Well, if you don't object and speak up for your rights, then you lose. I am sure that the "judge" would not like it, but that is their problem. If you don't you will be found guilty, so what do you have to lose? You just don't want to be nasty and insulting.
If you interupt the officer and try to be nice, you will be told to be quiet. The magic words are important. You also need to know the law. For example, in CA there is a set of requirements for the use of laser/radar and if you don't know that they are violating your rights and speak up, you will be found guilty and the fault lies with you for not knowing and/or speaking up.
I would strongly suggest that you take some time to watch the court cases. It is quite interesting. It is also good to make you think about ever wanting to go there since even when it is obvious that the officer is lying (yes, I do mean lying because the officer changed his testimony within a 5 minute period) the person is found guilty. Part of the reason for this is to get people to object to the way people are treated and to perhaps do something about it (like voting against certain judges).
It is also important to know that anything you say will be used against you, so you don't want to admit anything and it is also good to record what is said in order to ensure that the officer tells the truth.
The magic words depends on what is said, but for example "I object", but then you need to know the reason. If the officer tries to submit evidence, "I object, the officer is a witness, not the prosecutor". It might not work because often the "judge" does not care, but if you don't try, then it really won't work.
The main thing is to be prepared to say NO and to stand up for your rights. In CA, for example, there is a code section (law) which must be followed and you need to know about that and request the "judge" dismiss your case, as required, if the law is not followed.
In the case of Laser, yes, you need to question and show that the device was not calibrated, that the officer could not have correctly targeted and tracked your vehicle (pointing a gun type device at typically over 400ft, trying to hit an object the size of a license plate), etc. The Laser gun calculates the speed and that is important to realize.
Even new radar guns are "calibrated" with tuning forks to ensure that they read the "correct" speed, but the problem is that what is the speed of the center of mass of the tuning fork? It is zero. The fork is vibrating and consider what the radar gun reads. It does not read the average speed, which is zero, it reads the highest speed and also ignores the negative speed as the fork moves closes and further away. This means that it is reading a vibration and not the complete or correct speed.
Now consider the vehicles, such as BMW, which have a fan in front, which means that the speed could be read from that, remember it is reading the fastest speed.
In CA there is a vehicle code section, 40800, which lists what is required to get a conviction with laser or radar, but in watching court cases I have NEVER seen that followed. Part of the problem is that the defendant needs to know to speak the magic words.
In all cases, the question is what is it hitting.
With laser, there are 43 pulses in 1/3 second. There is some error detection, but since that is secret it is impossible to know what signals are really being returned. Consider that the front of a vehicle is not flat, then calculate the difference in speed an inch makes. After that measure the difference around the license plate.
It is also important to remember that the laser is not visible light, but the viewfinder is. Remember playing with a prism? The light bends differently based on the freq. of the light, so the moisture in the air can have an affect. Also, since laser measures distance, not speed, and they don't calibrate the unit under the same environment as actual use (plus it would take two officers to testify that it was calibrated, one with the laser device and the other in the test vehicle reading the speedometer).
The bottom line is that most traffic courts are really Kangaroo Kourts and they do not follow the law (been there, been lied to, been denied justice and had the case law to prove it, but in the end the officer did not show, but it cost me time, although I learned a lot).
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you don't object and speak up for your rights, then you lose. I am sure that the "judge" would not like it, but that is their problem. If you don't you will be found guilty, so what do you have to lose? You just don't want to be nasty and insulting.
If you interupt the officer and try to be nice, you will be told to be quiet. The magic words are important. You also need to know the law. For example, in CA there is a set of requirements for the use of laser/radar and if you don't know that they are violating your rights and speak up, you will be found guilty and the fault lies with you for not knowing and/or speaking up.
I would strongly suggest that you take some time to watch the court cases. It is quite interesting. It is also good to make you think about ever wanting to go there since even when it is obvious that the officer is lying (yes, I do mean lying because the officer changed his testimony within a 5 minute period) the person is found guilty. Part of the reason for this is to get people to object to the way people are treated and to perhaps do something about it (like voting against certain judges).
It is also important to know that anything you say will be used against you, so you don't want to admit anything and it is also good to record what is said in order to ensure that the officer tells the truth.
The magic words depends on what is said, but for example "I object", but then you need to know the reason. If the officer tries to submit evidence, "I object, the officer is a witness, not the prosecutor". It might not work because often the "judge" does not care, but if you don't try, then it really won't work.
The main thing is to be prepared to say NO and to stand up for your rights. In CA, for example, there is a code section (law) which must be followed and you need to know about that and request the "judge" dismiss your case, as required, if the law is not followed.
In the case of Laser, yes, you need to question and show that the device was not calibrated, that the officer could not have correctly targeted and tracked your vehicle (pointing a gun type device at typically over 400ft, trying to hit an object the size of a license plate), etc. The Laser gun calculates the speed and that is important to realize.
Even new radar guns are "calibrated" with tuning forks to ensure that they read the "correct" speed, but the problem is that what is the speed of the center of mass of the tuning fork? It is zero. The fork is vibrating and consider what the radar gun reads. It does not read the average speed, which is zero, it reads the highest speed and also ignores the negative speed as the fork moves closes and further away. This means that it is reading a vibration and not the complete or correct speed.
Now consider the vehicles, such as BMW, which have a fan in front, which means that the speed could be read from that, remember it is reading the fastest speed.
In CA there is a vehicle code section, 40800, which lists what is required to get a conviction with laser or radar, but in watching court cases I have NEVER seen that followed. Part of the problem is that the defendant needs to know to speak the magic words.
In all cases, the question is what is it hitting.
With laser, there are 43 pulses in 1/3 second. There is some error detection, but since that is secret it is impossible to know what signals are really being returned. Consider that the front of a vehicle is not flat, then calculate the difference in speed an inch makes. After that measure the difference around the license plate.
It is also important to remember that the laser is not visible light, but the viewfinder is. Remember playing with a prism? The light bends differently based on the freq. of the light, so the moisture in the air can have an affect. Also, since laser measures distance, not speed, and they don't calibrate the unit under the same environment as actual use (plus it would take two officers to testify that it was calibrated, one with the laser device and the other in the test vehicle reading the speedometer).
The bottom line is that most traffic courts are really Kangaroo Kourts and they do not follow the law (been there, been lied to, been denied justice and had the case law to prove it, but in the end the officer did not show, but it cost me time, although I learned a lot).