Estimates OK for speeding tickets, court rules

That burden of proof thing has always been troublesome. As an Ohioan, I couldn't be prouder.

"C. E. White" wrote in news:hu88iv$l8v$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:

Everybody (including the Ohio courts) seems to have forgotten just why it's been required, for decades, that the cops show iron-clad proof of wrongdoing by the alleged miscreant.

If the US is still a civilized country, the Ohio court's ruling will eventually be shot down as the case gets appealed higher.

As I recall North Carolina law allows officers to wite tickets based on visual estimates of speed during daylight hours (but not after dark). I don't think they can say you were doing 66.5 mph in a 55, but I think they can say you were exceeding a safe speed based on just appearances. I am not sure how well this actually holds up in court though.

Ed

I have to agree on this. Police here have not demonstrated the saintly grace of honesty around here, where objectivity and judgement are concerned.

There is a class action suit ongoing in this area regarding police profiling drivers, stopping them, and taking their money and valuables under the pretense that this is tantamount to money laundering. It turned into a big money making scam. It will be interesting to see what the court rules in this case.

Here in Georgia, we have a catch-all call - "Too fast for conditions." The officer can make this charge no matter the environmental, terrain, weather, vehicle or any other physical basis or condition. It is treated pretty much the same as a regular speeding ticket with no requirement that any reference be made to a particular speed. That would have been my very first ticket some 46 years ago. It is still on the books to allow officers to nail you when he has nothing else.

Lugnut

@news.eternal-september.org...

Sure, cops never are mistaken, or outright lie.

Here's hoping you get one of the first tickets! Cheers!

nate