DeTomaso Mailing List: March 98, Message #255
     



From: 	ShempsRus <ShempsRus@aol.com>

Subject: Re: Radar tickets [was Driving in the rain}

Date: 	Thu, 5 Mar 1998 22:50:19 +0000



Shane Ingate wrote:



<<< So why is it "easy" to beat a radar ticket?>>>



To clarify:  I never said it was "easy" to "beat" the radar ticket.  



I said,  " ALWAYS fight a Radar ticket...  It's usually in your favor to do

so.  Especially if you you were approaching the source of the radar at an

angle any greater than 10 degrees...  "



All Cops are given the benifit of "training and experience" as an added tool

of credibility against the common lawbreaker in court.  It's a given that the

average citizen, unless packing a decent laywer in his pocket, is the underdog

in any criminal litigation of this type, innocent or not.  



Your BEST ammunition is to discredit his observations, or the tools by which

he VALIDATES those observations at the time he made them, the Radar Gun for

instance. 



All to often officers will rely to heavily upon the Validation tool (radar gun

in this case) instead of bulding his case against you based on his own senses:

What did the car's engine sound like as it approached, was it revving?  What

was you distance from the vehicle?  Was the officer's view of the violator

unobstructed?  Was there an unusual amount of dirt, leaves, papers, debris

blowing around and behind the vehicle as it approached and passed that would

indicate a speed greater than "x"?  What was the relative speed of other

vehicles traveling in the same direction, or the other direction?  Traffic

congestion?  What were the road conditions?  Daylight - Darkness?  (Prima

facia)  Any unusual road conditions, obstructions? 



 ---  Point is, the Radar Gun doesn't make the case, it's the Cop, and all to

many don't make the case on their own, they rely on the Gun.  If you can

question or discredit his independant observations, then point out that using

the Gun alone, with all it's built in faults and variables, (including

surrounding vehicles with respect to relatve size and proximity to the target

vehicle, Cosign effect, etc), and that he can't reasonably asses the vehicle's

speed based on anything less --- you can possibly "beat the rap."



One other thing... all Radar Guns must be calibrated and certified on a

regular basis, and the interval may vary from agency to agency.  If the

officer doesn't provide proof of recent, certified calibration, blow his socks

out of the water and ask the judge why he hasn't provided it.  



We are mandated by SFPD to check the accuracy of our Guns at regular intervals

of its use, during any given day, by striking the supplied tuning fork and

holding it in an exact position in front of the gun so as to achieve a reading

of 35 mph.  Did he do that just before getting a your reading?  Does he even

know were the tuning fork is?  did he get a reading by "shooting" you through

the windshield, or by using the sideview mirror?  These are No No's.



I could go on but I won't... I have to save some secrets.  (just kidding).



So, Shane, will this suffice?



Happy Trails



Steve Mooney