I got a ticket last month and the officer x said, I was going 50mph while in a construction zone posted 30mph. I decided to fight it and it looks pretty good so far.

I showed up to court as promised, Plead not guilty and was given a pre-trial date, Went to that and was offered by the city prosecutor a discounted fine of $250 from $350 if I plead guilty, I said NO! We walked up front to the Judge and I asked for a Jury trial and a copy of the video of the stop, a copy of the video of the officer calibrating the radar before his shift and the radar calibration by the manufacturer.

3 days after I receive a large envelope from the city with a video copy of the stop, It show's officer x stopping another vehicle at the time I was ticketed? and a copy of "tuning fork certificate" with two different serial numbers?

So, I decided to ask for more documents.

#1. The officer calibrating the radar prior to leaving the station's parking lot before his shift (for the second time)

#2. A copy of officer x documentation showing he is certified to use radar installed on his motorcycle/vehicle

#3. The serial number from officer x motorcycle/vehicle radar device and the logs of service beginning from the date it was first installed.

#4. Officer x motorcycle/vehicle documentation records that the speedometer has been calibrated.

 

Were you going 50mph in a 30mph construction zone?

 

No

 

Good luck. When is your trial date?

 

1/12 thanks

 

What speed you allege you were going in the 30 MPH zone???

 

If *I* had to sit on your jury trial for a dumbass speeding ticket - I'm sure I'm not alone in that I'd find you guilty NO MATTER WHAT just for wasting my time.

If you want to play Perry Mason - good for you! I've fought speeding tickets numerous times and won! I've also had the DA hand me my *** a few times because lets face it, I ain't Matlock.

At least have the judge decide. Your chances are probably better.

Just sayin.

 

Well, The official video the city sent me, shot at the time I was issued my ticket was not me. So I have to say, I was going 30mph

 

So you would find a person guilty even if there not

The judge will always with give the officer the benefit of the doubt, The officer needs to prove my guilt and so far its not looking to good.

 

^^^ Yep. Absolutely. I don't care if the officer admits he made everything up in open court - I'd find you guilty as a matter of principle. Hell, I'd probably even vote for the death penalty if they would give me the option.

We are talking about a stupid *** speeding ticket - not a murder trial. Geez.

If I have to get dragged into court (along with a whole jury!) and miss a day's work over a silly ticket - I say **** ya in the neck!

Maybe when everyone is done wasting time over your stupid ticket, the jury members MIGHT each get a check for $10 or so out of the deal. It probably won't even cover parking for the day.

Requesting a jury in on a speeding ticket is just plain inconsiderate to everyone in my opinion. Sure its your constitutional right - but still makes you look like an asshat.

If its not quite as obvious you are not at fault, what makes you think a jury is going to find you not guilty? Are you hoping that the whole jury just thinks all cops are full of **** and the case will get dismissed because of that? A jury is instructed to use the same criteria a judge is sooooo whats the damn difference?

All that ranting done, I'm glad you are fighting the system! As I said in an earlier post, I'm all for figting for what is right and I've done it many times. However, if its as obvious as you say that you are not guilty - I think you should let a judge decide that in this case.

 

never mind ..Wrong section

 

Thanks for your input, The reason I created this thread was to inform others that might be in the same situation and possibly help somebody in the process.

 

He's right in that the Judge will have a stronger tendancy to go with the cop. Jury will always be more sympathetic to the little guy. And I have no doubt 7dust would be excused from consideration for Jury when interviewed. So don't worry about that kind of 'tud being a problem. Any attorney worth his salt would have asked for Jury as the OP did.

I don't know about anyone else, but Jury duty is a full paid day no different that a sick day, but your sick day allotment doesn't get tapped.

Unlike 7dust, I applaud the OP.

 

1. you have a right to trial by a jury of your peers.

2. are you saying the car videotape by the officer - and, I assume, clocked on radar by the officer - was someone else?

 

I've done this so many times it isnt funny. Out of 12 speeding tickets, I've had to pay 3 of them. even the ones that I was stupid enough to let go to warrant.

You messed up when asking for a jury trial.... Here's the deal:

If there is no one there to contest your statement, then the charges are dropped. Period.

So you request a trial with the judge and hope the cop who issued the ticket doesn't show up. 9 times out of 10 (or 9 out of 12 to be more precise) they don't show up. If the cop isn't there to say that you were speeding, then yours is the only argument heard and the charges are dropped.

If the cop does show up, then you change your plea and pay the fine. Or, in your case you show your evidence and plea your argument to the judge as you planned to.

Its that easy. Good luck!

 

Will try this next time in traffic court.

 

Thats correct, I received a "official copy" with my citation#, my name and officer name of the stop showing official time running on the video and it was another person/vehicle.

 

If its not you on the tape, what's the problem? Use that to your advantage, that cop is going to look pretty stupid showing the tape and finding out its not you or your car...That would be worth seeing.

 

+1 ^^^^

 

how can TxFCturboII speed without oil ?

 

very very carefully.... or in your '93, maybe?

 

As you said, if the cop doesn't show up you win essentially by default. Doesn't matter if its a judge trial or a jury trial. Either way, its a move for dismissal in the interest of justice.

 

You are correct, it just seems to me that the whole system may be more inclined to fail with less x factors involved.... its just a theory of mine, but if the city is paying jurors to be there, they may be more inclined to make sure the cop shows up.... the judge is paid to be there already, ya dig?

 

If you are in Houston, their new policy is that the cop does not show up to 2 pm even though you have to show up at 8 for roll call. So prepare to sit, then most likely have the trial postponed till another day.

They say this is to reduce the police over time, but in reality they know that many people will just opt for a guilty plea or deferred adjudication instead of sitting there. (been there and done that 2 times thus far).

And since the city is in a budget deficit they tell they try much harder now to make sure the cop will show up, so their attendance rate seems to be considerably higher for the last year or two. So I would not rely dismissal upon lack of witness.

My 2cents, may not be applicable in your city, but this is good stuff to know if you are in Houston.

 

My city is over budget, We have Stimulus Program here, Spend $250, Receive $25 back in a gift card. Maybe its from all the tickets they hand out