Montgomery County, MD Judge Calls Math "Bizarre" or My Morning in Traffic Court

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

I recently received two speed camera citations, both from a unit positioned very close to my office. These cameras have been sprouting like weeds in MD; in fact, I used to pass several cameras daily on my work commute. Still, these recent citations are my two and only (knock wood).

I am opposed to speed cameras on principle (a topic for another thread) which is why I decided to waste my time contesting the two $40 fines. I requested a hearing at which that the Camera Operator would be present, via certified mail. I reviewed the relevant statute. Then, I reviewed my citations.

The first thing I wanted to do was do a back-of-the-envelope speed check. On one citation, the image quality was so blurred that I couldn’t determine the position of my car. (My “alleged” car?) :slight_smile: The second citation image quality was marginally better, and I could see a white lane stripe visible in both photos. I used satellite mapping to estimate the average length of the lane stripes on that stretch of road (about ten feet each) and was then able to conservatively estimate that my car had moved ten feet or fewer between the first and second photo.

Unfortunately, the time stamp on the photos only breaks down to the second. Both photos were taken during the same second.* I resorted to using the small print cited on my violation, that speed readings were taken at a rate of 200 to 300 calculations per minute. I assumed the photos corresponded with two consecutive readings taken at the fastest rate, and so was able to conservatively estimate my shown speed at 34 mph.

Armed with my calculations, I headed to court. When my name was called, I explained that I was unable to verify the position of my car based on the first citation’s blurry photos, but explained the process I had used to estimate the speed of my car in the second citation’s photos. I tried to be very clear about the sources of my data and my assumptions. I also emphasized that my estimates were “conservative,” ie, the largest possible distance traveled and the shortest possible time interval calculated. Based on my estimates, the cited speed exceeded the actual speed by a minimum of twenty percent, which to me, indicates reasonable doubt** about the accuracy of the cited speed.

The judge told me my argument was “bizarre.” She also said that my estimate of 34 mph was an admission of speeding. (Argh! No! That’s why I repeated that my estimates of distance and time were conservative!) Then she reduced my fine on each to $5 plus court costs and waved me away.

Thus, my morning’s efforts netted me a savings of 2 x $13.50, or $27 total, which does not heal my wounded feelings. My methods were NOT bizarre. They were MATH.

What do they teach in schools these days?

*This was not always the case! A colleague of mine successfully contested a ticket using the distance and time displayed (fractional seconds). Apparently the citation-issuers have become craftier about not providing data with which to verify their claim.

**IANAL. Obviously.

2

In MoCo, any math that doesn’t equal them getting your money is considered bizarre. Surely you’ve noticed this in the tax bills?

3

You did not mention what the speed limit was. If it was under 34 that was not a very good argument.

4

I’m surprised she awarded you anything.
The speed cameras use radar, so the photographic evidence is just to verify that it’s your car, and you are the driver.

5

OK, so I guess I’m missing something, but if the car itself was too blurry to identify, how die they know who to send the ticket to?

Also, as someone mentioned, what’s the actual speed limit at that location? That’s critical info for someone interested in this story.

6

I’m confused. They sent you two separate $40 citations for two separate incidences of speeding – that were less than a second apart?

7

Sounds so much like Sheldon Cooper…

8

Your math is bizarre.

First you say you received two $40 citations. Then you say they were knocked down to two $5 tickets and you saved $27. Huh?
ETA: Oh, plus court costs. Never mind. But yeah, they used radar or laser.

9

If the speed limit was 30, then going 34 is exceeding it. What was bizarre wasn’t the math, but the fact you went to all that trouble to prove you were exceeding the speed limit.

10

I think the OP tried the “I may have been speeding, but if I was, worst case scenario, I wasn’t speeding as much as they said I was, so there’s an error on the ticket and you can’t make me pay it!” defense.

…which won’t work, math or not. I had a ticket once that had my hair color, gender, the date and the last number of my license plate wrong. This was not an automated ticket, but one written by an actual police officer. Turns out that it takes a whole lot more than factual errors for speeding tickets to be “thrown out on a technicality” the way murders are on primetime crime dramas.

11

Hey, Officer Magoo has a sterling reputation in the department.

12

The standard for infractions is a preponderance of the evidence, not reasonable doubt.

The finder of fact is allowed to weigh the evidence. Thus a judge in a bench trial may afford substantially greater weight to a disinterested, radar-based machine that determines speed relatively directly versus the report of the charged party who has deduced, via a litany of steps and assumptions (including going to google maps and estimating the length of a lane stripe and estimating the lapse between two snapshots). Particularly when these photos are used merely to establish the identity of the driver and the vehicle, and not to establish the speed of the car, which is instead done by radar.

Thus, the judge had a high-weight direct radar report versus a low-weight, “back-of-the-envelope” speed deduction. The preponderance of the evidence plainly establishes the infraction.

ETA: Oh, I see your deduction itself established the violation. So your beef is, despite the uncontradicted testimony of both the charging authority and the respondent stating that you were speeding, you still think the judge should have tossed the suit?!?!?

13

I’m reminded of the Homer Simpson quote: “I want to set the record straight: I thought the cop was a prostitute!”

But don’t feel bad, OP. A friend of mine tried to challenge a red-light ticket in Annapolis on the basis that Lockheed Martin operated the red-light camera systems. He argued that since Lockheed was responsible for this multi-million screwup (and yes, he showed the judge a picture of the missile), why should anyone believe that their cheap-o red-light cameras would be trustworthy? The judge laughed but made him pay the ticket.

14

You are correct, the speed limit was thirty.

The point I failed to make (apparently) both in court and here is that a conservative estimate is a worst case scenario. I could have made a reasonable case that I traveled eight feet or that the unit might have been only churning out readings at two hundred per minute, rather than three hundred. I was not claiming innocence because I was traveling 34 mph; I was saying their radar was clearly wrong because that fastest I could have been traveling was 34 mph.

15

They got at least one clear shot of the license plate.

16

Not according to the citation I received. “Recorded images are evidence of a violation of the Maryland Law prohibiting exceeding maximum posted speed limit.”

Additionally, the citation contains a certification section which states, “I am an agent of employee of the City of Gaithersburg police Department. Based on inspection of the recorded images shown above, the motor vehicle was operated in violation of TA 21-809, as evidenced by the above images.”

17

“Your Honor, worst case scenario: I was speeding. But, on the other hand, what if I wasn’t? Respondent moves to dismiss.”

18

“This is highly irregular, but I’ll allow it.”

[/A Bored Judge Who Doesn’t Exist]

19

I’d now like to call a surprise witness.

20

The thing is that if the OP was only going 34 in a 30, while he was speeding, the camera shouldn’t have taken the photo as they only take photos of people going 12 over the limit.

The cameras around here are a joke. All people do is speed until they get to it, then slam on their brakes to go 20mph past them, then speed off again. They’re also getting mad that the cameras are not generating enough money.