Speeding Ticket going 93mph in 65 zone. How to fight it? (how much, construction)

[jbub22]

Seriously!?!

Your only hope is to attend the court hearing with the attempt to lower the fine. Be present in professional attire, show that your a tax paying citizen who made "1 time" mistake.

[hamster21]

Originally Posted by ram2

Step 1 is the first opportunity to have the cop not show up.

Step 2 is the second opportunity for the cop not to show up.

At step 3, ask to have the ticket changed to a non-moving violation with no points if the cop shows up. All the court wants is your money. They could care less about safety.

1st appeal the cop doesn't have to show up, just a representative from the region, who always shows up.

[NEOhioBound]

You're lucky you weren't arrested on the spot! 93 in a 65!

[dysgenic]

I live in Massachusettes, and where I live the cop doesn't actually show up, there is someone that goes in his/her stead and reads from a card as to what happened in a magistrates hearing. The first question I would ask of the magistrate is:
"Do you accept hearsay testimony in this hearing?" If he/she says yes: "I would like a continuance so I can collect the testimony of 9 or 10 people who can speak on my behalf. Or if you are really ballzy, bring a signed letter from 10 of your friends all saying that you weren't speeding. If he says no, move to dismiss the ticket based on no evidence or witnesses on behalf of the prosecuter.
Other ways you can win:

Ask the prosecuter if they filed a valid cause of action against you.
When they say yes, ask: "how many elements are in a valid cause of action."

(one of the elements in a cause of action is the appearance of a victim that sufferered a net tangible loss in the form of a financial harm or physical injury, absent this element the magistrate is SUPPOSED to dismiss the case)

I've had limited success using these tactics in court. I hate to tell you, kid, traffic court is a criminal junta run by criminals looking to get your money. They care nothing about the law.

dys

[ram2]

Originally Posted by NEOhioBound

You're lucky you weren't arrested on the spot! 93 in a 65!

Why? It is not a felony.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by ram2

Why? It is not a felony.

Only because the officer chose not to charge the OP with a criminal offense. In MA, there's no set "reckless" or "criminal" speeding speed (in many places 30mph over the limit is "criminal"). It's entirely at the discretion of the officer. 93 in a 65 is nearly 30mph over (again, the amount that many places consider criminal) and it's not at all out of the realm of possibility to receive a reckless driving or driving to endanger charge for that type of speed if the officer felt inclined. Reckless driving and driving to endanger are criminal offenses, so yes, the OP is lucky they weren't arrested.

To answer the OP's question, I agree with the others. Appear professionally dressed, well spoken and sincerely sorry. It'll be tough to get 93 dropped, but it's worth a shot. Keep in mind, these magistrates deal with these sorts of things nonstop every day. It's repetitive and they just want you out of there fast. Challenging legalities and trying some of the nitpicking suggested in this thread may work, but it could also just annoy them into upholding the fine (especially if you're 18, you'll appear like a know it all kid). These guys deal with frustrated argumentative people all day and have little patience for it; so really make sure you know what you're doing if you choose to argue. Read the room and choose your approach accordingly. However, professional appearance is a must. And certainly don't argue for the sake of arguing. You may find that regardless of the approach you choose, you barely get a word in. They have a lot of cases to hear and, unfortunately, 28mph over the speed limit is a pretty easy one to call in the eyes of the court.

Still, I am a big believer in always challenging speeding tickets. I got my first ticket two weeks after getting my license. I was going 54 in a 40. I challenged it and got it overturned because the magistrate saw that I was young, scared, and sincerely sorry. I've gotten 2 tickets since (one in Maine and one in RI), and both were overturned by challenging. I'm in my mid 20s and haven't had a ticket in 5 years (I've learned to slow it down and living in the city keeps me from driving as much). I'll challenge a ticket 100 times out of 100. You really have nothing to lose.

[steel7]

[quote=dysgenic;25025085
I hate to tell you, kid, traffic court is a criminal junta run by criminals looking to get your money. They care nothing about the law.

dys[/QUOTE]

Its all about revenue & if they dont care about the law they should be fired but that will never happen.
I dont exceed the speed limit yet i sometimes do have people riding my bumper. I hate that & i hope road rage dont happen against me.

[ram2]

When you go to court, do NOT admit guilt.

[ram2]

[quote=lrfox;25029493]Only because the officer chose not to charge the OP with a criminal offense. In MA, there's no set "reckless" or "criminal" speeding speed (in many places 30mph over the limit is "criminal"). It's entirely at the discretion of the officer. 93 in a 65 is nearly 30mph over (again, the amount that many places consider criminal) and it's not at all out of the realm of possibility to receive a reckless driving or driving to endanger charge for that type of speed if the officer felt inclined. Reckless driving and driving to endanger are criminal offenses, so yes, the OP is lucky they weren't arrested.


quote]


Are you telling me, in theory, an officer could charge a driver with reckless speeding for going only 10mph over the speed limit?

Also, the freeway speed limit in Massachusetts used to be 70mph (pre-55). So driving faster than 65 is not unsafe.

[lrfox]

Originally Posted by ram2

Are you telling me, in theory, an officer could charge a driver with reckless speeding for going only 10mph over the speed limit?

In theory? Yes. But unless there were extenuating circumstances (i.e. the driver was also swerving, tailgating, etc.) you'd never see that happen. If you ever get pulled over going 75 in a 65 and the cop charges you with reckless driving (it's reckless driving not specifically reckless speeding), you either did something else seriously wrong or you got a cop having a bad day and you'll easily win an appeal (not to mention, take further legal action if you wanted to). Remember, these cops are held accountable for what they do. If a traffic cop brings a guy in on a reckless driving charge when he was going 10mph over the limit, he's going to have a LOT of explaining to do.

There are a lot of words like "reasonable" in the law which make it somewhat open ended. Reckless driving charges for 10mph over the limit isn't going to be reasonable in the eyes of just about any judge (or police chief who would chew out his officer for something like that) which is a huge part of the reason why you never hear of it happening.

Personally, I like the way the MA law is written. Putting an absolute value on it (i.e. 30mph over like in many states) is sort of restrictive. It also gives speeders a number to keep in mind (ok, I'll cruise at 94 because then I can only get a ticket). Giving the officer the ability to make the decision for his/herself is allows flexibility (someone driving 20mph over the limit may be more "reckless" than someone at 35mph over) and doesn't give drivers a golden number to set cruise control to.

Also, the freeway speed limit in Massachusetts used to be 70mph (pre-55). So driving faster than 65 is not unsafe.

I agree with you. Speed limits always struck me as a little goofy. I understand why we have them, and I understand that they need to be generalized; but I don't think there's such thing as one single "safest" speed. You could say 55, 65, or even 70mph are "safe," but it's really only relatively speaking. Each driver is an individual and has different levels of skill on the road. Not to mention a lot of other variables (type of vehicle, age/experience, physical limitations, etc). There are plenty of drivers out there that are safer at 70-75mph than other drivers are at 55. Regardless of what the speed limit may be, there are going to be drivers who are good and drivers who are bad. Then people argue, "but more people will be at risk if the speed limit is higher!" True. 55mph is probably safer than 65mph for most people. Then again, 45 is probably safer than 55. And 5mph is safer than all of them! So why not reduce all roadway speeds to 5mph? Speed limits are a balancing act. There's no such thing as a "safest" speed. The only thing we can do has have a balance of reasonable speed limits to allow for traffic to move at a relatively safe speed and get to their destination in a reasonable amount of time. 70mph is fine (in my opinion) on many highways outside of urban areas in MA. I cruise at around 70 on the highway now.