I was going 72 MPH ... LIDAR measured at 143 MPH.
Is it possible that you were convicted of "speeding" but not necessarily of speeding at 143mph? Whether it be by your own admission (assuming you took the time to make any statements other than insulting the commissioner and/or the cop), or by some statement or testimony that the officer made (other than the Lidar reading)...
I did not even hear what the fine was ...
Well, that may have been a way to answer what you were convicted of (at least as far as "how many mph in excess of the limit”
...
I called the magistrate an idiot...
I saw the cop outside the courtroom and told him off & tore his ticket up in front of him. I cursed him out outside the courthouse.
I am not happy at all, pretty much pissed off. On monday I was so angry, never have been so angry in my life! I'm still about 90% of that anger level when I think about it.
Not sure if you're bragging or if you're trying to prove that acting like a fool isn't going to get you anywhere I court... it sounds to me like you went into court stomped you feet, covered your ears and screamed
"I can't hear you, I won't pay, you're an idiot and its all a sham"...
Did you even hear what the officer testified to?
Did he present calibration certificates/training certificates... etc (pursuant to 14-219(c))?
Did you pay any attention to what evidence was presented?
Did you challenge and object to the Lidar reading as being invalid?
What evidence or arguments did you present to the court?
Seriously, you posted all that information, none of which is relevant...
One main advantage to a trial de novo is that you have an idea what testimony was presented against you in the first trial, and from that, you can try and develop an alternate defense strategy that will hopefully prevail. of course in this case, none of that is clear... great performance though!
We also need to know what the officer testified to, whether you were convicted based upon the Lidar reading alone (not likely) or whether the officer's estimate of your speed -independent of the Lidar reading- played any part in the "totality of evidence presented to the court"... If you look at 14-219(c)(1), it does state:
"The police officer operating the radar, laser, vascar device or other device has adequate training and experience in its operation;". It looks to me (
Police Officer Standards and Training Council) that Connecticut uses the P.O.S.T. training and certification programs, part of which requires the officer to be able to visually estimate a vehicle speed. In most states, the estimate must come to within +/- 5mph for the officer to pass the course. So depending on the officer's testimony, and whether he did visually estimated your speed prior to obtaining the Lidar reading, it is VERY likely that you were convicted of "speeding" but with a lower speed.
We also need to know what YOU testified to (if anything), whether you admitted guilt of exceeding the limit by way of a similar statement to the one you made here, i.e.: "I was going 72"...) which, in and of itself, is sufficient to convict you of "speeding" (depending on the speed limit).
You can read this case
State v Parham 70 Conn App 223 - Google Scholar "Sate v. Parham, 70 Conn. App. 223", and though the numbers are different (more extreme in your case) the case does provide an interpretation of "prima facie" evidence, and what requirements must be met for a reading to be admissible. I don't know whether any of that will help you with your attitude!
Page 314 of the 2010 user manual says:
Speed Limiter
"When the vehicle reaches the maximum speed in any shift position,
you may feel the engine cut in and out. This is caused by a limiter (112mph, 180 km/h) in the engine’s computer controls. The engine will run normally when you reduce thespeed to below the maximum."
---------------------------
Your car cannot go physically faster than 112mph by what Honda has set. Also, is the LIDAR calibrated correctly etc. You can argue against the prima facie, but you'll need an Engineering and Traffic Survey. If you were on a highway, it won't matter because max speed on highways is 65mph.
That argument was tried in the case I cited... And while it did earn an honorable mention, it got the defendant nowhere!
OP is not accused of driving 72 though. It should quite easy to introduce evidence and provide proof there is no possible way the car was moving at 143 and do so in a manner without testifying about what the actual speed was. He is essentially driving a large sized lawn mower.
OP was cited for exceeding the maximum speed. Whether the actual speed reading is relevnant or not will depend on the code section he was cited for. OP provided 14-219(c) though that isn't a charging statute.
Speed limit is 65 , driving 75 MPH is pretty normal.
Normal does not necessarily mean "legal"... There had to have been a reason why the officer picked you out of the crowd.. More often than not, that reason is you were the fastest, so his Lidar gun got pointed at your vehicle. And if you shot your mouth off without thinking and admitted to 72 in 65 (like you did here), then you only have yourself to blame!
And the chicks dig the car.
Yeah, I am sure... You're gonna need more that a car to dig them (pardon the pun)! losing that negative attitude might be a start!
