Photo Radar Chandler, Process server gave notice to my Son (Prescott: 2013, unemployed)

[Bummer]

Originally Posted by fcorrales80

True about the judges! Good point. However, the P&R statements are often misinterpreted. It generally means that a driver can be at fault for accidents in adverse weather conditions and NOT that the driver is allowed to speed in excess of the limits when it's nice outside. This would defeat the purpose of speed limit laws. The judge can explain that as well as it is not a judgment call but precedent.

Say the limit is 65 mph but a driver was going 65 mph in a monsoon storm and "caused" an accident. They can try the defense that they were "traveling at the posted speed as allowable by law," but the P&R statues would over-rule that because conditions warranted driving under the limit because it was reasonable and prudent.

BINGO, fcorrales!

Although argued by many, P&R statues will never allow a driver to exceed the posted speed limit. As you posted, P&R statues justify a speeding citation even if a driver is doing the posted speed limit or less while the road or weather conditions cannot allow that limit.

P&Rs are never an authority to exceed the limit.

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by fcorrales80

Say the limit is 65 mph but a driver was going 65 mph in a monsoon storm and "caused" an accident. They can try the defense that they were "traveling at the posted speed as allowable by law," but the P&R statues would over-rule that because conditions warranted driving under the limit because it was reasonable and prudent.

I completely agree with you on this point. Under the law, a driver can legally be stopped and cited by an officer for driving the speed limit, or even under the speed limit depending on different factors. A good example of this would be last week's blizzard in northern AZ. Let's say a person was driving the posted speed limit on a Flagstaff street, but the road conditions warranted slower driving due to the road & weather conditions. In that case, the driver could be cited, regardless if there was an accident involved.

That's exactly why the posted speed limits technically are useless in many cases. You could be driving down a divided boulevard in a suburban part of Phoenix where the posted limit is 40 MPH, but could still be reasonable & prudent by driving 55 MPH if conditions warrant. I have driven 10 to 15 MPH over the limit quite a few times, and even passed police officers on the side of the streets who never pulled me over. It was because I was driving safely, even though it exceeded the limit. Again, officer's discretion!

[fcorrales80]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I completely agree with you on this point. Under the law, a driver can legally be stopped and cited by an officer for driving the speed limit, or even under the speed limit depending on different factors. A good example of this would be last week's blizzard in northern AZ. Let's say a person was driving the posted speed limit on a Flagstaff street, but the road conditions warranted slower driving due to the road & weather conditions. In that case, the driver could be cited, regardless if there was an accident involved.

That's exactly why the posted speed limits technically are useless in many cases. You could be driving down a divided boulevard in a suburban part of Phoenix where the posted limit is 40 MPH, but could still be reasonable & prudent by driving 55 MPH if conditions warrant. I have driven 10 to 15 MPH over the limit quite a few times, and even passed police officers on the side of the streets who never pulled me over. It was because I was driving safely, even though it exceeded the limit. Again, officer's discretion!

No, your last part is incorrect. The law states the limits allowed on roads and the posting of those limits are the public notification of such. There is no condition that warrants a disregard for those posted limits. Some situations like emergencies exist but even then you will be stopped or followed by police until you get to the ER or station, etc...

They didn't pull you over because they didn't warrant it important or had other distractions; crime to attend to. However, if you were to get their attention and pulled over for driving that fast your P&R defense would be unusable; officer's discretion to pull you over as they can't pull everyone over for speeding because of their working situation and is not because of a reasonable and prudent situation. That misinterpretation of the law can get you in trouble. Officers often have other things more important to watch for or look after than all those who would disregard speed limits.

[thegirlinaz]

Originally Posted by observer53

How old is your son?

POd, I read through the previous posts and don't see if you answered this question (which I am still curious about). Is your son 5? 10? 15?

[POd_about_radar_ticket]

Originally Posted by thegirlinaz

pod, i read through the previous posts and don't see if you answered this question (which i am still curious about). Is your son 5? 10? 15?

17

[fcorrales80]

Originally Posted by POd_about_radar_ticket

17

Go to court, if you don't get it dismissed from what you can present then ask for lenience or a reduced fee since this is your first ticket and the judge would have your clean record attached to your file. You never know...like Valley Native said, a judge just might be inclined to be nice to you if they don't happen to like the cameras themselves.

[observer53]

If there were cameras, and others were at the same speed, then you probably aren't the only person who was cited. And, the speed limit set by city authorities is the speed limit. If you see the photo enforcement camera signs, it doesn't take many brain cells to decide to SLOW DOWN. You can try your "reasonable and prudent" argument, but don't be surprised if it doesn't fly.

[POd_about_radar_ticket]

Originally Posted by fcorrales80

Go to court, if you don't get it dismissed from what you can present then ask for lenience or a reduced fee since this is your first ticket and the judge would have your clean record attached to your file. You never know...like Valley Native said, a judge just might be inclined to be nice to you if they don't happen to like the cameras themselves.

I'm thinking of going to the hearings and see what other people are saying and what works. The picture is very poor quality and isn't complete. Forehead is covered by the sun blue screen of the windshield. Perhaps I can use this. Otherwise throwing myself at the mercy of the court is my last option. :-)

[fcorrales80]

Originally Posted by POd_about_radar_ticket

I'm thinking of going to the hearings and see what other people are saying and what works. The picture is very poor quality and isn't complete. Forehead is covered by the sun blue screen of the windshield. Perhaps I can use this. Otherwise throwing myself at the mercy of the court is my last option. :-)

Photo quality is a big issue if judge agrees that you can't be identified.

[observer53]

Originally Posted by POd_about_radar_ticket

Hmmm, internet driving school is $35. Perhaps my best option.

Taking the test in front of a notary sounds like a pain.

Oh, it's more than that..... you still pay additional fees over and above the price of the school. Not all the schools require taking the test in front of a notary... for one of them you go to any of several locations, including UPS stores, the clerk gets you onto the computer and then you take the test and leave.