How to win a speeding ticket with no limits posted

[Da Game]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: Eddie
70 in a 35 zone and you couldn't figure out this was way too fast?


Missed this...

Where on Lakeshore/US41 in/near Chicago can you go this fast??!? Maybe on the 94 going up towards Racine or on the Dan Ryan or whatever it is going into Indiana late at night.

but to be doing it on a non-interstate, US highway near the city, you deserve to have the book thrown at you on speed.

The other stuff, maybe not.

But what ive seen in situations like this, you might have lost your license and had your car impounded for the single infraction, so they gave more, lesser ones to make the pain the same but not the consequence.

You may well be lucky you got what you did!

70 in a 35 (or even a 55). Geez.



For the last time read the post, i was doing 55mph according to the my dash. The officer was at the only 35 sign on that stretch, so according to people here, I'm lying because the police says so. Yes this piece of HWY DOES NOT HAVE A POSTED SIGN! Even presenting the officer with all the documents from Enterprise, I'm wrong. I talked to Enterprise and was told that the documentation was valid proof of Insurance. I was doing 55 in a 55!Other places on the same HYW but going Northbound is 45 and it's posted. So what you guys are saying is police can site you for a speeding violation before the posted speed. At best I was doing 55 in a 55! So the question is "should the dash-cam be on to record my speed"? Or does the office set the speed before the posted limits?

 

[Eosyn]

Originally Posted By: kasedian
Chalk it up to, hopefully, a lesson learned. First of all, you wouldn't of got the other two tickets, if you didn't get the first. - If you weren't speeding at a ridiculously high rate, you wouldn't of gotten pulled over. Seriously, 70 in a 35?! You're lucky he didn't take you to jail. You need to take a step back, and re-evaluate the way you think about things. Like, basically saying that it's the cops fault. Or trying to find a way out of YOUR screw up. Man up, go to court, suffer the consequences, and learn a lesson. And by the way, with a user name like "da game", you may need to grow up first.


+1. Cops will never ever get you ticketed, only YOU can get yourself ticketed.


Originally Posted By: NYSteve
For those of you ragging on this guy for going 70 in a "35" zone, this "street" is a 4 lane each way highway that turns into I-55 South a few miles from where he was. This is in no way the 35 mph zone that you are picturing in your head.


Illinois is really stupid to have a 35-zone on a 4-lane each highway as you described. 55, I can see, but 35

 

[Nick R]

Wow, a lot of you are being pretty harsh. Apparently you don't live in places where cops are horses rear ends for no reason. (I do)

1. It's the same around here, it's 55 unless otherwise posted. 70 in a 55 is much, but there are lots of sections of road where you would definitely not think it's 35 except for the sign. There are also sections where after you turn on the street, there is no posted limit for a few miles, and you'd assume it's 55- but it isn't. They eventually put in a speed sign.

The illegal lane change, I don't know what to tell you about that.

The insurance follows the VEHICLE, not the driver. It's a rental car, it's the rental car companies job to ensure the vehicle is insured. At least in NYS. My mom works for state farm for an agent here you learn alot about it over dinner.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Da Game

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: Eddie
70 in a 35 zone and you couldn't figure out this was way too fast?


Missed this...

Where on Lakeshore/US41 in/near Chicago can you go this fast??!? Maybe on the 94 going up towards Racine or on the Dan Ryan or whatever it is going into Indiana late at night.

but to be doing it on a non-interstate, US highway near the city, you deserve to have the book thrown at you on speed.

The other stuff, maybe not.

But what ive seen in situations like this, you might have lost your license and had your car impounded for the single infraction, so they gave more, lesser ones to make the pain the same but not the consequence.

You may well be lucky you got what you did!

70 in a 35 (or even a 55). Geez.



For the last time read the post, i was doing 55mph according to the my dash. The officer was at the only 35 sign on that stretch, so according to people here, I'm lying because the police says so. Yes this piece of HWY DOES NOT HAVE A POSTED SIGN! Even presenting the officer with all the documents from Enterprise, I'm wrong. I talked to Enterprise and was told that the documentation was valid proof of Insurance. I was doing 55 in a 55!Other places on the same HYW but going Northbound is 45 and it's posted. So what you guys are saying is police can site you for a speeding violation before the posted speed. At best I was doing 55 in a 55! So the question is "should the dash-cam be on to record my speed"? Or does the office set the speed before the posted limits?


Dude, you'll quickly learn that police can do whatever they want, and get away with it 90% of the time, because it's your word vs theirs.

 

[Da Game]

I understand what you guys are saying, so to end this bashing because of the questions that I asked I'll end this now. Not blaming anybody just looking for answers.

 

[Eosyn]

Originally Posted By: Nick R

Dude, you'll quickly learn that police can do whatever they want, and get away with it 90% of the time, because it's your word vs theirs.


Plus the cops are in tight with the judges and judges, on the most part, will side with the cops unless you can provide undeniable evidence against the cop. If you take it to court without a good lawyer, I'd say your chances of success is well under 10%.

I'd say take your losses, pay the fees and move on. If you take it to court, chances are you'll be paying your fees anyway in addition to the court costs.

When I was young, I had 9 pts on my license. Was I upset about it, sure I was. Did I fight it? No, because I knew my chances of winning were slim and I'd be paying more than I would have to (court costs) and I would only be more upset. Wasn't worth my time and aggravation.

 

[buickman50401]

Originally Posted By: wallyuwl
This is one of the many, many, many reasons why I will never live in Illinois.

Or as I like to think of it, Rapinois.

 

[ddrumman2004]

Originally Posted By: Da Game
2) Doing 70mph in a 35 zone... When I got on RT-41 Southbound at 57th Street (right hand turn) there was no sign posted for 7/8 of a mile the indicates what's the speed limit. Only when you get to 61 street is a sign posted that reads 35, which the CP was sitting there.

So...were you doing 55 or 70?
Also, is there a posted speed limit on this section of road before you get to the section where you say there is no posted speed limit?

If so and you are familiar with that section of road, they will tell you that you should know what the posted speed limit is.

We are either fortunate or not in that our county law enforcement are not allowed radar speed detectors.....they have to "chase and clock" you to issues a speeding violation. Now within the city limits of the closest town, they have radar and you better obey the limits. If they stop you, they will ask you how long you have been living in the area and will tell you ignorance of the speed limit laws is no excuse.

Good luck!

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: ddrumman2004
So...were you doing 55 or 70?


I think that's the most important question. Whether or not the speed limit was 35 or 55, if he was found to be doing 70 mph, that's in excess of the speed limit. Up here, that would merely lower the price of the speeding ticket, and nothing else.

As for whether or not a limit is posted or not, I don't know what the legislation says in the jurisdiction of this incident, but up here, if the speed limit isn't posted and it's outside a city, it's automatically assumed to be 80 km/h. If it's in a city, the assumption is 50 km/h. In neither case are posted speed limits necessary.

With respect to the insurance issue, the original poster is likely out of the realm of he said/she said when it comes to whether or not an offence can be proven in court. The car was either insured or it was not. If the driver can provide evidence that insurance was valid at the time of the alleged offence, that's the end of that ticket. If there was no insurance, that's another matter, and whether or not the driver took reasonable steps to ensure insurance was in place (which he indicates he did) may be an issue.

Up here, registration and insurance are one in the same. If someone gets charged here for driving an unregistered vehicle (i.e. uninsured), all the police have to do to prove it to the court is get a sworn certificate from SGI (our DMV) stating that the vehicle described as whatever, bearing VIN whatever, was not registered on whatever date and time.

 

[doitmyself]

Isn't there a process where you can contest it, without going through the whole court thing?

I have found that often times they will "plea bargain" it down instead of taking it before a magistrate, etc., to save them time and aggravation.

You might still pay a smaller fine, but it won't go on your record (points).

It's a lose/lose compromise.

 

[Hootbro]

Did the cop have a laser or radar gun? If a laser, he has you dead to rights. If a radar, it picks up the fastest object moving and it is up to the officer to "determine" who was moving that fast and other cars around you may have given him the higher reading.

As others have said, get your ducks in a row and go fight it. Cops are notorious for not showing up for traffic court and many times you can get it dismissed just on that.

Good luck!

 

[ffracer]

Originally Posted By: Eosyn
[1.ops will never ever get you ticketed, only YOU can get yourself ticketed.


That assumes they are doing their job and that all speeding is unsafe. Neither which are true.

The whole speeding industry is a racket to make revenue. Because, if they cared about safety, they'd write tickets for no turn signals, high beams, driving in the left lane, running lights, rolling stop signs at speed, etc.

They wouldn't have enough hours in the day to get everyone.

My first ticket was a 69 in a 40. Only problem was that I was going 30 in a very cold car. It was obvious they needed the money when I went to court.

 

[hattaresguy]

Well for starters to get pulled over 3 times in one day, their is more to this story. You were hot rodding it or something, if you want to play with the rental car that's cool just don't cry when you get pinched.

70 in a 35 is twice the speed limit, around here you would have had to be a good talker to not get a court date. Actually a couple local cops are up on manslaughter charges for doing something similar, 80+ in a 40, and a couple kids not realizing they were going so fast pulled out and were killed.

Why were you pulled over the first time?

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: ffracer
That assumes they are doing their job and that all speeding is unsafe. Neither which are true.

The whole speeding industry is a racket to make revenue. Because, if they cared about safety, they'd write tickets for no turn signals, high beams, driving in the left lane, running lights, rolling stop signs at speed, etc.


You're repeating the same error you're trying to correct. You're right, not all speeding is unsafe. However, the whole speeding industry isn't a racket to make revenue. Some jurisdictions are bad for that, others are not. Some use ridiculously low tolerance in very safe areas, others do not.

Here, I've gotten my share of speeding tickets in my youth. They were all places where I knew better. As for turn signals, rolling stops, and so forth, a fair bit of that is written up here, too.

That's where I don't approve of photo radar, but I do approve of red light cameras. The former is a cash grab, no question. The latter has improved the safety of intersections here.

A radar trailer that just displays a driver's speed is as effective at reducing speeding as is one that takes the picture and mails a ticket. As for your case of being charged for 69 in a 40 when going only 30, if that's the case, then such a police officer is in the wrong line of work, unless he was an elected officer, which means he's in the right line of work.

 

[FL_Rob]

Take it to court,calm down in front of the Judge and state a wise case.DO NOT BLAME THE OFFICER IN FRONT OF THE JUDGE.It'll make you look hatefull/conspiratorial.Ask the judge to see the photos',dont tell him .They all work for the same GOV'T,so dont seem like your trying to 'wag the dog'.Just make an honest account clearly ,one step at a time,an account of what happened.Admit that if there was a sign that said 35mph...you wouldv'e followed the law and taken note of said posted speed.Pictures ,better yet have a friend ride shotgun with a video cam on the exact route.

If nothing else, the officer won't show and your off ,hope for that.

 

[urchin]

The OP is "irresponsible" plain and simple.

Hopefully the judge will see that and after he challenges these citations in court they will add additional fines.

I think the OP is probably "young and dumb" or maybe not, but he needs to learn a lesson in using common sense and reason.

 

[FL_Rob]

Originally Posted By: urchin
The OP is "irresponsible" plain and simple.

Hopefully the judge will see that and after he challenges these citations in court they will add additional fines.

I think the OP is probably "young and dumb" or maybe not, but he needs to learn a lesson in using common sense and reason.


Did you read the entire post ..or are you guessing?
come on now ,you're a smart fellow,I know the truth....

 

[Hootbro]

Originally Posted By: urchin
The OP is "irresponsible" plain and simple.

Hopefully the judge will see that and after he challenges these citations in court they will add additional fines.

...............


Fines are fixed scale and a judge can not add additional levy on them. Only thing is if he loses, court cost can be incurred and also on a fixed scale. In essence, it is a misdemeanor crime and it is either a thumbs up or thumbs down or he can actually request a jury trial in some states.

I have sat on two juries for traffic court when I lived in Texas. It is not always a slam dunk just because Johnny law says it is this or that and I believe just by what the OP has given, he could reasonably fight this and win.

 

[urchin]

Originally Posted By: Da Game



1) Driving a rental car without Insurance... I presented the CP a copy of the contract which indicated that Insurance was on the vehicle. He said it was not valid.


Note how the OP doesn't explain why the officer states the car is considered NOT covered, why not? I am certain that the officer told in detail to the offender why it was considered that no valid insurance was in effect on the vehicle.



Quote:


2) Doing 70mph in a 35 zone... When I got on RT-41 Southbound at 57th Street (right hand turn) there was no sign posted for 7/8 of a mile the indicates what's the speed limit. Only when you get to 61 street is a sign posted that reads 35, which the CP was sitting there.


I don't believe this explanation either, because of the way he described the above.



Common sense should have told the OP that if speed limit is unmarked on a secondary road he should have slowed down significantly, ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Sorry but his screen name also tells me something about him. The judge would see it the same way.

 

[FL_Rob]

He's a member since '05 .Let the man tell what he wants to say, for crying out loud.
If you really want to go get that heavily entailed......... "Urchin"is not the best call sign either t.....
this is what I dont want this forum to turn into. a balls out 'cage match' go find it elsewhere.
C'mon bro.Where else are we gonna have this discussion?

If not for bitog... you wouldn't even be responded to.