Ohio speeding tickets by sight
#1
06-02-2010, 08:09 PM
Ohio speeding tickets by sight
WTF Officer estimates enough for speeding convictions
Ohio.com - Officer estimates enough for speeding convictions
COLUMBUS: Ohio's highest court has ruled that a person may be convicted of speeding purely if it looked to a police officer that the motorist was going too fast.
What's next
#3
06-02-2010, 08:45 PM
Banned
#4
06-02-2010, 08:54 PM
Diesel Bomber
#5
06-02-2010, 08:56 PM
They've always been able to do that.
People have really weird misconceptions when it comes to traffic infractions. People think that speeding tickets go through court like Law & Order cases...
If a cop writes you a ticket, you have a ticket. The cop doesn't "need" any evidence or proof to write you a ticket, all he needs to do is write you a ticket, at which point you have a ticket. Arguing legality with the cop on the side of the road is irrelevant, because to the cop legality is irrelevant.
Once you get to court, it becomes a question of legality only to the extent that the judge feels like winking at legality at that point. It doesn't need to be proved beyond the shadow of a doubt; you're not being prosecuted, you're not being defended, there's no jury. It's the judge's discretion.
There is no law saying what a judge may or may not enforce a ticket based on. The judge could say that he simply trusts the word of the cop more than your word, and give you a fine with that being his reasoning. Or he could feel like feeding a line of BS about how "police are professionally trained to estimate speed by eye". There's no fairness, justice or truth involved.
"Pleading down" with the district, asking the judge to remove the point off the insurance, or hiring an "attorney" to do those two for you are effective measures... Pretending like your Sam Waterston and arguing the ticket in court Atticus Finch-style based on your understandings of the "holy law" of traffic codes and attempting to cross-examine the officer who wrote the ticket is not effective in the slightest. If you do it well enough you might get some bonus points by accident though.
People have really weird misconceptions when it comes to traffic infractions. People think that speeding tickets go through court like Law & Order cases...
If a cop writes you a ticket, you have a ticket. The cop doesn't "need" any evidence or proof to write you a ticket, all he needs to do is write you a ticket, at which point you have a ticket. Arguing legality with the cop on the side of the road is irrelevant, because to the cop legality is irrelevant.
Once you get to court, it becomes a question of legality only to the extent that the judge feels like winking at legality at that point. It doesn't need to be proved beyond the shadow of a doubt; you're not being prosecuted, you're not being defended, there's no jury. It's the judge's discretion.
There is no law saying what a judge may or may not enforce a ticket based on. The judge could say that he simply trusts the word of the cop more than your word, and give you a fine with that being his reasoning. Or he could feel like feeding a line of BS about how "police are professionally trained to estimate speed by eye". There's no fairness, justice or truth involved.
"Pleading down" with the district, asking the judge to remove the point off the insurance, or hiring an "attorney" to do those two for you are effective measures... Pretending like your Sam Waterston and arguing the ticket in court Atticus Finch-style based on your understandings of the "holy law" of traffic codes and attempting to cross-examine the officer who wrote the ticket is not effective in the slightest. If you do it well enough you might get some bonus points by accident though.
#6
06-02-2010, 11:05 PM
#7
06-03-2010, 03:29 AM
Diesel Wrench
If the cops where I lived were allowed to do that, I'd be in BIG trouble. 
I think its BS though, I did get out of what would have been my first ticket though because the cop didn't clock me. Didn't have insurance on that truck either. Got out that ticket by saying I was on my way to the bank to get money to pay for insurance. I'm so glad that when it comes to minor traffic violations that the cops here are just too lazy to deal with it. The resident state cop is a different story though 
pull you over for doing 1 mph over the limit.
I think its BS though, I did get out of what would have been my first ticket though because the cop didn't clock me. Didn't have insurance on that truck either. Got out that ticket by saying I was on my way to the bank to get money to pay for insurance. I'm so glad that when it comes to minor traffic violations that the cops here are just too lazy to deal with it. The resident state cop is a different story though pull you over for doing 1 mph over the limit.
#10
06-04-2010, 09:20 PM
Yeah, I agree that speeding is speeding, and no matter what it's illegal, but they should have to have actuall concrete evidence, and not just what the officer thinks. I don't see how anyone would be ok with this ruling, but people were going insane last year when they put speeding cameras up in Heath, that area has had the same speed limits as long as I can remember, and they were actually being clocked speeding, not just what somebody thought. I had no problem with the camera's, if you wern't speeding, you were fine, I drove through there all the time, and never got a ticket. So basically, camera's ok, naked eyes not
