last night, I was quite fortunate. I went to court for the second time in Rollingwood - which is a small ticket-happy community in Austin, TX. Its a small municiple court and this is how they get their revenue. Some might call it a joke of a place - Sondra even went w/me to visit this court one time before, and she can vouch for that.

Originally sighted for 51 in a 40. I contested it since it was raining, foggy, lots of traffic, and visibility down to about 30 yards. Not too good, so I can't see why I was going that fast on those roads, especially since I had the car for two weeks (yes, well over 6 months ago), and was trying to get a friend of mine meds at the local Walgreens (dilodid - sp? - good stuff so I hear). Immediately after receiving the ticket, I jotted down notes, and still have them, about the area, the traffic conditions, everything and anything I can recall about the situation. This is VERY important!

I pleaded not guilty. I went up there, contested it, and watched 6 or 7 others plea their trials before the judge, right before me. I did not want to waste the small community's time and resources by asking for a jury, but this is definately something to consider otherwise.

Its important that you watch others plea their cases. Its important that you ask the right questions. Look for what is relevant and what is not. Just don't argue or contest anything the officer says until you plea your case.

The case went like this -
Do you want the complaint read?

*I said YES - I was the only one that did last night. And I believe that its important to do this. Remember, this is the ONLY thing you are defending. Not anything else that is brought up such as 'weaving in and out of cars'. That would be wreckless driving in some eyes, and that is NOT what you are defending here!

Prosecuting attourney brings officer as the witness, explains where he noticed me, explained the radar, explained the tuning of the device, explained our conversation that I stated I was going home to get medicine, and that I changed my story so there was iffyness in my story.

*Just sit there and nod. The only thing you should say in this portion of the trial would be 'could you repeat that please' if you did not hear anything.

Next, I get to question the officer. I asked him what kind of radar gun it was. He stated it was a Genesis model, different than what other cases had been tried with. Its a handheld device, rather than a dash mount. Its a point and click. I asked if this was set to a particular speed and if it goes off, then someone is greater than that speed.

*Some radar guns can be set for speeds, say...if its a 40mph, and they are being lenient by 10mph, then they'll set it to 50mph for the threshold, if any car goes over that speed, then it will go off, the officer will pull the 'seen' car over.

We discussed this for a few minutes, and it was stated that the officer has two settings - highest speed and exact speed. The difference is this - if you have two cars, going opposite directions and you tag them, it will only register at the highest speed and not tell you which one it is. If its set to point and click (can't remember the term he used), then it will only pick up what you point it at. In my case, it was set to point and click as he remembers it. The calibration is done like all others, with tuning forks, they have speeds on them, and you hit them and then point the gun at them - thus, saying 50mph for a particular tuning fork. This was done before his shift and immediately after pulling me over. It was also discussed that he has not seen radar have any errors in the rain.

My final questions to the officer, had to do with my situation. I asked him three simple questions.
- Did I have a passenger with the defendant?
He stated that I did, but he did not identify male or female
- Did the officer know the conditions of the defendant's passenger being male or female?
He stated he did not. Its IMPORTANT to ask this question, even if its already implied that he does not know because he couldnt identify male or female. This deals with the health concerns that I have for my passenger.
- And finally, does the officer know about dilodid (the drug)?
He did not.

I then passed the witness, and the prosecuting attourney did not have any further questions for the officer. I then gathered my thoughts and gave my oath and testified on my own. I gave the entire story, stating that there was a lot of traffic out due to the area, the time: 7:35pm on Friday, 12/15/00, which was in the vicinity of the Trail of Lights, which is a light festival around the holidays at Zilker Park.

I confirmed where the officer noticed me, even though I did not understand the exact location where he was located. I stated how the officer pulled me over, and how he cut off another driver, forcing them into oncoming traffic to get behind me while I was stopped at a light; coming up on me very quickly as I watched in my rear view mirror, bracing my passenger Chris with my arm and letting off the brake, thus preparing for impact. (he didn't hit me though, he stopped, luckily on the rainy road just inches away)

I confirmed where he pulled me over and where we were going. I stated that my voice can be mumbled sometimes and given the conditions and the reasons of where I was going, it was not unlikely that I could have mumbled enough where it was understood by him that he understood me as 'going home for meds' when I live off of Jollyville Rd. many miles away on the other end of town.

I stated that as the officer was returning to his car, I asked to see the radar, which I know I didn't have the explicit right to, but there are officers that do have it. This officer responded by saying, "I dont have it."

I stated that the Walgreens up the road was where we were going for the drug - not the local ER - because the local ER that he usually attends is quite a bit further. The one off of Ben White/71 has been problematic for him in the past. I also stated why he needed the medicine, as he was in extreme pain from being released from the hospital a few days prior after having some plumbing reconnected in his internals due to chrones disease (sp?).

So, that was it, I said my peace, my story to the judge. And being a "W" (my last name), I was the last person in the entire court room (or civic center).

The judge asked the prosecuting attourney if she had any quesitons for me. She did not.

The judge then said there is benefit of the doubt in your case since you were assisting a friend in pain, not guilty. I was only one of two people that got out of there without paying a fine last night. =D

_______________________________

I hope this is beneficial so that you know what to expect in most traffic cases, and also in questioning radar, the officer, all while respecting the court system that we have.

 

Great job Schatten. Congrats on getting out of the ticket. I think you handled that case extremely well and kept very level headed.

 

Yeah man. See what a little calmness and maturity can do. I'll have to try it some time!

 

Indeed Tex!

And I apoligize for the story being long. But I feel its important to include everything. There were a few other people that I talked to during recess (not like kindergarten recess, mind you) that did not know what to expect or how to contest/question radar. I think this will help clarify some of the fuzziness, and if not, have another beer. =)

 

*Applause* Nice job bro. Well, thought out. Very well defended...ever considered being a lawyer???

 

Great job, Schatten. So, what you're saying is that I should knock the crap out of my passenger if I'm getting pulled over so she (my wife, most likely) will be in pain. Wow, what a great idea; I'll remember that.

 

Thanks for the insight into the justice system, Schatten. It seems to me that you did a great job of talking your way out of that one. However, I'm not quite sure what your message of advice is here. Do you suggest we just "talk" our way out of a speeding ticket?

Forgive me if I missed something in this story, but I didn't read anything that indicated it was the basis of a solid defense. O.K., your passenger was in pain; however, I understand that this is never a legal excuse for speeding or breaking any other traffic laws. Explaining that your passenger was sick MAY get you sympathy from a judge, but as heorshe's probably heard that story a hundred times, why should heorshe believe you - unless you had some kind of positive proof, such as paperwork from an ER, or a physician's statement? If the situation is serious enough for anyone to be speeding, then very often the cops will give you an escort - not a speeding ticket.

Apart from that, it doesn't appear that you contradicted very much of the officer's statement, or the methods he used to clock you. That's why it puzzles me that you got off so easily, because he appeared to do everything by the book (except the dramatic manner in which he pursued you in order to give you the ticket).

That said, I'm glad to know that you got out of the ticket. No-one likes to hear about someone getting busted for speeding - especially when there's a plausible and compassionate excuse. Obviously, good manners and logical thinking go a long way to demonstrating to a judge that you're not a hardened criminal or a menace on the road.

 

Way to go, I have to go thru a similar situation soon. Lets hope this story rubbed off on me

Congrats!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 1Y2KS2K
[B]However, I'm not quite sure what your message of advice is here.

 

There is no logic as to how judges pass judgement.

I once sat in court. The Judge let most "mothers" and military men off for speeding.. Just because they had a sob story to tell.

I walk up and I get my license suspended for 6 months for "reckless driving", get a heavy fine, and a few weekends in jail.

The cop did not radar me. He did not pace me.. The cop said he had to go 116 mph to catch up to me so I must also be going that speed. Funny thing was, the cop wasnt even on the same road I was travelling on.. He was on a parallel road. The procecutor said I was a danger to society.

I later look on my DMV record and it states "RD in Excess of 80MPH"

Maybe the the judge don't like chinks. Maybe he doesnt like young punks with expensive cars (didnt have the S2000 at the time).. who knows...