Ticket for going 48 in a 35 MPH speed zone

I received a ticket for going 48 MPH. The officer said that the speed
limit was 35. The speed limit changes from 35 to 50 and the officer
was sitting at the road in front of the sign. I'm not sure if it
matters, but the officer put the wrong address on the ticket. The
address he listed is 2 miles from where I received the ticket. The
address he listed is on the same road, but closer to town. Where I
received the ticket is on the edge of town.

Thank you,

:
> I received a ticket for going 48 MPH. The officer said that the speed
> limit was 35. The speed limit changes from 35 to 50 and the officer
> was sitting at the road in front of the sign. I'm not sure if it
> matters, but the officer put the wrong address on the ticket. The
> address he listed is 2 miles from where I received the ticket. The
> address he listed is on the same road, but closer to town. Where I
> received the ticket is on the edge of town.

If you are looking for advice on fighting the ticket, the best you will
receive is this: get a lawyer. Don't try to fight the revenue juggernaut
that is law enforcement (sic) and the courts (sic) alone.

--
"This town needs an enema!"
--The Joker

"necromancer" > wrote in
message th.net...
> :
>> I received a ticket for going 48 MPH. The officer said that the
>> speed
>> limit was 35. The speed limit changes from 35 to 50 and the
>> officer
>> was sitting at the road in front of the sign. I'm not sure if it
>> matters, but the officer put the wrong address on the ticket. The
>> address he listed is 2 miles from where I received the ticket. The
>> address he listed is on the same road, but closer to town. Where I
>> received the ticket is on the edge of town.
>
> If you are looking for advice on fighting the ticket, the best you
> will
> receive is this: get a lawyer. Don't try to fight the revenue
> juggernaut
> that is law enforcement (sic) and the courts (sic) alone.

My son just had a recent experience with the local revenue generating
traffic enforcement organization.

He did something stupid - "spun" his tires where a Raleigh Police
Officer could see him. The officer gave him a reckless driving ticket.
This is the second worst violation in North Carolina. He would have
lost his license, and my insurance would have gone through the roof.
So I had to hire a lawyer. The lawyer had my son attend traffic school
and do 25 hours of community service. In court the reckless driving
charge was reduced to a violation of a city ordinance against SPINNING
TIRES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There was an actual law against this,
but the fine is only $10 and it does not affect your license. Clearly
my son should have been charged with this initially (it is what he
did). But by charging him with reckless driving instead, we were
forced to go to court, pay the $10 fine, AND the $110 "cost of court."
Not to mention I had to pay the lawyer another $290. What a crock of
@#$%@#$. Of course my son is being punished (by me), but there is no
way the initial charge was justified by what he did.

Ed

On Jun 5, 9:12 am, wrote:
> I received a ticket for going 48 MPH. The officer said that the speed
> limit was 35. The speed limit changes from 35 to 50 and the officer
> was sitting at the road in front of the sign. I'm not sure if it
> matters, but the officer put the wrong address on the ticket. The
> address he listed is 2 miles from where I received the ticket. The
> address he listed is on the same road, but closer to town. Where I
> received the ticket is on the edge of town.
>
> Thank you,

If I understand your description correctly you were going 50mph in the
zone between the 35mph and 50mph signs. You were caught speeding in a
35mph zone and should pay the fine.

C. E. White wrote:

> My son just had a recent experience with the local revenue generating
> traffic enforcement organization.
>
> He did something stupid - "spun" his tires where a Raleigh Police
> Officer could see him. The officer gave him a reckless driving ticket.
> This is the second worst violation in North Carolina. He would have
> lost his license, and my insurance would have gone through the roof.
> So I had to hire a lawyer. The lawyer had my son attend traffic school
> and do 25 hours of community service.

Why is it that lawyers can't go for an acquittal in the first place?

Back in 1998, I got a speeding ticket for going 70 mph in a 55 mph zone.
If I just paid the ticket, it would have cost me about $200 (including
court costs) and 3 points on my license. If I had got a lawyer, he or
she would have probably just reduced it to 65 in a 55 which would have
been about $80 (including court costs) and no points.

I fought the ticket myself and beat it, and didn't have to pay anything
other the time required for two appearances in court.

Another time I decided to fight, I got a reduction of charges offer from
the prosecution before the trial (which was the 10 mph over, no points)
which was probably due to the fact that I had filed a motion for
discovery for a number of items and records.

IMO, if the lawyer isn't going for an acquittal, then get another lawyer
or fight it yourself. Being prepared by filing a subpoena duces tecum,
or moving for discovery prior to trial can help in getting you a plea
bargain, or winning on a technicality in some cases.

On Jun 5, 11:31 am, "C. E. White" >
wrote:
> "necromancer" > wrote in
> messagenews:MPG.20cf4582e384b1b698a41d@newsgroups. bellsouth.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > :
> >> I received a ticket for going 48 MPH. The officer said that the
> >> speed
> >> limit was 35. The speed limit changes from 35 to 50 and the
> >> officer
> >> was sitting at the road in front of the sign. I'm not sure if it
> >> matters, but the officer put the wrong address on the ticket. The
> >> address he listed is 2 miles from where I received the ticket. The
> >> address he listed is on the same road, but closer to town. Where I
> >> received the ticket is on the edge of town.
>
> > If you are looking for advice on fighting the ticket, the best you
> > will
> > receive is this: get a lawyer. Don't try to fight the revenue
> > juggernaut
> > that is law enforcement (sic) and the courts (sic) alone.
>
> My son just had a recent experience with the local revenue generating
> traffic enforcement organization.
>
> He did something stupid - "spun" his tires where a Raleigh Police
> Officer could see him. The officer gave him a reckless driving ticket.
> This is the second worst violation in North Carolina. He would have
> lost his license, and my insurance would have gone through the roof.
> So I had to hire a lawyer. The lawyer had my son attend traffic school
> and do 25 hours of community service. In court the reckless driving
> charge was reduced to a violation of a city ordinance against SPINNING
> TIRES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There was an actual law against this,
> but the fine is only $10 and it does not affect your license. Clearly
> my son should have been charged with this initially (it is what he
> did). But by charging him with reckless driving instead, we were
> forced to go to court, pay the $10 fine, AND the $110 "cost of court."
> Not to mention I had to pay the lawyer another $290. What a crock of
> @#$%@#$. Of course my son is being punished (by me), but there is no
> way the initial charge was justified by what he did.
>
> Ed- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Here's hoping your son has decided to not drive in an immature and
reckless manner in the future. He's lucky the judge reduced the
charge. Had he spun the wheels lost control and injured or killed
someone you and he would be worrying about a lot more than next year's
insurance premiums.

In article <4665824c$1@kcnews01>, C. E. White wrote:

> He did something stupid - "spun" his tires where a Raleigh Police
> Officer could see him. The officer gave him a reckless driving ticket.
> This is the second worst violation in North Carolina. He would have
> lost his license, and my insurance would have gone through the roof.
> So I had to hire a lawyer. The lawyer had my son attend traffic school
> and do 25 hours of community service. In court the reckless driving
> charge was reduced to a violation of a city ordinance against SPINNING
> TIRES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There was an actual law against this,
> but the fine is only $10 and it does not affect your license. Clearly
> my son should have been charged with this initially (it is what he
> did). But by charging him with reckless driving instead, we were
> forced to go to court, pay the $10 fine, AND the $110 "cost of court."
> Not to mention I had to pay the lawyer another $290. What a crock of
> @#$%@#$. Of course my son is being punished (by me), but there is no
> way the initial charge was justified by what he did.

The system wants money, justice is a distant 10th or so... somewhere
behind feeding the judge's goldfish on time.

BTW, IMO The spinning tires laws were passed by morons who only drive AT
cars. A little wheel spin under certain conditions is normal with an MT.

On Jun 5, 12:04 pm, (Brent P)
wrote:
> In article <4665824c$1@kcnews01>, C. E. White wrote:
> > He did something stupid - "spun" his tires where a Raleigh Police
> > Officer could see him. The officer gave him a reckless driving ticket.
> > This is the second worst violation in North Carolina. He would have
> > lost his license, and my insurance would have gone through the roof.
> > So I had to hire a lawyer. The lawyer had my son attend traffic school
> > and do 25 hours of community service. In court the reckless driving
> > charge was reduced to a violation of a city ordinance against SPINNING
> > TIRES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There was an actual law against this,
> > but the fine is only $10 and it does not affect your license. Clearly
> > my son should have been charged with this initially (it is what he
> > did). But by charging him with reckless driving instead, we were
> > forced to go to court, pay the $10 fine, AND the $110 "cost of court."
> > Not to mention I had to pay the lawyer another $290. What a crock of
> > @#$%@#$. Of course my son is being punished (by me), but there is no
> > way the initial charge was justified by what he did.
>
> The system wants money, justice is a distant 10th or so... somewhere
> behind feeding the judge's goldfish on time.
>
> BTW, IMO The spinning tires laws were passed by morons who only drive AT
> cars. A little wheel spin under certain conditions is normal with an MT.

Hell, I've (inadvertantly) spun the tires on Vlad the Impala quite a
few times, even with the AT and anemic 3.4 engine. the stock Goodyear
tires are so abysmal that a little rain is all it takes to lose almost
all traction.

If the tires aren't worn enough for the fleet people to authorize
replacement before winter, I can see that I'm going to have to have
words with them. It was bad enough last winter, but with another
year's wear on them, I can't see me willingly driving in snow on these
POS tires.

nate

In article .com>, John S. wrote:
> On Jun 5, 9:12 am, wrote:
>> I received a ticket for going 48 MPH. The officer said that the speed
>> limit was 35. The speed limit changes from 35 to 50 and the officer
>> was sitting at the road in front of the sign. I'm not sure if it
>> matters, but the officer put the wrong address on the ticket. The
>> address he listed is 2 miles from where I received the ticket. The
>> address he listed is on the same road, but closer to town. Where I
>> received the ticket is on the edge of town.
>>
>> Thank you,
>
> If I understand your description correctly you were going 50mph in the
> zone between the 35mph and 50mph signs. You were caught speeding in a
> 35mph zone and should pay the fine.

In at least some states there are laws that within X feet of a speed
limit sign where the limit changes one cannot be ticketed for exceeding the
new or old limit (one would need to be exceeding both). This distance is
defined under the law usually so cops can't sit directly behind a large
change in speed limit downwards to ticket people because they cannot
change their speed instantly. There may also be protection for people
accelerating when the new sign is the only visible indication of the
limit. The state where the OP was ticketed likely has such a law and
that is why the cop falisified the location. Likely the cop had someone
successfully fight a ticket from where he was set up to catch people
accelerating to the new limit and he is using his 'weight' in court to
well lie.

If any state has a law that spells out a speed limit step change at the
exact location of the sign I would like to see it. IL law reads as if the
limit is the sign that is visible or last was visible and a change
downwards cannot be enforced within 500 feet beyond the sign. (at least
with electronic equipment)

N8N wrote:

> If the tires aren't worn enough for the fleet people to authorize
> replacement before winter, I can see that I'm going to have to have
> words with them. It was bad enough last winter, but with another
> year's wear on them, I can't see me willingly driving in snow on these
> POS tires.

Sounds like it's time to spin the tires on purpose for a little bit
(just to get enough wear on them)