Point in taking this to court?

[Croatian7]

I received a speeding ticket ~ $138 ($113 if I pay within 30 days). Offense 146 (3).

I was travelling down a stretch of highway I thought was 80km/h doing about 85km/h. As I came under a pedestrian overpass I noticed a police officer on his receiver. About 1 kilometre down the highway I was pulled over and issued a ticket for going 87km/h in a 70km/h zone at 215 meters (radar measurement?). As this section of highway is on my way to work, I was a little shocked, and told the police office that I was pretty sure that I was in an 80km/h zone. He said that there was a sign right beside the overpass that is 70km/h. On closer examination there are no 70km/h signs anywhere near to where I was clocked at 87km/h. In fact there is a sign right beside the overpass but it reads 80km/h. I've taken a picture.

Is there any point in taking this to court considering I was speeding, in my opinion 5km/h above, 7km/h according to radar? I have no previous traffic violations in 8 years of driving, I am pretty conservative driver and a little ticketed at how two police officers can be monitoring speeds in an area and a) lying about the speed limit or b) not look at the sign.

[sho_bc]

99.9% of the time, showing up to traffic court with a defense of "Yes your worship, I was driving faster than the posted speed limit, but not by as much as he says I was" will garner the irritation of the JJP.

*Edit* and the speed + distance noted is from a laser unit.

[Croatian7]

So, basically even if the judge finds the speed limit posted in my favor (it is pretty clear cut - all the signs are 80km/h in the area), he will still be irrirated that I was over the limit and just recharge me with 7km/h over the limit instead of 17km/h? Would that even reduce the ticket amount I have to pay??

[sho_bc]

$138 is the lowest fine for speeding. You were charged under Section 146(3) MVA (linked here). That is the fine for driving 1-20km/hr over the posted speed limit. You were driving over the posted speed limit.

What was written in the charge section? Does it say on the ticket you were issued that you were going 87 in a 70 or is that what he told you?

[Croatian7]

Says in the top corner of the ticket 87/70 @ 215.7m.

Damn, that licks balls. So I could get a ticket for doing 81 km/h in an 80 zone! Would that reduce the points thought, if the judge recharged me with 7 km/h over instead of 17km/h?

[sho_bc]

Originally Posted by Croatian7

So I could get a ticket for doing 81 km/h in an 80 zone! Would that reduce the points thought, if the judge recharged me with 7 km/h over instead of 17km/h?

In the words of the JJP the last time i went to traffic court: "If the speed limit is 50km/hr, is it legal to drive at 51km/hr?"

It is the same charge for driving 17km/hr over the speed limit as it is for driving 7km/hr over the speed limit. Therefore, there is no difference in fine or points.

[Rich Sandor]

If the officer cannot correctly determine what the speed limit is on a stretch of road, it brings to doubt his ability to measure your speed correctly as well.

More importantly, analog speedometers have a 8-12% error built into them from the manufacturer. When I am travelling at 110kph, my GPS shows 100kph.

It's possible that if your car was showing 85kph, you might only have been doing 80kph. The officer claiming that you were going 87kph shows even more error between display and reality.

This is just one reason why police do not give tickets for 51kph in a 50kph zone, or 85kph in an 80kph zone.

I'm not going to suggest that you dispute a ticket for speeding, when you in fact were speeding - BUT - if there is so much of a shadow of a doubt that you actually were, in fact, speeding, then you should absolutely dispute it, because there is no way in hell that going near the speedlimit +/- a few kph should garner you a $130 ticket.

[zulutango]

"Absoluoute liability"...you MUST not exceed the posted limit. Technically 1kmh over is speeding. That is the way the law is written in BC. The 215m is the distance from the Laser unit and your vehicle at the time it took 6 distance readings in 1/3 of a second. It should not be written on your copy of the ticket. JPs do not want to see either the alleged speed or anything else on the face of the ticket. It may prejudice your chances in court and there is no provision for it to be there. If you like you can go back to the exact location the ticket was issued and measure out exactly 215 m from where the laser was stationed. This would be the place your car was when the speed was calculated. You can then go backwards in your direction of travel and see what the closest speed sign says, unless it it is within a Municipality where the speed does not have to be posted as it is deemed to be max 50 unless posted. If you were charged with 146(3) speed against Hwy Sign it has to be stated which specific sign you were speeding against. If it was anything under 90k then you have no defense, as you said you were going over 80k. Hope this helps a bit to understand what is required.

[Rich Sandor]

If it was anything under 90k then you have no defense, as you said you were going over 80k.

If your speedometer shows 85kph, but your GPS shows 80kph - and you are in an 80kph zone: Are you speeding?

If your speedometer shows 85kph, but you do not have a GPS to confirm it, and you are in an 80kph zone: Are you speeding?

[Croatian7]

"It should not be written on your copy of the ticket. JPs do not want to see either the alleged speed or anything else on the face of the ticket. It may prejudice your chances in court and there is no provision for it to be there."

But I didn't write it in there - the police office did??? So I get prejudice placed upon me because the police officer doesn't know what he or she is doing? I don't get it.

Also, signs read 80km/h before and after where I was tagged.

[zulutango]

The quote above is what numerous JPs have told disputants in court when they cried that their speed was not written on the ticket. I never wrote the speed or laser distance on the face of the ticket. I always wrote it in the officer's notes section on the last white copy. I don;'t know why it was written on your ticket.

Rich, in answer to your question, again to quote numerous JPs...and what I said above..it is an absoloute liability offense. It is up to the driver themself, to make sure they do not exceed the posted limit. If your speedo is out and you speed, to me, they are saying that this means it is "your fault". Knowing this, under "normal circumstances" ( no weather, visibility, traffic etc concerns) & after 28 years of Traffic work, I do not know of, nor have ever heard of, ANY Cop who actually writes a ticket for 1 km over the limit. Anyone who tells you that they got one for just a couple of kms over the limit are either genuinely mistaken...or lying...or there was some confusion on somebody's part about the limit or location. We know of speedo inaccuracies. The problem is that Photo Radar's politically correct approach here in BC told driver that they could go 10 k over any posted limit and they would not get charged. The result was that drivers all added this to the limit...then added their normal 10 plus on top, thinking that Cops would not stop them for 10 over the limit because of the speed thing. Now we have people driving at least 20 over the limit...and add the speedo errors on top of that and 25 plus was common. JPs regularly tell people this in the Traffic Courts I ran my ticket through.

IN answer to your specific questions...with one response...it comes down to what speed the vehicle was actually doing...not what the GPS or speedo did or did not show. If you were actually doing 80 in an 80 zone, you were not speeding. Do even 1 km over that and you are technically speeding. Speeding is like pregnancy...either you are pregnant or you are not. There is no "kinda pregnant". If the test kit is not accurate and it does not show pregnant, but you really ARE...you can't claim to NOT be pregnant because the kit malfunctioned.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

If your speedometer shows 85kph, but your GPS shows 80kph - and you are in an 80kph zone: Are you speeding?

If your speedometer shows 85kph, but you do not have a GPS to confirm it, and you are in an 80kph zone: Are you speeding?

Originally Posted by zulutango

IN answer to your specific questions...with one response...it comes down to what speed the vehicle was actually doing...not what the GPS or speedo did or did not show. If you were actually doing 80 in an 80 zone, you were not speeding. Do even 1 km over that and you are technically speeding. Speeding is like pregnancy...either you are pregnant or you are not. There is no "kinda pregnant". If the test kit is not accurate and it does not show pregnant, but you really ARE...you can't claim to NOT be pregnant because the kit malfunctioned.

I think what Rich really was getting at was... if your speedometer reads 80 in and 80 zone, but the cop reads your speed at 85... are you liable?

Were you speeding? Yes. Did you KNOW you were speeding? Probably not, unless you've taken the time to familiarize yourself with the specific irregularities of your own speedometer. Very few people I know actually do that, they simply accept with the dial tells them as being correct.

[Uncle Benz]

When I worked as a paralegal and as a articling student I defended a lot of tickets on bhealf of people. In my experience almost every single officer I have ever come across allows a 10km margrin before giving a ticket. Some allow even up to 22kms. Yes I acknowledge they can give a ticket at even 1km over, but usually it does not happen.

Considering there were two officers present and monitering the area and they were both operating under false pretences I would suggest you dispute the ticket. If the officers were aware that the area limit is 80kms they may have let you slide. Wheather you dispute or not is entirely up to you. Keep in mind the fine may be minimal, but there are still 3 demerit points attached to any speeding ticket in BC. The points will stay on your record for 5 years.

At 3 points the premium you pay is nil, however say by chance you get caught off-guard again (even good drivers have bad days) sometime in 12 months and have a combined 6 points on your record you're looking at a $300.00 premium. Also the points on your record for 5 year, may affect job prospects if you are required to produce a driver's abstract.

[zulutango]

"operating under false pretences" . (Under common law, false pretense is defined as a representation of a present or past fact, which the thief knows to be false, and which he intends will and does cause the victim to pass title of his property. That is, false pretense is the acquisition of title from a victim by fraud or misrepresentation of a material past or present fact".

Or do you mean they were not really Police? Not to be picky but as an "articling student and paralegal defending tickets" I hope you were a little more accurate in your testimony? I think what you might mean is that you allege the Police were mistaken in their knowledge of the posted speed limit in that area? My post above offers a suggestion on how to pursue the matter. Croatian7 might also want to consider contacting the issuing Member and see if they agree that the limit was in fact 80 and did they wish to pursue the VT for going an acknowledged 7 k over that limit instead of 17 over? As I said above, the speed sign that is vital to the specifics of this case, is the last sign he passed BEFORE driving at 87k. 215 metres out from the exact location of the Laser. The one posted on the overpass would not qualify as it had not been passed before the speed was registered.

I have inadvertantly issued tickets on occasion for over the limit..but found out later the limit was actually higher. My practice was to contact the disputant if the speed was now only a few kms over and tell them that I would call no evidence on the court date. As I always wrote at least 23 plus over, I might end up with a 13 k over...,or a 53 k over for an excessive. In the latter case I would drop it to a regular speed and not allege a speed more than 1 k over, so the disputant got a $138 instead of a $196, as consideration for my mistake. Didn't happen very often but eveybody makes mistakes and I always owned up when I did.

[Uncle Benz]

Originally Posted by zulutango

"operating under false pretences" . (Under common law, false pretense is defined as a representation of a present or past fact, which the thief knows to be false, and which he intends will and does cause the victim to pass title of his property. That is, false pretense is the acquisition of title from a victim by fraud or misrepresentation of a material past or present fact".

Or do you mean they were not really Police? Not to be picky but as an "articling student and paralegal defending tickets" I hope you were a little more accurate in your testimony? I think what you might mean is that you allege the Police were mistaken in their knowledge of the posted speed limit in that area? My post above offers a suggestion on how to pursue the matter. Croatian7 might also want to consider contacting the issuing Member and see if they agree that the limit was in fact 80 and did they wish to pursue the VT for going an acknowledged 7 k over that limit instead of 17 over?

My mistake zulutango, I ment to write apprehension/knowledge. Thanks for the clarification. In regards to me being more accurate in my testimony. I never gave testimony, I elicited testimony from whoever was on the stand at the time.

I do hope the matter can be resolved for Crotian7 without going to court. If it is not, he should be well aware of the possible resulting consequences.

[wing_woo]

If you are 100% sure that the speed limit was 80km/h where you were, I suggest you call the officer and talk to him asap. If he realizes it's 80, he might drop the ticket.

[Croatian7]

Like I am 115% sure the speed limit is 80km/h. I took pictures of all 6 posted signs from when I turned onto the highway....all 80km/h.

How would this work in court....

Myself: "Your honour, I was traveling in my white car (give some ICBC stat on the % of white cars) on a busy section of highway, according to the allegation I was tagged at a distance of approximately 2 football fields at 87km/h in a 70km/h zone. This cannot possibly be my car because I was never traveling at 87km/h, and I never was in a 70km/h zone (Present pictures/evidence). I believe miscommunication occurred between the police officers and I was wrongly identified as the speeding vehicle."

Officer: "You were still traveling at 87km/h"

Myself: "Your honour, I find it hard to believe that two professional officers with the ability and skills to tag speeding cars in traffic at a distance of 2 football fields and would not be aware of a speed limit in an area they are monitoring, clearly posted approximately 20 meters before of the overpass, and approximately 300 meters before the overpass."


How would to officer try to weaken my arguement in my above scenario?? and would my arguement be strong enough?

[Croatian7]

I think that I am going to take this to court, not because of the $113, but with bad luck if I get two more tickets (similar to this) in a three year period with the new ICBC program (that just started Jan 1st, 2009) I will have to pay a $400 penalty to ICBC for three years....plus my insurance costs go up. So this ticket could potentially cost me close to $2000.

I got this ticket in the worst period; I would have been 10x better off if this happen on December 30th, 2008! Bad ticket, bad timing....ahhh....

[zulutango]

The charge is speeding against a Hwy sign. They say it was 70, you say it was 80. They say they targeted your vehicle and at 215 m before your car came to their laser setup, you were exceeding the posted speed limit. The laser is accurate to + or - 1 kmh as it only reads in full kmh. It is target specific.
They would have to say which sign you were speeding against. If they insist it was 70 but you produce photos taken at that time, showing that they are wrong then the JP may consider their prima facie evidence was defective...as they say the sign you were speeding against was a 70...and you just proved they were wrong..it was an 80. It depends on the JP IF he will toss the ticket.
If you just cross examine the Member after he states that it was a 70K zone, and show pictures to contradict his evidence, then the only speed evidence will be his. You are not subject to cross examination unless you testify yourself.
IF you testify yourself and say that you were going over the posted limit (70 or 80) then that evidence will be entered and could be considered supporting his testimony.

What you are looking for is reasonable doubt of the sworn testimony, his and yours, if you testify. The JP may accept that the alleged mistake of the speed limit may be fatal to the Crown's case...or not. If he doesn't, then, by your own admission you were guilty of speeding. He cannot reduce the minimum fine but he can suspend the imposition of the penalty. I have seen it done on a few very rare occasions.

[Croatian7]

Wow, you're helpful! So the police officer always presents the evidence first?

[zulutango]

Ye...they are the Crown. They must enter enough basic evidence to convict you. You then get a chance to cross examine their evidence. If you want to testify to your side, then you are next. Then the Crown ( Police) get to X you. JP makes his decision ON THE EVIDENCE GIVEN IN TESTIMONY. If the Crown proves your case then you loose, if you give the JP reasonable doubt, then you will likely get off.

Just remember though, you are just discussing "how pregnant you are" here because even you admit you were speeding. Knowing that, you make a moral decision on how you are going to proceed. It's the LEGAL System...NOT the JUSTICE System. You may choose to use the Legal system to subvert the Justice system. Such is life today.

[Rich Sandor]

It goes both ways. Giving someone a $138 fine for going less than 10% over the speedlimit is about as morally dubious as disputing the ticket afterwards.

[Croatian7]

I did some actual measurements today (my conceptual measurements were way off - I thought the sign next to the overpass for like 20 meters away ~ only 100 meters off). First 80km/h sign 700 meters away from overpass, second 80km/h sign 120-130 meters from overpass. So if I was tagged at 215 meters I was definitely within a 80 km/h zone.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/34436343@N02/3202738064/

[sho_bc]

....

[Rich Sandor]

Alex, that was the most retarded analogy I've ever read.