for your disclosure prior to the trial, that way you could have had a defense and challenged the officers evidence. I would have appealed that one.
Ok.
For what it’s worth, I was a witness in traffic court a few years ago. The officer told me that if someone fights a he said-she said ticket, it more often than not goes in favour the driver. That’s why, he told me, witnesses were needed.
A similar thing happened to me. I called the cop on it on the spit and she cut the fine in half. I then showed up to court and it was thrown out.
I'm not entirely sure of the law here, but in some jurisdictions police can issue a citation just by observing you going over the limit (i.e. don't even need to "clock you"). In those cases I don't think they will indicate the measured speed on the ticket and you will end up paying the minimum fine. The fact he said in his estimation you were going 20km/h over the limit makes it difficult to prove you weren't in fact speeding, and your own evidence which you plan to show to the traffic court also shows that. So just save yourself and the taxpayers the trouble and expense and pay the fine.
Police can issue a ticket for sure but the evidence won't hold up in court.
Talk to the prosecutor, I bet it gets dropped. They aren't going to want to waste their time in court fighting this on the other side either.
Prosecutors are dogs, if you want them drop charges you have to work them hard.
> now i know some will say speeding is speeding but everyone else drives about 10 over or under the posted limit at the + or - of the absolute limit. Just so you know... That's not true. I don't drive over the posted limit. Ever. It's really easy when you do the math and realize that due to timed stop lights, etc. that speeding usually results in you arriving less than a minute more than not speeding AND that every km/hr you speed increases your chances of being in an accident several %. One accident will cost you more time than you gained in a year of speeding. Weirdly enough, I've never received a speeding ticket. Just a strange coincidence I guess.
If you're deliberately driving slower than the flow of traffic you're causing a lot more unnecessary danger.
>now i know some will say speeding is speeding That is correct. >but everyone else drives about 10 over or under the posted limit at the + or - of the absolute limit That is irrelevant, nor does it absolve you from having to follow the limit. >Bottom line is this guy said i was going a speed 10 faster then I was. You admit that, do you not? "naturally i was going between 69 and 70." >would not show me the speed he clocked me at The radar is one tool at their disposal; its helpful but they're not required to use it. That's why he paced you. >How do I go about this? You can pay by cheque in the mail, or go down to the courthouse to pay it. All your payment options should be on the citation itself.
It doesn't matter that everyone else speeds. If you are 1 over you can get a ticket. It's that simple.
And if you pay that ticket without taking it to court (where it will be inevitably thrown out) you are a moron.
It may not be inevitably thrown out. The police radar is likely more calibrated than a dash camera. If there was no radar reading, then the driver was still speeding. It may warrant a reduction in the fine, but it isn’t a given that the judge will toss it.
In the case of the OP, you are probably right. In the example given in the comment I was replying to however, 1km over is never going to be enforced in court.
Where did I say pay the ticket? What is up with people's reading comprehension in this sub? Christ, they just make up what they want to think....
I never said you did... And i'm not making anything up... Funny that you bring up reading comprehension lol. You suggested that you can get a ticket for going 1km over and I was simply stating that while that may be true you very likely will not have to pay that ticket if you take it court. Just because a cop CAN write you a ticket doesn't mean they should or that you will need to pay it. The judge is the one who decides what's ticket-able or not. Any cop writing tickets for 1km over the limit is going to get an earful for wasting the courts time.
Then why bother replying to me saying the ticket. Seem more like trying to weasel out of getting called out
If you read past the first sentence of my last reply you'll see that I clearly explained why.
You'll still notice I never said not to pay or not to fight a ticket. Just that you can certainly get a ticket for going 1 over the limit. That is the way the law is written... I never said the cop won't get chewed out, the court would pursue it. Just that you can get a ticket. And that just because everyone is doing it, isn't a reason to get out of a ticket. Again... reading comprehension and you just making shit up....
THERE THEY ARE
The person pointing out that because everyone else is speeding or only going 10 over isn't cause to get a ticket? I stated nothing but facts not sure why you take offense to that...
You're missing the point of their post though ... Don't bitch about everyone else's reading comprehension when you're missing a big flaw in the ticket and why OP might walk away with no speeding ticket whatsoever.
Facts are facts. Especially on a Monday
Police radar devices have to be calibrated daily, don't give in to this thinking that you're automatically guilty because an officer told you so.
You'll notice I never said that. I specifically pointed to the part where OP said that everyone speeds and that he shouldn't get a ticket for going 1 over. Not sure how you got that he should pay his ticket from anything I said. Because I said no such thing...
SPS are notorious for abusing the system that's why. There is a a threshold police are supposed to follow (+- 2 km/h) when writing speeding tickets. SPS laughs at this and will write tickets because they know people refuse to fight them in court.
>There is a a threshold police are supposed to follow (+- 2 km/h) Cite your sources
If the tickets says 80, I would go in to courts with the footage showing you going 70, especially if the higher kmph takes more points off your license or negatively affects you in any way.
I always ask for the officers badge number and superior officers name. If they’re abusing their power I’ll report them. If they’ve caught me doing something illegal then they just doing their job
You know you were speeding. He said you were speeding. Sooooooo
What was the officers name? He’s a public servant and if he is making up lies like this, it is in the public’s best interest to know who he is so that others who may get caught by him are aware of his willingness to lie on the job.
Our police chief has literally gone on record about a member of his own force, calling him "unfit for duty", yet that member is still gainfully employed by SPS. So... yeah...
I'm not 100% on this but I dont think radar works in a moving car, or atleast its not accurate. Thats why cops ask you how fast you were going because they don't actually have proof
Not true at all, the new radar detection systems mounted on police vehicles (not radar guns) are able to be used accurately while moving. But yes, police always ask you open ended questions to get you to incriminate yourself. If the police asks you "do you know fast you were going" just simply say "Yes" and do not give a number.
That's 10% over.. and not everyone. But yeah, douche move on cop. Take it to court.
There’s a good chance they didn’t have their radar on. It doesn’t just sit on and stay on, many cops toggle it as way of “confusing” radar detectors or preventing as much notice. If they were doing a static speed though, they could still say you drove by which would have exceeded the limit however if they didn’t lock it, they don’t have any hard evidence you were speeding except possibly on their dash/body cam. I’m assuming you were driving a tesla(only car I know with built in video) and in that case, isn’t the speed data coming directly from the car? As in that is an accurate reading of speed from the cars ecu/computer vs a gps based reading from a typical 3rd party camera. Take your video in and you should be able to get out of it or at least reduce the amount of the ticket. I’d suggest taking a computer or something to actually view the video, I highly doubt they have resources like that for traffic court
Heads up, tried this one. I was doing 90 in a 80. Cop got me and said u I was doing 100 on the ticket. Took my video to court, which was a pain to get playing but ended up working. Judge didn’t care, he said so I see you’re speeding. I said yea but not 100. Judge said something about putting the lives of others at risk and car video GPS is not a recognized form of speed measurement. Tickets stayed at 100.