Disputing Officers radar gun claim in court ?

[G-spec]

20 minutes ago driving down the downhill section of Boundary right before Marine drive got pulled over. Now I'm a guy if I'm wrong I fully admit it, so if I really was speeding I would be paying the ticket right now instead of writing this post. The explanation is kind of long, but I wanted to make sure I fully state the facts so I can get an expert opinion.
Just so you're fully informed to be able to draw your own conclusions, I'm not about to bitch, complain and point shlt out for the sake of sounding angry, I'm only stating full facts here, no opinions.



Here's the explanation.

I was following 3 cars that were in the right lane all stuck behind a big trailor truck entering the last blind twist right before the Marine drive exit. The cops were in that little bus stop area waiting right after the twist. The semi was going real slow so we were all stuck behind it driving very slow actually, definitely the speed limit.

Now here's the first thing I wanna bring up in court, as soon as we turned the twist I saw the officers well before they saw me, both had their radar guns down, I see one officer making eye contact and motioning the car right in front of me to pull over (Brand new AMG SL coupe, fully tinted) he didnt even see me at first, but then he looks up and sees my car, SO BY THE TIME HE FIRST LAID HIS EYES ON ME I WAS GOING 10KPH because the Benz was right ahead of me being slowed down, which slowed me down to a crawl, he then motions the Benz to go around him and go away, and pulls me over.

Second and main thing I would like to bring up in court is.... he flashes his radar gun at me quickly saying he clocked me at 78, as soon as I motion my head to look over, he quickly pulls it away from my eyes.



Here's the other issues non relevant that I don't plan on mentioning in court, unless I should, what you guys think ??

he walked around the car tells me he can't see my license plate, (it's neatly and firmly attached inside of my bumper inlet, it is behind the mesh but the whole plate and all letters are clearly visible) I tell him I was in traffic court not too long ago and that I met all the criteria for proper plate location which the judge and officer present both agreed it was legally placed and clearly visible.
He proceeds to tell me he's been doing this job longer than I've been alive and "he" thinks it's not visible. I said no more and then the conversation moved over to my rear license plate frame. It has a very light smoked plastic cover over it, he asks me why I have it on, so I ask "I didn't know it was illegal, because I bought it at Canadian Tire" so I ask him if he's gonna ticket me for it, he proceeds to tell me and I quote...

"You have a nice car, but you're gonna get ticketed for it because of it's looks"

In my head I'm thinking this because I know it to be fact,

-My front license plate location IS legal
-My rear license plate frame is NOT 'illegal'

but since it completely contradicts his "opinion" on the matter, I knew better than to argue with an police officer.





Here's the question

how do I counterclaim or dispute this particular officers claim of his radar gun catching me speeding in court without sounding like your typical douchebag before the stand making typical excuses???

How do I bring up the fact that he never took my radar reading and didn't even notice my car until I was crawling at a measly 10kph stuck behind the car he originally intended to pull over ??

[skidmark]

Originally Posted by Adon

it is behind the mesh but the whole plate and all letters are clearly visible)

If it is behind mesh, it is obstructed. I don't care what the judge said, he's wrong.

how do I counterclaim or dispute this particular officers claim of his radar gun catching me speeding in court without sounding like your typical douchebag before the stand making typical excuses???

I would start by reading the sticky on "How to deal with a violation ticket."

How do I bring up the fact that he never took my radar reading and didn't even notice my car until I was crawling at a measly 10kph stuck behind the car he originally intended to pull over ??

My first question would be how you knew for a fact that he didn't measure you?

I also suspect that he was using laser and not radar.

[wing_woo]

Originally Posted by Adon

I was following 3 cars that were in the right lane all stuck behind a big trailor truck entering the last blind twist right before the Marine drive exit. The cops were in that little bus stop area waiting right after the twist. The semi was going real slow so we were all stuck behind it driving very slow actually, definitely the speed limit.

That bus stop area is actually a police only area. If you look at the sign there, it actually is a police vehicles only sign. I always find it funny how they actually put a police area there knowing that they will use that place to catch speeders. Don't know if they changed it or not, but that's what it was the last time I looked there.

Originally Posted by Adon

He proceeds to tell me he's been doing this job longer than I've been alive and "he" thinks it's not visible. I said no more and then the conversation moved over to my rear license plate frame. It has a very light smoked plastic cover over it, he asks me why I have it on, so I ask "I didn't know it was illegal, because I bought it at Canadian Tire" so I ask him if he's gonna ticket me for it, he proceeds to tell me and I quote...

You aren't allowed anything to cover your license plate. The smoked plastic cover could potentially reflect if your car gets a picture taken of it at a red light camera. They have signs at Canadian Tire saying that some of the products sold are not street legal and it's up to the buyer to find out if it is or not before they purchase it. Just cause Canadian Tire sells it, it doesn't mean it's legal for you to use it on the road.

[fukkeneh240]

Originally Posted by wing_woo

Just cause Canadian Tire sells it, it doesn't mean it's legal for you to use it on the road.

so true. it's like buying a pellet gun from canadian tire. just because you buy one from them, doesnt mean you can go around carrying it every where you go or shoot people in public.

stretched analogy but it's the same.

[G-spec]

Originally Posted by skidmark

If it is behind mesh, it is obstructed. I don't care what the judge said, he's wrong.

so the judge is wrong, and your fellow officer in court who looked at the pics that actually told me the plate is safer behind the mesh since it's secure and wouldn't fly off in case of accident, they're both wrong ?

Originally Posted by skidmark

My first question would be how you knew for a fact that he didn't measure you?

I also suspect that he was using laser and not radar.

that's explained in my post, but I'll repeat again. The guy didn't even notice my car or look at me, I spotted them first before they even laid eyes on me, and I saw 1 cop talking to another car, and the other one (who pulled me over) had his radar gun pointed at the ground looking at the semi pass by, then jumped out in front of the Benz (the car directly ahead of me) to pull HIM over..... until offcourse he looked up and saw my car, motioned the Benz to leave and decided to pull me over instead
that's the first time he spotted my car and I know this because I was looking at him the whole time. I have no reason to lie, I'm just trying to figure out how to say this to the judge without sounding like a liar.

and 1 more question, I just checked my ticket, and I'm not 100% sure but if I was caught by radar, shouldn't it say on the ticket Radar, and exactly how fast I was clocked ?? because it doesn't say Radar anywhere on my ticket, and it doesn't have my alleged speed written anywhere?

which further leads me to ask the question of how can this guy get all up in my face saying he clocked me on radar, when it's obvious he didn't, can I bring this up in court as well ?

and by the way I'm gonna have to say that it's absolutely impossible for him to make an accurate radar reading when there was a semi and 3 cars backed up behind it, bumper to bumper all going at the same speed, and we were all bumper to bumper even before the twist and before we became visible to the police.




and yea you guys are right about CT selling offroad use stuff, it's probably illegal and I'll take it off, he didnt ticket me for it however, wonder how much it would have cost.

[wing_woo]

Originally Posted by Adon

and yea you guys are right about CT selling offroad use stuff, it's probably illegal and I'll take it off, he didnt ticket me for it however, wonder how much it would have cost.

$196 for obstructed plate. However, if you just remove your plate and not have it at all, it's $109 only...haha. However, I don't know if that's only for the front plate or does that also apply to the rear plate as well. Good choice to remove the film.

As for the ticket itself, the officer does not need to write the speed or how he caught you speeding. He'll have all that in his personal notes that he will use should you dispute the ticket. That's one reason why they take so long to write you a ticket, because they'll be taking all their notes down as well. If you feel that for sure you were not speeding, then go dispute the ticket. For all you know, there could have been another officer on the over pass taking down your speed before you even got to that bend where you saw the officer. Happens sometimes but from what you said, if the officer quickly flashed the laser gun to show you, then that probably wasn't the case.

[Gh0stRider]

was it a motorcycle cop? if so, we were doing the two strike speed watch.

[Dragon-88]

I think I saw you this afternoon driving up Hastings into burnaby...

[stutterr]

Good luck with your case. Definately fight it!!

Here is a great article on how to fight your own speeding tickets. It goes through requesting the last time the gun was calibrated, as well as officer certification etc etc. Its a step by step guide on how to fight traffic tickets.

Although it is written for Ontario Law, I beleive this should still serve as a great information package. It goes over every step of the legal system as well as what to ask for and a timeline of what is going to happen.

http://www.magma.ca/~fyst/

Best of luck to you!!

[skidmark]

Originally Posted by Adon

so the judge is wrong, and your fellow officer in court who looked at the pics that actually told me the plate is safer behind the mesh since it's secure and wouldn't fly off in case of accident, they're both wrong ?

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

The guy didn't even notice my car or look at me, I spotted them first before they even laid eyes on me, and I saw 1 cop talking to another car,

Just because you don't think that they saw you doesn't make it so.

shouldn't it say on the ticket Radar, and exactly how fast I was clocked ??

No, that's in the officer's notes.

which further leads me to ask the question of how can this guy get all up in my face saying he clocked me on radar, when it's obvious he didn't,

Maybe HE didn't, but another officer did. What is so obvious to you is not so obvious to me.

can I bring this up in court as well ?

Yes.

and by the way I'm gonna have to say that it's absolutely impossible for him to make an accurate radar reading when there was a semi and 3 cars backed up behind it, bumper to bumper all going at the same speed, and we were all bumper to bumper even before the twist and before we became visible to the police.

Which is an ideal situation for the use of laser, which IS perfectly capable of rapidly taking accurate readings of individual vehicles in just this situation.

wonder how much it would have cost.

$109.

I still think you should go back and read the sticky on dealing with a violation ticket....

[sho_bc]

Originally Posted by Adon

so the judge is wrong, and your fellow officer in court who looked at the pics that actually told me the plate is safer behind the mesh since it's secure and wouldn't fly off in case of accident, they're both wrong ?

Yes, they are. From the Motor Vehicle Act Regulations:

Plates to be unobstructed
3.03 A number plate must be kept entirely unobstructed and free from dirt or foreign material, so that the numbers and letters on it may be plainly seen and read at all times and so that the numbers and letters may be accurately photographed using a speed monitoring device or traffic light safety device prescribed under section 83.1 of the Act.

Entirely unobstructed means nothing in front of/covering it. That includes those licence plate frames that cover up British Columbia and the Validation Tag.

[zulutango]

I wouldn't hang your defence on the magma site. Like all thes sites, they let their hatred of Police and refusal to accept responsibility for their actions when caught, to colour their judgement and advice. There are a few things that are correct and a lot more that are half-truths that MAY apply under certain circumstances...and a lot of outright lies. After 28 years of Traffic Court as a Crown witness and a Prosecutor, like Skidmark and 5-0 and others here, I LOVE to hear the disputant ask the type of questions that appear on the magma and similar sites. It shows me that the disputant seldom knows anything about real procedures and the way business is done in BC courts. When I hear a demand for the daily log/calibration record/list of all the other tickets issued that date etc I know what to expect and how uninformed the disputant will be. I really loved this quote..

"when traffic radar is used near an international airport, the radar will pick up the return signals from airborne objects. In this case, extremely fast speeds such as 300-400km/h will be registered on the radar. Even if an aircraft is flying at a few km's away, the radar will still be capable to pick up the return signal since an aircraft is much greater in size and has much faster speed than any ground vehicle. I can't imagine if you are being charged 300km/h in a 60km/h zone by a clueless cop."

As a trained operator I have tried to get speed reading with Radar units and have NEVER been able to do it. IF I stood right at the end of the flight path of YVR and the 747 plane was taking off right at me I MAY be able to get a reading...even Richmond MT don't work that close. The radar units used for speed enforcement are just not capable of "mistaking" a plane several KMS away for a speeding car coming at them on the highway...neither would the Cop using rhe Radar unit to develop a tracking history of the car. Beware of any site that uses poor grammar and urban legends as a basis for "facts".

[Timpo]

I don't think you can do much about the license plate cover, it has happend to me before...I bought it at Canadian Tire and didn't know it was illegal.

I would still dispute about your front license plate tho, I know it's illegal but if you tell the judge that you were told by police officer and judge that it is ok to do so...then the judge might take it into consideration.

It's not that you were asking your friends or random people walking on the street...you have asked 2 legitimate people...if it happend to me, I would totally believed them. I know that Skidmark said these things are absolute liability(yes or no kind of thing) but the judge might be able to lower the charges?

for example I know that the license plate needs to be "entirely unobstructed" but 99% of people out there have a license plate frame, which makes it illegal. But I have never seen people getting a ticket for a license plate frame.

[zulutango]

I have had convictions for licence plate frames that obstructed the Val tag. If I can't see the month or day then you get stopped. I would be going to Canadian Tyre and asking them why they sold you a cover. They are not permitted to even offer to sell them, or any defective equipment, under the MV Act. I would be asking for my money back...you could use some of it to pay your fine?

Sale of motor vehicle contrary to regulations
222 A person must not sell, offer for sale, expose or display for sale or deliver over to a purchaser for use a motor vehicle, trailer or equipment for them that is not in accordance with this Act and the regulations.

[stutterr]

I am surprised that you were able to plea "ignorance of the law" just because you were not aware. Normally I have been told If you do not know the law, than its your fault.
Canadian Tire states, with license plate covers and even fog lights they they are not responsible, not legal for normal driving, only available for off road use, blah blah blah blah. Normally this can be found below item pictures in the flyers, and they have little notices on the packages. This is usually in a very fine print.

[zulutango]

Section 222 above still prohibits the sale...the small print would not technically exempt them. Get into a lawsuit and see how little protection a disclaimer, waiver and release gives the seller of the product.

[G-spec]

yea as for the license plate covers and all that, I'm not ignorant, it's pretty obvious it's illegal and why it's illegal, it's still sold because it's still sold.... I mean front window tint is illegal, but why does every tint shop still do it ?? I personally feel if something is illegal it should not be available to the public.

But in any case, I disputed the tickets already, because I know I wasn't speeding for a fact and I know I got profiled, BUT I will take off my rear license plate cover, and I've already placed my front license plate on the outside of the mesh now. So I shouldn't be getting any flack from the police anymore, and if I do, I swear I'm gonna lose it.

Aside from me not speeding, the only other issue I had is it's really annoying is that I actually FOLLOWED the officer's specific instructions from court, but only to have another cop telllin me basically to fuck off and call me a liar because "He's been doing the job longer than I've been alive" There's absolutely no consistency from officer to officer in my experiences and that's what I have difficulties with, I imagine I'm not the only one.

[G-spec]

Originally Posted by Adon

so the judge is wrong, and your fellow officer in court who looked at the pics that actually told me the plate is safer behind the mesh since it's secure and wouldn't fly off in case of accident, they're both wrong ?

Originally Posted by skidmark

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

Originally Posted by sho_bc

Yes, they are. From the Motor Vehicle Act Regulations:



Entirely unobstructed means nothing in front of/covering it. That includes those licence plate frames that cover up British Columbia and the Validation Tag.

so if I find myself in a situation where I know a cop is wrong, as long as I quote a motor vehicles act regulation pertaining to the situation, I'm then allowed to tell an officer in the field that he is wrong ? ?



I would get my car towed even if the officer is a 110% wrong in the situation, there's simply no talking back to the police even if you're absolutely right.
Thats why my new method is to only answer questions related to the situation at hand (whose car, license, insurance, etc....) because THAT'S MY LEGAL RIGHT, and guess what happened when I exercised it ?? the cop threatened to tow my car if I didn't answer ALL of his questions.

[zulutango]

If you will not control your language, your access to this board WILL be controlled.
As far as roadside discussions go....court is held in the court room...not on the shoulder of the Highway. The court gives you the opportunity for an impartial hearing of the facts of your case. If you disagree with the charge, court is the place to discuss it. If you use language in court like you are using here, expect to be cited for contempt. Swearing does not bolster your case...the facts do.

[stutterr]

Originally Posted by zulutango

Section 222 above still prohibits the sale...the small print would not technically exempt them. Get into a lawsuit and see how little protection a disclaimer, waiver and release gives the seller of the product.

so why not go inform Canadian tire for breaking the law? How can a company function selling such illegal hardware?
Should the Police not be serving and protecting us from making illegal purchases? Just like a drug dealer is selling an illegal item, canadian tire is doing much the same thing.

[G-spec]

Originally Posted by zulutango

Swearing does not bolster your case...the facts do.

I edited the swearing for you.

Ok, I bring facts to every thread but in the police forum I always get the same communist answer.

I understand now about my license plate covers, and where to put my front plate, I've since fixed both of those things.

My other questions still remain unanswered though, what do I do when an officer is obviously abusing his power....

A) Quote motor vehicle regulations, or laws...etc ??

or

B) Dispute it in court and take my chances there ??


I feel both of these are a losing situation, no way is a cop gonna let me prove him wrong in the field, and in no way is a judge going to take a young kids word over a police officer.

I just want to know what other options do I have ?

[zulutango]

As I said above...there is no Traffic Court at roadside. Nothing "you" say will make "me" change my mind, nothing "I" say will make "you" change yours. There is danger in overheated conversations leading to problems later. "We" are both wasting our time and accomplishing nothing. The JP is impartial. If you disagree with his ruling you can appeal it. If you disagree with the conduct of the Police then you have all sorts of ways to file complaints.

If you were a betting man, in a hypothetical/gereral case...on average would you bet money on the cop or the person they deal with being correct on points of law? I'm not saying that Cops are always right...but my 28 years dealing with traffic matters I know that I have been right in all but a microscopic percentage of times. When I have made a mistake I will admit it, apologize and make it right. When circumstances have arisen in court during my testimony, that brought this to my attention, I have done just that, in front of the JP, the disputant and the audience. I want to be right, I will not sell my integrity to win a case. There is absoloutely no such similar requirement on any of the thousands of drivers I have had dealings with over the years. I, the JP and many a courtroom full of people have sat there and heard disputants deliberately lie under oath, in the most obvious manner, just to get off..and then laugh and boast about how they did it. I have seen an ambulance driver lie about a seatbelt that he & his kid were not wearing, I have seen respectable business people and community leaders lie about speeding tickets, I have seen a nurse lie about a red light ticket, students lie about open liquor, mechanics lie about the condition of vehicles, you name it, they have lied about it. I have taken interrogation training so that I can identify liars. The JPs are not stupid. They see it happen every court day and they also know who is lying under oath.The same JPS can also know if the Police are not telling the truth. The consequences for a Cop to lie under oath are severe...the consequences to a defendant...are almost non-existant.

[Care]

.

[zulutango]

Originally Posted by stutterr

so why not go inform Canadian tire for breaking the law? How can a company function selling such illegal hardware?
Should the Police not be serving and protecting us from making illegal purchases? Just like a drug dealer is selling an illegal item, canadian tire is doing much the same thing.

I have informed a succession of management and employees at our local Canadian Tyre and Lordco store but it seems of no concern to them. I don't think a set of tail light covers ranks up there with crack or heroin though...do you? I have a bigger problem with inspection stations doing sub standard inspections on a regular basis. I HAVE reported all those I found. How can you miss limo tint on the front windows or the complete replacement of suspension systems with internally adjustable airbags...or have exhaust systems with no mufflers or cats, ending under the vehicle body? They did, and I did get a couple to loose their right to inspect.

[stutterr]

Well laws are black and white, regardless its an illegal item. I would think that the store that sold this illegal merchandise would be help responsible, and be fined or prosecuted. Obviously there are varying degrees of "illegal merchandise".
Thanks for the information Zulu!