Disillusioned1
New Member
Please help...I've become disillusioned with the judicial system. I was pulled over for doing 51.2 mph in 35 mph zone. Vascar was set up as .021 (110.88') mile trap for 1.47 seconds. My driving record was spotless and I drive this road every day so I checked my speed often and am convinced there is no way I was going 51.2.
In preparing my defense, I found several articles showing minimum recommended distances of 1/8th and 1/10th mile as well as one calling for a 4 second minimum trap time. The error would drop to (in my opinion) an acceptable range of +/-2 mph. I felt well prepared.
When I went to the hearing, the justice told me to put that stuff away, reduced the points from 3 to 0, and kept the fine/court costs/etc. This took about 5 minutes.
To be honest, I was happy when the points were taken off my record, not so happy they kept the money, but really disgusted because I felt I was guilty until proven innocent as soon as I walked in and to make matters worse, I wasn't really given a chance to argue in my defense. I know I can take it to a higher court but I'm not really interested in that.
My question is: had I been given the fair chance to present reports by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, Wake Forest University, the Kansas Highway Patrol and the Association of Chiefs of Police all showing minimum recommended distances much longer that 110', what would my chances have been for 1. Total dismissal, 2. Same outcome as I received, or 3. Laughter and scorn?
Thanks for your help.
In preparing my defense, I found several articles showing minimum recommended distances of 1/8th and 1/10th mile as well as one calling for a 4 second minimum trap time. The error would drop to (in my opinion) an acceptable range of +/-2 mph. I felt well prepared.
When I went to the hearing, the justice told me to put that stuff away, reduced the points from 3 to 0, and kept the fine/court costs/etc. This took about 5 minutes.
To be honest, I was happy when the points were taken off my record, not so happy they kept the money, but really disgusted because I felt I was guilty until proven innocent as soon as I walked in and to make matters worse, I wasn't really given a chance to argue in my defense. I know I can take it to a higher court but I'm not really interested in that.
My question is: had I been given the fair chance to present reports by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, Wake Forest University, the Kansas Highway Patrol and the Association of Chiefs of Police all showing minimum recommended distances much longer that 110', what would my chances have been for 1. Total dismissal, 2. Same outcome as I received, or 3. Laughter and scorn?
Thanks for your help.