I was driving with my cruise control set at 85, and was trying to overtake the car ahead of me. This is actually my 2nd ticket where I was going 90+ (although the other was for a 65 speed limit not 70), is that what the (#2) is for under the Description with the Code and Section? The other one had gotten dropped. Even if it was dropped, do they keep track of them? I’m assuming that because I missed the 25 mph cutoff by 2 mph, I wont have traffic school offered?
For the stop itself, it was professional and I was polite the whole time. He did ask what speed I was going and I mentioned “I had set the thing for 85” (I had forgotten the term cruise control, but idk if he understood through context) and followed up by saying that I had been overtaking someone in front of me. He said that he clocked me going 97. Unfortunately I wasn’t paying attention as I was trying to overtake so I don’t really remember what my speed was. He then asked me if I was late to work (I was in my uniform) and I replied “no, not yet”. That was pretty much it before he explained the ticket and had me sign it.
Were there any other cars on the road near you at the time you think the officer got his reading?
(answer: Yes there were several cars around me in all the lanes at the time, I wasn’t on an open stretch of road on my own)
Ah, then you attack the radar evidence in your Trial by Written Declaration. You can include a diagram such as this one with beam spread and other cars, and here’s the same photo from officer’s POV. Or something like this one, showing beam spread with labels. This looks fancy but all it is, is a screenshot of the Google Maps and then writing on it with the drawing program on whatever computer you are using.
This works well with an argument like: “Given the distance from the officer to my car, and given the other cars that were near me and well within the spread of the officer’s radar beam, the officer’s assumption that his radar reading came from my car is in serious doubt. There was a large pickup truck in front of my small sedan hatchback along with another SUV that had just passed my car and was going faster. An overhead map of the area is attached. I have also included a photo from the officer’s perspective facing traffic coming from the opposing direction. These vehicles were between my car and the officer’s. Many vehicles also passed me just prior to my stop. The officer’s radar could have targeted any one of these.” Etc., etc.
Extra evidence is always good. If everything is clearly labeled, and you refer to it in your declaration, it shows you were paying attention. And if you were paying attention, you likely were following the law. Cops often do not pay attention, but are often quite successful in using their badge of office and authority to steamroll over defendants during adjudication. You can counter this by having better evidence. The best evidence usually wins in court, so have good evidence.
These Trial by Written Declaration arguments came from here. Here are directions for how to do a Trial by Written Declaration. Access requires basic registration. The guides are free (sort of) but if you want specific examples, then they want a $25 contribution.
If you lose your Trial by Written Declaration, you can ask for a new trial (a Trial de Novo), or you can ask for court assignment to traffic school and a fine reduction. If you lose your Trial de Novo, then you can ask the judge for traffic school afterwards. In other words, fight it as far as you can, and then ask the judge for traffic school.