Speeding Ticket Question

Factual Questions
1

I was going 73 in a 60mph zone, and got a speeding ticket as a result.

But I am not convinced I should have to pay this thing.

I got onto the highway I was speeding on from street A, and got the ticket near the exit for street B. I have now driven over that section of the highway a few times looking for a speed limit sign, and there are none. (It so happens, incidentally, that I established w/ the police officer at the time of the issuing of the ticket that A was the street where I had entered the highway. So that’s in the record assuming his memory works correctly.)

The law here in Texas is that speed limits on highways are generally 70 except where local municipalities have decreed otherwise. So basically, I was going what I assumed was the speed limit, and my assumption was a reasonable one since there was no speed limit sign telling me otherwise. (It was also a reasonable assumption since all the cars around me were going, as far as I can tell, 65-75, but I would think that observation would have less traction than the lack of speed limit signs would.)

Moreover, I am a visitor here.* I do not regularly drive in the county I got the ticket in, so I couldn’t reasonably have been expected to know about the special speed limit even if it’s something like “common knowledge” around here.

So my question is, are these the kind of consideration that ever get speeding tickets dismissed? I mean the following two considerations:

1 There are no speed limit signs that I should have seen
2. I’m visiting here and so am unfamiliar with any local conventions.
3. I was obeying the law to the best of my knowledge, driving at the limit that generally holds on interstate highways in this state.

Or do 1 through 3 generally not appear relevant to traffic courts?

Thanks for any information,

-Kris

*Actually, I did live near this city (Ft Worth) until 1996, a little less near until 2000, and far away but still in texas until 2004. (Minus the year in Japan during that interval.) But for the past four years I’ve been nowhere near this area, having lived in California during that time. And at no time have I lived near enough to this highway to need to drive on it with any regularity.

2

Don’t go with #2. Ignorance is not a valid defense.

Bring pictures. Show that there are no signs. It is up to the judge. Depends on him. You have a defense. No guarantee it will fly.

ETA:

Make sure this really is the law. Also think of what you are arguing. You think the speed limit was 70. You were going 73. So at best you will be arguing that you were purposely going over the speed limit by 3mph. Which is still a violation.

3

Yup. Looks like the ruling will go against you. Your defense may reduce the fine if it is based upon how far over the limit you were going. Ask yourself if it is worth all the trouble to go to court and prove all this stuff just to knock 10 MPH off your violation.

4

One thing you can check is the engineering survey of that stretch of road. Basically the engineers go out there (I believe they use those road cable things) and see what the 85th percentile speeds are, and set the limit accordingly (or to the highest legal speed, and in Texas I believe they have some 80 MPH zones in the west part of the state). If the actual limit is much less than what the survey recommends, that could be brought up in court in your favor. At that point I wouldn’t sweat the 3 MPH difference, unless you admitted this to the officer.

In any event THIS is the forum you need to post on, as they have some guys who really know their stuff about getting people off.

5

Thank goodness for context.

6

Texas has a statatory speed limit law which states that if there is no speed limit sign the statatory limit is in effect. In your case it is going to depend where the highway is located, the statatory limit is 70 in rural areas, 60 in urban areas. The engineering survey thing won’t work in Texas, all speed limits are consider “prima facie”, this means the limit is the law irrelevant of other factors.

7

I thought a prima facie speed limit is not “absolute” or speeding “per se” but simply gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of what is considered a reasonable speed. A defendant can rebut a prima facie speed limit with other relevant factors.

8

I saw that wikipedia page, but I think its information for Texas is incorrect. Everything I can find online that’s actually from the state of Texas indicates only a 70 mph limit on interstate highways, with an option for local authorities to lower it if they so choose.

-FrL-

9

Even if that is the case (which I will assume it is since I have no direct knowledge of Texas law) you will have to prove to the judge that it is reasonable for you to assume that the speed limit was 70mph where you were clocked. Then you will have to somehow prove that the reading was wrong and you weren’t going 73. In fact if you can prove that there was something wrong with the radar you won’t have to prove anything else. Remember it is a speed limit. Anything over is a violation. Arguing that you thought you were only going a little over the limit isn’t a very effective argument in court.

10

It seems to me 73 is what the officer said. The car’s speedometer could say 69.8 MPH.

11

Admissions. Were you speeding or is that just what the cop said? Did you admit to the cop you were speeding?

Were you in the same math class as Joe Biden? :wink:

12

I’ve been taking the radar gun’s word that the speed was 73. In truth, I was, to the best of my knowledge at the time, controlling my speed at 70.

I have no means by which I can argue I was not going over 60 mph. Rather, the argument I’ve offered in this thread is that I could not reasonably have been expected to know that that was the speed limit at that spot.

Some people in this thread have said “ignorance of the law is no excuse.” But I am not claiming ignorance of law, I’m claiming ignorance of fact. The law is, obey speed limit signs. I was fully aware of that law, and to the best of my knowledge at the time, I was obeying that law.

That’s what happens when I add an item to a list and forget to look to see how many items I said there were on the list in the first place.
-FrL-

13

I’d rather a fine be assessed as though I were going 73 in a 70 rather than 73 in a 60. Assuming I can make the case that it was reasonable for me to think the speed limit was 70, then also assuming that this fact (that it was reasonable for me to think so) has some legal significance concerning my culpability or my fine, then I don’t see how there couldn’t be some less negative outcome for me than if I simply paid the fine as is.

As noted elsewhere, I thought I was going 70. (In any case, isn’t there some well known fudge factor when it comes to radar guns? Something like plus or minus five miles per hour? Or is that just a kind of urban legend?)

-FrL-

14

If the radar is more than +/-1 it is broken and taken out of service. They are tested before and after every shift (at least in NJ). I don’t remember this ever happening to me. When they break, they stop working.

I had someone come in to court and argue that his speedometer was broken and showed a repair bill. Driving with faulty equipment was not an effective defense with the judge that day.

I have had several people argue that “there is no way I was doing 40, at the most 30.” In a 25mph zone. That argument was not a very effective defense with the judge that day.

It all comes down to if you can get the judge to agree with you. No one on this board can answer that. Just don’t be surprised if your defense doesn’t work.

In most courts you will probably be offered to plead to a lesser charge anyway.

15

I am glad, then, that I did not ask that question or any similar question.

As this is GQ, I was careful to ask a factual question. I was not asking for speculation or legal opinions.

Nevertheless your assistance so far has been appreciated.

I am starting to see this as I do more research–which could make it worth it in any case.

-FrL-

16

Hmm, I’ll have to look into it. I thought for sure that back when I took drivers ed way back when, the teacher told me radar guns are only considered to be accurate to within 5 mph when used in the field. But I never knew just what the authority for her claim was supposed to be. I’ve heard the same claim several times, but never from anyone who would be particularly likely to know what they were talking about. It just seems to be one of those things “everybody ‘knows’”.

-FrL-

17

It’s probably accurate within ±1 mph in the right conditions, but there may be conditions where the reading can vary by ±5. I’m sure that officers are trained in using the radar in the right conditions. Whether they all do so all of the time is a different matter.

18

I have personal knowledge of a case similar to this one being kicked by a Judge in Ft. Sill, OK. The speeds were different but the absense of a sign was the same. Fought it with that logic and won it, within a week a new sign was put up.

19

Do you happen to remember, was it just that there was no sign, or was it that there was no sign even though some standard said there should have been a sign?

-FrL-

20

Slight hijack… but I have a related question. I’ve tried searching the Michigan Compiled Laws, but not gotten a good definition.

What defines what a “rural road” is versus a “residential road” (or whatever the proper wording in Michigan is for 55 mph vs. 25 mph)?

There are two spots of which I’m thinking where 55 is absolutely ridiculous (yeah, yeah, basic speed law, drive per conditions), but wonder if I’d be subject to a ticket. The first one, I’d probably not make it to 55. The other is perfectly reasonable at 55 until you reach the traffic circles, but all the minivans seem to want to cruise at 30 or so (plenty of passing room).

Here’s a link to the latter. The road I’m interested in is “Partridge Creek Blvd.” Not a speed limit sign, not a house, driveway, or anything, other than small roads coming off of the two traffic circles.