The Best Speeding Ticket Defenses In Washington

[Cadyryeith]

I got a 69 in 55 and have too many options for ways to contest it.

1) I could subpoena the trooper and hope he doesn't show up (which I've heard is common). My court date is 9AM Jan 3, 2008. I'd expect the trooper not overly eager to show up after the holiday & New Years eve patrols.

2) The Infraction notice has an illegible statute code.
As I've read on here, IRLJ 2.1 b(4) requires the notice to have a statutory citation, but what if it's simply illegible (on both my copy and the one I got from the court clerk)?Here's the actual illegible section.

3) The trooper was illegally parked on the side of the highway without any lights on (in violation of RCW 46.61.575 & RCW 46.37.020).
Thus, any evidence obtain from his position was illegally gather and thus should not be admissible in court.

4) I was on the highway for only about 1/4 mile when the trooper started following me. I had pulled onto the highway where there's a significant dip in the roadway. Another fast approaching vehicle was heading the same direction as me (I pulled out between it, causing it to slow, and the trooper).
I suspect the trooper saw the other vehicle and used the radar on him/her and didn't see me pull out.

Option 4 is what I consider the real circumstances, but that doesn't mean it would fly in court.
I'm thinking of trying #2, then #3, and (if needed) finally #4, but I'm afraid that might appear annoying to the judge and make him less likely to believe me.

My preference would be #2, and getting it over quickly.
#4 will require charts, diagrams, pictures, and probably a lot of stress on my part.

Any suggestions?

[Langford]

Yeah.....I think #1 is the only chance you've got; almost for certain. (By the way, #3 is ridiculous, #2 is a daily occurrence and #4 is as 'old as the hills'). Good luck...and let us know how you make out. (I do think your idea that the trooper won't show up offers reason for hope!)

[Vsnderveer]

Barry is the expert on traffic matters in the state of Washington so I'm hopeful he'll advise you about deferment and your other question about the trooper showing up.

One word of advice: When you get to court, be up beat, positive, respectful and forthcoming. It's OK to be smart...but don't be too smart; if you are, you'll definitely stand out...and you don't want that. Just be smart enough to make good points without being condescending or insulting. I feel sure you understand what I mean. Good luck and let us know how you make out!!

[curtiss62]

Quoting chuckycheese



Yeah.....I think #1 is the only chance you've got; almost for certain. (By the way, #3 is ridiculous,







Actually, #3 apparently worked recently:http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/..._ticket03.html











Quoting chuckycheese



#2 is a daily occurrence and #4 is as 'old as the hills'). Good luck...and let us know how you make out. (I do think your idea that the trooper won't show up offers reason for hope!)







Yeah I know #4 is old, but the actual elevation changes, pictures I took (showing from Trooper vantage point he couldn't see the highway in the area of the side road), along with available testimony I had just pulled onto the highway from that side road seems pretty convincing.

Thanks,

Ken

[Haslett]

Quoting cdwjava



Isolated and not precedent setting.
Even in the article it says that it is no changing procedures at all.

The ruling of one court does not make for a trend, and other courts may very well disagree with the judge's ruling ... though, I would expect others to try it.
I suspect it has been tried before, though, so many of the courts have likely heard this - I know I have heard it down here a few times, and the courts here have tended to reject the idea as a separate issue from the speed citation.

But, judges can be opinionated or temperamental sometimes.

- Carl







I agree with Carl. Traffic court judges can do whatever they want to do...and so can cops. Cops break laws all the time but that doesn't, in any way, justify a normal citizen doing so.

The stance that most judges would take is the "two wrongs don't make a right" stance. Besides that, you're the sap on trial..not the cop who wrote the ticket. You can try the "cop was breaking the law" defense but I think you'll be skating on thin ice. You should at least have a 'back up' plan because judges know, full well, that cops often don't follow the traffic laws they enforce. That's life!!

[Ignace]

Quoting cdwjava

Could it be ...

RCW 46.61.400







Yeah, I figured out which RCW it was (after searching through the 46.61... RCW's). I personally have extremely lousy penmanship, but I still find the troopers RCW scribble inexcusable. He wrote perfectly legible '0' digits elsewhere on the citation.

So it sounds like this wouldn't produce anything more than a possible comment by the judge about the trooper needing penmanship lessons.

Ken

[Olney]

Could it be ...RCW 46.61.400

Basic rule and maximum limits.


(1) No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing. In every event speed shall be so controlled as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle or other conveyance on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care.

(2) Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with subsection (1) of this section, the limits specified in this section or established as hereinafter authorized shall be maximum lawful speeds, and no person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed in excess of such maximum limits.

(a) Twenty-five miles per hour on city and town streets;

(b) Fifty miles per hour on county roads;

(c) Sixty miles per hour on state highways.

The maximum speed limits set forth in this section may be altered as authorized in RCW 46.61.405, 46.61.410, and 46.61.415.

(3) The driver of every vehicle shall, consistent with the requirements of subsection (1) of this section, drive at an appropriate reduced speed when approaching and crossing an intersection or railway grade crossing, when approaching and going around a curve, when approaching a hill crest, when traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway, and when special hazard exists with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or highway conditions.

Both the numerals "4" seem to be identical, and the double loop at the end looked like "00" to me.

- Carl

[webb]

Quoting kwinters79



Actually, #3 apparently worked recently:http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/..._ticket03.html







Isolated and not precedent setting.
Even in the article it says that it is no changing procedures at all.

The ruling of one court does not make for a trend, and other courts may very well disagree with the judge's ruling ... though, I would expect others to try it.
I suspect it has been tried before, though, so many of the courts have likely heard this - I know I have heard it down here a few times, and the courts here have tended to reject the idea as a separate issue from the speed citation.

But, judges can be opinionated or temperamental sometimes.

- Carl

[Cleon]

Estimating chuckycheese<br />
<br />
One-word of guidance: whenever you reach courtroom, be up-beat, good, sincere and future. It is okay to become smart...but-don't be also smart; if you're, you will absolutely stick out...and you do not need that. You need to be wise enough to create great details without having to be condescending or insulting. I'm certain you realize the reason. Best of luck and let's understand how you write out!!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Yes, I understand everything you suggest. I am usually respectful, ethical, calmly confident and honest. And it is no act, I had been simply elevated that way.

[Cornwallis]

Estimating chuckycheese<br />
<br />
It is possible to attempt the "policeman was splitting regulations" protection but I believe you will be skating on thin snow. You need to atleast possess a 'back-up' strategy since judges understand, complete effectively, that police frequently do not follow the traffic regulations they impose. That is existence!!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Thanks for that feedback. I've got many back up ideas in your mind, Iam simply not certain however how I'll really attempt to perform them out.<br />
While you mentioned, there is a great opportunity the trooper would not appear on that day. If he did, I've a number of images, images, along with a sworn affidavit that show I arrived onto the freeway away from troopers perspective (significantly less than 1/4 distance from his area). Obviously, he probably wont recall any details and could possibly believe he'd visible contact all the time. Iam also a PC Researcher with 25 years professional expertise in Science associated programs (including substantial use radar and RF) and Iam fairly particular I might increase some degree of issue within the Judges brain concerning the credibility of the radar data.<br />
But when all my initiatives fail, may the strain and period have now been worthwhile? So here is another issue, easily subpoena the trooper and he really turns up, might that harm my likelihood of being provided a deferment (must my simple request crash)? The simple path is always to simply get a deferment (I Have got 28 years with no simple moving breach everywhere), but easy is not usually best. And that I dislike the thought of pleading guilty to anything used to don't do.