Recent content by Friendlyone

I've moved on.

I was exercising my right to be PROVEN guilty in a court of law. Seems you forget one I'd Innocent until proven guilty in this country and not the other way around. In my opinion I was not proven guilty. It was case law the magistrate followed that related to moving radar and not stationary radar.

I wasn't there to testify against myself. It was my right to have a hearing and question the officers. I was simply exercising my rights instead instead of pleading guilty. Remember this...Innocent until PROVEN guilty. In my opinion the officers did not prove me guilty. They had no hard...

I did not say the officer lied. I was trying to prove spurious radar readings. After all it wasn't the officer that alledgedly said I was speeding; it was a machine.

Once I realized my speedometer was not working at random times I had evidence that I was trying to get it repaired. One receipt was from a dealership that found nothing wrong when they plugged in a diagnostic device and told me they would have to tear apart the dash to find anything. The second...

I had several defenses. I guess I should have brought up the defective speedometer first. I had an eyewitness testify to the speedometers going dead during recent trips. I drive disabled friends to grocery stores. Also at the time of this ticket my 19 yr old cat was dying of kidney failure, and...

I forgot to mention this and brought it up last in court. My speedometer was giving my spurious readings at the time which I documented and offered to show the judge and repair receipts but the judge refused to look at them.

Lesson learned I guess. I have never received a traffic violation in 48 yrs of driving. I won't get any points as I was eligible for the one time Driver Improvement course which I took and passed with flying colors! Thank you all for your responses.

Yes I tried I tried getting expert testimony but there wasn't enough time.

So So in essence you are stating the spurious radar reading are never possible!? If you look on YouTube you will see plenty of radar spurious reading documented for various reasons.

Im I'm not saying they lied. I'm stating that the opinion that all officers tell the truth all the time opens a door for having the ability to lie and being believed by the judge or magistrate. It becomes a scenario of "he said, but cop is always right" instead of "he said/she said".

The radar "cone" was very close to an electrical Power Substation if not affected by it. What I have read about radar interference is that being close to electrical power substations especially can affect the accuracy of the radar reading. The officer said it did not affect his reading but how...

So if their testimony "Trumps" a citizens testimony the officers are always seen as telling the truth? What about bias or DWB (driving while black)? This seems like an opportunity for corruption. If the officers know they will always be believed. I would think some evidence such as documented...

I fought the ticket in court for about an hour. The officer had no evidence but his word that I was alledgedly going 30 in a 25 zone. The majestrate ruled on his word without any forensic evidence. So this seemed odd as the ticket writing officer was silent and the one that handed me the ticket...

What is the name of your state? Michigan My speeding ticket reads under "description" as "Speed 30/25". Also, in addition to this, under "Remarks" the officer wrote "Actual 42/25." My question is what speed will the court or judge fine me for if found guilty? Why did he write two different...