posted on Jul, 6 2014 @ 07:37 PM
originally posted by: smithjustinb
That's not the strategy. The strategy is to prove that their speed measuring device is inaccurate and render that inadmissible as evidence. Which
at that point, the officer would have nothing to go on to claim I was doing 100 mph and the charges would get dropped.
That's the problem though - Chances are, if the cop did actually do as he said, then there'd be video evidence to support his claims.
I agree with Ricky's comment as well - Even if you can prove the equipment was defective, what they will probably do is knock it down to whatever the
lower number is (IE: 90mph in an XXmph zone). Or, they will knock it down to 97mph instead of 100.
Like I said, seeing as you haven't said how fast you were going, and what the speed limit was in that area (I'd assume that you were on the freeway
or a highway, where the limit is 70/75mph). My point is: The jury is going to do like I am now, questioning the circumstances around the ticket -
It's clear to me you were speeding in that area, which means were I on the jury pool, I'd motion that you get a reduced charge (IE: Driving 25 over
in a 75mph zone). See, regardless of whether or not the equipment is bad, you now have to prove:
1. The radar gun was not calibrated correctly (In order for it to read 100mph, you had to have been doing something close to that).
2. That you didn't bypass the speed limit by a reasonable amount.
Source: My cousin is a cop.